User talk:Sreeramsn

Can you please explain why you removed my edit even after citing two sources? One from India Today, and another from an educational website. Both backing the reason for my edit. Sreeramsn (talk) 17:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

It is not my opinion, it is the truth. I know that you know it. I may not be powerful in this platform, but I am a little bit so in Quora. I am taking screenshots of all this. I am perfectly aware of Wikipedia's agenda (and yours). While you continue to mislead, I will do my best to lead. I know you will bann me.

Did you look at the India Today source? It literally says that the 'Vedas' were distorted, led by Max Muller. Since you don't know anything about Vedas and Sanatana Dharma, I can understand your confusion. Vedas are generally referred to as Vedas only. That includes the Rigveda, the Yajurveda, the Samaveda and the Atharvaveda. So when one says Vedas, it is understood that he/she is referring to these four. So in the India Today article, they are talking about the Vedas. That means they are also talking about Yajurveda. Sreeramsn (talk) 06:17, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

January 2021
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Yajurveda, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Chariotrider555 (talk) 13:40, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Yajurveda. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You need to find reliable sources that the Yajurveda was deliberately mistranslated, do not use sources that say other texts were mistranslated. What you are doing is a violation of Wikipedia's policy on original research and Wikipedia's policy on syntheses of published materials. Chariotrider555 (talk) 14:52, 14 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Those sources are unacceptable for the content you added to Yajurveda, because the sources do not mention the Yajurveda and they don't mention the scholars who translated the Yajurveda. Additionally, they are not academically published (which is a secondary concern). What you basically did was take two sources that have nothing to do with the translations of the Yajurveda, and you made your own claim that for some reason, the English translations of the Yajurveda are unreliable. You need to provide academically published reliable sources that the specific English translations of the Yajurveda are considered to be unreliable by modern scholars. Please read Wikipedia's policy on original research and Wikipedia's policy on syntheses of published materials. Chariotrider555 (talk) 20:42, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not appear to do at User talk:Sreeramsn. Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Thank you very much! Chariotrider555 (talk) 04:59, 15 January 2021 (UTC)