User talk:TheRingess/Archive 10

__NONEWSECTIONLINK__

Recent assessment
Hi, As with the previous case, i need a relook of some of the ratings. I do accept some of the lesser referenced contents like Kalyanasundaresar Temple, Nallur‎ are assessed as start, but some detailed ones like Mahalingeswarar Temple, Thiruvidaimarudur or Mahamaham stampede with larger details and referenced with all the posssible online books are also rated as start. Pls provide the missing pieces, i can add them. The online sources for these ancient temples are way too limited. S Sriram(talk - my page - contribs) 02:24, 13 January 2012 (UTC)ssriram_mt


 * By all means, if you feel an article deserves a higher rating, please change it. The ratings I give are just opinions.TheRingess (talk) 17:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Pls provide me the blatantly missing pieces in terms of language, content or structure - i will try to improve them. Since i have widely expanded all these articles, i cannot assess the work myself. Thanks in advance.S Sriram(talk - my page - contribs) 02:02, 14 January 2012 (UTC)ssriram_mt

Hi Ringess
You have major errors in the alkaloids found in Nelumbo and Nymphaea under soma and the botanical identity of soma. A summary of these errors are give in David L. Spess, Errors in Alkaoids of Nelumbo and Nymphaea. In addition, if you are going to list the Sacred Lotus as a soma candidate you should reference the people who originally published it. The original person who published on it was David L. Spess', Soma the divine hallucinogen in 2000 and Andrew Mcdonald's article in 2004. You have a lot of errors in your soma articles. Please leave the additional references and bibliography in as they are needed. David L. Spess Ph.D. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David L. Spess (talk • contribs) 19:03, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Fractal
What is wrong with link that I added in Fractal article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MSa1 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Would You like to Help?
Hi, I am starting WikiProject Ravidassia. I would like to get help from people who are interested. You may sign up for the project on the []. McKinseies (talk) 13:57, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Information on article Swami Vivekananda GA Nomination
Hi, since you are one of most brilliant contributors of Swami Vivekananda article, we want to inform you that we have nominated nominated Swami Vivekananda article in Wikipedia Good article category. Most probably you have already noticed it in your watchlist, still, we just want to make sure, you don't miss it! Also note, the person who has nominated the article, this nomination is his first experience in this section. So, it'll be fine, if you recheck if everything has been done correctly. Thanks once again for all your contributions! Even if the article fails to get GA status, we have really done an excellent team work! --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 18:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

23
What i talked about is a movement that lived 20 years across europe organizing big events such as Chzektek, Dragon Festival (spain), Boomoff (portugal), Teknival du primer de may (france), and many street parades such as Rome "million marijuana march" or Bologna. If u dunno about that, this movement born in England from "Spiral Tribe" (a group of electronic musician and artists) and Mutoids Waste Co (a world wide rocognised art comunity). Meeting with the Freak way of life during Castle Moroton festival in 1993 they decided to start travelling across all the world (Asia, America, Africa Oceania and of course Europe) spreading the culture of tekno music (not at all "techno") creating new sub generes and used the T.A.Z. way of protest to speak about problem as drug legalization and mind freedom. The "rave" organized by this movement are called Free Party (also see "free Party Movement") where free stand for the freedom of people to do what they wish in respect of other people involved. Is so much trivial that if you now go in any big city of Europe you will see the majority of teenagers following that scene. So much trivial that to fight it special law was taken in England France and other states... and often "tribes" (group of people that together organize this kind of party) have been forced to leave the countries (even their own) where was spreading this culture. In the last years many of this artists have been recognised even from other scenes and invited to play in several festivals and events of all kind. (just an example Crystal Distortion playing often at Barcelona's "Sonar" a festival that take place in the Macba (museum of contemporary art). If u still not belive me or think is a delirium please check some wiki pages at least where this is reported, but if u wish to make some more work taking information about it i strongly racomand you to watch "world travellers adventures" serie. In this culture as i said the 23 numbers is not something of little importance but is the "magic number" of whole movement recurring toons of times as i said in songs's, tribes's, artists's names grafics tattoo and any other way. Finally i really try to figure out as something that influence a whole generation can be defined trivial while still remain in citation something like: The German band Welle: Erdball referenced the 23 enigma in their song "C=64/23. (and sorry man but i really don't know who this band is so i would define this trivial). I hope you will check the truth of my words and rewrite mine add to the 23 enigma article that you erased. As i'm really wiki-nub i would really appreciate an help to write it with all link to other wiki pages. Thank you for attention and please take care of check information truth and weight before to delete it. Best regards and sorry for bad english. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.51.170.206 (talk) 10:33, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Revisions in siddha yoga and siddhayoga
please talk in the talk page before removing and making changes, why did you remove merging tag from the article ? as both articles are related and with same name ? Shrikanthv (talk) 08:09, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Links removal
Hi,

