User talk:Seema429

Welcome!

Hello, Seema429, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Ism schism (talk) 11:52, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Indraprastha
Hello Seema429

I did not give any reasons when I reverted your edits to the Indraprastha article because there were numerous changes of a type (changing standard names) that are usually treated as vandalism. My apologies since you seem to be a serious contributor.

Brief explanation of current naming policy. The name of the article is Indraprastha, not Indraprasth, similarly with other names in the article, using Sanskrit rather than Hindi forms. Thus, Deva not Dev, Mahabharata not Mahabharat. This is standard practice here on Wikipedia for most historical places, historical names, religious names and terms that originate in Sanskrit. Exceptions occur of course, such as when a Hindi form has become established and an accepted word in the English language (e.g. avatar), and even then the Sanskrit form is used when it makes more sense in context. The other exception is for places that are also modern place names in Hindi speaking regions (e.g. Vrindavan). A guide to the policy can be seen at Naming conventions (Indic), and there have been many discussions on this topic which you will have to search for. It is not 'colonial' practice – that statement is itself derogatory to those such as myself who were brought up in a mother tongue that pronounces the end 'a' in these names.

Hindu 'scriptures' might be holy to you. However, Wikipedia articles are not for Hindus only, and we don't take the Hindu viewpoint anymore than the Muslim, Christian, or any other viewpoint. The place to state that the Mahabharata is scripture to you is the Mahabharata article. Although I will contest that it is scripture. Certainly it does contains scripture, which the article states. But it also contains material that is not scripture; e.g. the story of Nala and Damayanti – this is a good story, but it is not scripture. You redirected the Hindu mythology link to the Hindu scriptures link; but while the latter contains the Bhagavad Gita, it does not list the MB as scripture.

The section on the etymology of Delhi is a bit out of place; that probably belongs in the Delhi article. The additions you made should have (as with all newer additions) come with references, and you will find that new unreferenced additions get reverted routinely.

A couple of general observations;

1.Please create a user page for yourself; otherwise someone who does not look for the corresponding talk page may assume as I did that you are using a throwaway account.

2.When adding a new section to another user's talk page, such as mine, please add your comments at the end (or at least follow the existing practice there). I have moved the comment you added to the end.

Thanks, Imc (talk) 10:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)