Can you please tell me why you removed the links to my new book on ayahuasca that I posted on the Ayahuasca page and the Blue Morpho Ayahuasca Center page?

Thanks Mark MarkRJF (talk) 18:35, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I donot understand the reasons behind removal of the section "Sri Yantra"in various temples. We talk about the yantra but dont want to say where it can be seen? Of course, no one can provide a complete list of all the temples where it is installed. But is a pointer in this direction. It is incorrect to say that it is iireleveant in this context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karthik (talk • contribs) 03:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazca_Lines Is there a reason why you remove my last addition about this interesting book is all over the net and TV chanels and radio programs. Best regards Elena — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elenatroyana (talk • contribs) 16:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Great, but what does it mean? can you please explain since its the first time I add this, and now you are erasing my first contribution.!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elenatroyana (talk • contribs) 18:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Mantra-Rock Dance
Hello. I've reverted your recent edit of Mantra-Rock Dance because, per WP:OVERLINK, "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, links may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead", which seems to be the case with A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada there. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 03:18, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Good Morning Ringess: seems you have some very specific and subjective opinions about Chit and Mark. From an entirely objective point of view, they were both students of Muktananda. Both of them are gurus, one officially appointed and the other unofficial. That's perhaps the best (and most objective, encyclopedic way of describing it as Wikipedia demands). — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlysonDutch (talk • contribs) 15:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It's all good. See WP:AGF.  Happy editing.TheRingess (talk) 15:40, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Kagapujandar
Hi,if you see the history of the page you can see I am still editing and now the page is totally different from the external link. Earlier while created the page it was a copy of that link but now it has a different content than the website. Apart two or three sentences looks the same and I can change as I am still improving the article. Arulraja (talk) 02:32, 30 August 2012 (UTC)Arulraja

Hello Ringess
Hello Ringees,

It seems that fight in the editing and putting forward some imputs on Dattareya wikipedia won't stop. What's your good name ? where are you from ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.63.0.49 (talk) 15:55, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not give out my real name.TheRingess (talk) 20:02, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

email talk
Why don't we know eachother and have some talks on email. and share some knowledge. my email id is bhaktabhay.krishnadas@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gadhadhara (talk • contribs) 16:00, 31 August 2012 (UTC) I do not discuss Wikipedia related stuff via email. Exchanging messages here. Please read the following link WP:OR.TheRingess (talk) 20:03, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Kagapujandar
Hi, recreated the above article with references at Talk:Kagapujandar/Temp, please review. And move it under the article name Kagapujandar. Arulraja (talk) 06:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)Arulraja

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page. In this issue: Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->
 * Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
 * Research: The most recent DR data
 * Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
 * Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
 * DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
 * Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
 * Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:33, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Mohanji page
Hi Ringess. I am the creator of the Mohanji page you drastically edited. Yes, the page was once deleted because it didn't meet the notability criteria, the texts was paraphrased, and it missed third party sources. So, I deleted the page and made a new one making it biographic, and added dozen of third party sources. Now, by deleting 70% of the text you also deleted the third party sources. Did you see the initial page proposed for deletion? It was totally different than the current one you edited. The text was completely new and biographical. It was backed up by dozen of third party sources. Why did you propose to delete it? Please advise how do we proceed so that we meet the Wikipedia WP:BIO criteria. Thanks. Zlio2004 (talk) 09:02, 7 September 2012 (UTC)Zlio2004
 * I removed lines such as the following: "His arrival to this plane of existence was marked by a beautiful smile. This baby born smiling went through various phases and severe tests of life before he became a public figure, an experiential spiritualist and a guide and inspiration to many.".  Most of the other material I removed was also pretty similar.  I will bring this article to an AFD.TheRingess (talk) 17:46, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know Ringess. But, the article that was first created in July is different than the on created in August. The article from July was nominated for speedy deletion and deleted. The article from August needed more third party sources and they were diligently added - but you deleted most of them yesterday, so the article became not eligible again now. We should at least return the article as it was before August 6th, before your edits, and see if it meets the criteria with the third party sources. I still have the article with the sources, can I copy paste it again so it can get a proper discussion? Zlio2004 (talk) 18:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)Zlio2004
 * I made major edits to the article not to delete proper sources, but because the article contained, in my opinion, too much flower language and unverifiable assertions. See the line I copied and pasted.  The question is not whether the article as it exists has enough sources, the question is whether or not those sources can be found.  Articles are not deleted because they lack sources, they are often tagged as lacking sources.  Doing a quick google search, I found almost nothing on this man that wasn't from a blog or his own website.  He's published a book, but that in and of itself is not really enough to guarantee that an article will persist.  It will be discussed now in AFD, so let's just see what others in the community say.  Good day.TheRingess (talk) 18:44, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Can't find more reliable sources to meet notability criteria for Mohanji page at this moment. As the original creator of the page I would like to delete it until more reliable sources are collected. Can you please advise me how can I delete it today? Thank you. Zlio2004 (talk) 20:47, 8 September 2012 (UTC)Zlio2004
 * Recommended for Speedy delete. I have gone through the previous page and the one in present edited form. After all these edits, The page is left out with no information the page creator wanted to convey. I can understand What the page creator must be going through. It is better not to have a page rather than getting reflected with such remarks which harms the credibility .My request to all the editors is to help and encourage the page creator with more information and what is exactly required . Probably editors with spiritual background would be able to understand the point of view. LOVE TO ALL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nilkanthyengde (talk • contribs) 03:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Please don't make this about personalities. One of the guiding principle's of wikipedia, as I understand it, is to always discuss content and never discuss each other.  The intent behind creating an article should be to always create the best article to share with the world.  No other intent is required or needed.  Once an article is created it belongs to no one person and therefore might be edited in unforeseen ways, the article might even look very different from the original, simply because we all might share differing viewpoints on what should/should not be included.  The primary reason for deleting an article, especially a biographical article, is not what the article looks like, but whether or not there are sufficient 3rd party sources for the article.  Remember articles can always be improved.  Welcome.  Happy editing.TheRingess (talk) 21:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

David Quinn
Thanks, I didn't notice the old afd a.k.a. meatpuppet shitshow... Some people who pass notability on our encyclopedia are really beyond belief. Oh well -- Y not? 20:42, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Greg Sams
Hi -- I just undid the revision you made to the references in Greg Sams. While I agree that perhaps there is some repetition, to delete all bar one of the references was a little gung ho and some rather important information would have been lost as a result.

As the person who started this page, I will commit to improving the references section as soon as I have some spare time, but in the meantime please do not do a blanket delete of the references! Thanks, and I hope you appreciate where I'm coming from. Tris2000 (talk) 15:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Vedaranyam
Hi, can i know why the article is rated as start? I am planning for a GA nom with additional contents/images and i can add contents based on your feedback. Ssriram mt (talk) 04:44, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Art of Living Foundation
It has been found that sections are deleted without discussion or considering talk page. In Talk page it was mentioned to add courses by other wiki members. Further, it is inline with other NGOs having complete details of service projects and other services. Musical events which made entries in Guinness book of World Record are important to address. This page is monitored by many users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepeshdeomurari (talk • contribs) 11:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Tirumala_Venkateswara_Temple
your are invited.Please Participate in the discussion. [] Eshwar .om Talk tome 23:06, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Please explain why you reverted my changes on the Kundalini page
Hi. I do not understand why your reverted my changes on the Kundalini page. OK, the addition to the "psychiatry" section may have been poorly worded but the idea I expressed was representative of the opinion of a part of the psychotherapeutical community that confronts to the effects of kundalini, that is it may actually lead to positive changes in one's personality - as opposed to a mere illness; a valid point of view that is not represented in the section. As for the book I referenced, I do not wish to "promote" it, since I am not the author and in no way affiliated to her; I have justified the inclusion in my comment, did you read it? This is one modern reference written by a psychotherapist specialist of the subject and very conversant with the topic, widely accepted as useful for both patients and professionals - it surely qualifies as good reference for this article? One problem I have with the current "Further reading" section is that it lists either old or spirituality books that do not necessarilly reflect all viewpoints on the topic; the reference I added balance that a bit. Tell me, why is this worse than listing Cyndy Dale's book? As for the dangling words, I just have noticed them and it s*ck*d, I am sorry. Syl 11:00, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello Ringess. .  I'm just learning how to use wikipedia, and have discovered that you have removed my edits. I thought perhaps I was not posting correctly. So, I understand that this is your task, and thank you for clarifying the procedures. Please educate me a little more about what's acceptable for comment. Do I understand correctly that if something has been published it's acceptable to reference it? what constitutes simple referencing as opposed to editorial comment on the reference itself?

My reasons for editing out some of these comments are because their objectivity and veracity are in question. To indicate a balanced opinion or rebuttal of these accusations, how would that be done ? . . and again, must it have been published somewhere that can be annotated?

I did leave in place sentences that indicate there were general criticisms about sexual activities. I simply want to see an accurate record, and didn't enjoy seeing the page ending on unproven and anonymous allegations of rape.

Thanks, VoxLight

Voxlight (talk) 20:09, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

removal of external link
Regarding your removal of the link to nityanandatradition.org from the Swami Shankarananda article. I have reviewed the external links policy, can you please elaborate on why you removed the link in that case? Yogidude (talk) 04:07, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. That specific book is an important external link because it is the book on Brahman and how to achieve that state. Please let me know why you would disagree? Thanks! Have a great day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diviwadhwa (talk • contribs) 19:34, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * There are hundreds of books by gurus; to link only this one is WP:UNDUE, and it reads like an advertisement. So I think this link is inappropriate.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   08:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Aurobindo
Why do you feel the crticisim as a original research ? and would suggest to reword it if possible rather than deleting the entire content, have a look at previous GA review, it was noted the critque section was poorly stated, any help in making the article to GA would be of real help. Shrikanthv (talk) 08:17, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=599526582 your edit] to Muktananda may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:30, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Ten Years After His Passing|journal=Hinduism Today|date=October 1992|accessdate=1 June 2006 At 15 he encountered Bhagavan Nityananda, a wandering avadhoot who profoundly

Thanks for the welcome Ringess! I'm still figuring this all out :) About the edit we've been discussing, I get where you're coming from but I'm concerned that it leaves the inaccurate impression that the Shiva Ashram still exists. I've got a small edit to correct that, I'll do it soon and you can see what you think. Elephanteyes21 (talk) 23:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Your editing of DQ
You removed a verified reference to SeriesFest and also Dream for Darfur. The SeriesFest site is live and the event is going on RIGHT NOW. The best Darfur reference is here: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Olympic_Dream_for_Darfur

Please revert the page to our last edits. We know Quinn better than you do and we have been exceedingly careful to ensure his page meets Wiki referencing standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.254.127 (talk) 00:36, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Editorial
Template:Editorial has been nominated for merging with Template:Essay-like. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:24, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Read An Article Thoroughly Before Editing
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Sahaja Yoga, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Please Take Note= you sir/ma, in your edit (2 days ago) as pertains the aforementioned article unduly removed from the see also section an article named Siddha Yoga and your reason for this action implied you thought or felt articles are unlikely and un-related, this however turned out false as in the 16th line of the article 3 references were provided which proves your postulation untrue as well as invalid May i remind you that wikipedia is a collaborative project and one persons opinion on an issue is not enough yardstick to take descions, if you however want to, you may bring an Administrator to look into this discussion. i would open a discussion as well at the articles talk page, your edit proved un-productive hence it shall be reverted forthwith  Celestina007 (talk) 16:45, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Reference to 'the ringbearers diary' in kundalini
Dear TheRingess, I can see that you undid my addition from yesterday, regarding warnings against kundalini. It was my intention to add a reference to the book (the ringbearers diary), but I failed to figure out how to add the reference to the reference section. it is my intention to do that today — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.66.188.193 (talk) 09:16, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Reference to 'The Ringbearers Diary' in kundalini article
Dear TheRingess, I can see that you undid my addition from yesterday, regarding a warning against kundalini. It was my intention to add a reference to the book ('The Ringbearers Diary' - TRD), but I failed to figure out how to add the reference to the reference section. It is my intention to do that today. In your motive for removing teh section, you write 'simply too much emphasis on a minor theory'. If you were to investigate further into this, that is, to read 'The Ringbearers Diary' you would see that it is not a minor theory, but in fact a very well described theory.

We - the author, some friends and I - discussed adding the section to Wikipedia, because we believe that this research should be available to people in general. The theoretical/practical basis for the description of kundalini in TRD, is a full mapping of the chakrasystem including an explanation of why the chakras look the way they do.

So while the theory may not at this point be widely know, we believe that it is important that people seeking for knowledge on this subject are made aware, that a serious theory about the nature of kundalini exists.

I hope this sufficiently explains the background for the edit. Kind regards M. Barfoed — Preceding unsigned comment added by MBarfoed (talk • contribs) 09:37, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * See WP:OR. This is original research.TheRingess (talk) 13:02, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

I have now checked the reference to Original research. What I will refer to in a 'Warning'-section does live up to the stated criteria: It is published material (a book) - with exact quotations taken from the book, ie: '.... the “pseudo-energy” force referred to in Sanskrit as the kundalini force. This energy has its origin in a severe disruption of the male/female balance. The disruption rises “up” through the chakra system, which it destroys on its way', or "Kundalini is Sanskrit for “snake”. Its meaning is that an attitude towards life – a way of thinking – “bites its own tail”. We are dealing with a self-confirming “what did I say”-like idea, which incessantly pronounces itself about the world that it prevents its “user” from contacting. It is an idea which “basks in its own concept of the world” – allegedly a “cosmic” idea which in its extreme consequence claims to know how to explain everything. This comes about precisely because it cuts off its “user” from all that it cannot explain – from all those things that do not fit into the world vision of the kundalini itself." I will of course refer to the source, which I will include in the references. Please let me have your comments. MBarfoed (talk) 11:09, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * My answer is still no, this should not be included. We have no real way of knowing whether or not the author's research was peer reviewed by other experts who study kundalini, even if he/she published a book.  We will need more reliable resources.  The author should publish their research in a journal first, then we can include a summary of their research, citing the journal article.   See WP:RS.  Also see WP:NPOV, you are proposing to add something that is non-neutral; first that kundalini exists and second that people need to be warned about it.  In order to maintain neutrality we need another pov that states that kundalini exists and that people don't need to be warned about it. Of course we will also need that research to have been published in a reliable journal.TheRingess (talk) 18:46, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Enlightenment Intensive External Links
Hi,

While I don't entirely disagree with you reverting the EI page, taking out the link to the Spirit Horse EIs, I am wondering what the policy is regarding external links. Three of the four external links on the EI page are clearly advertising (the fourth leads to a site that looks like it was last updated in 2012). Perhaps a better external link for EI providers would be https://www.enlightenment-intensive.net/en/enlightenmentintensives.php. This lists upcoming EIs for lots of different providers all over the world.

What do you think?

Thanks,

--Rowanolof (talk) 17:07, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello. The general policy is to prefer a minimum number of external links.  You can read more here:  WP:EL.  I agree that the one you listed is better.  I would say go ahead and add it.  Cheers.TheRingess (talk) 17:59, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the feedback.

--Rowanolof (talk) 18:45, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Hinduism
 WikiProject Hinduism

Hello, TheRingess. We would like to inform you about the recent changes to the WikiProject. We would like to introduce a newsletter to Wikiproject Hinduism. A newsletter is always help to inform recent changes in the project to project members and help for effective coordination. Now we have launched a new newsletter for the Wikiproject. As a member, you are cordially invited to subscribe to the newsletter. Also do not forget to contribute to the newsletter. Thank you!

 Subscribe

- Discuss this newsletter

Contribute

Subscribe/Unsubscribe

Archive

Sent by on behalf of WikiProject Hinduism. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:14, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

Eikositriophobia is An Actual Term
You state it was "nonsensical" when it is an actual term & as well, an actual condition. I invite you to do diligence and to look this up! I did, and that is what I learned. Your edit may have been in error. 69.112.128.218 (talk) 22:36, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 <div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-

Edit Warring
As a longtime editor you do not need a template added about edit warring. However you do seem to be involved in an edit war with on Gurumayi Chidvilasananda you have past the 3RR mark. VViking Talk Edits 23:18, 4 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Unfortunately now the editor has either created a sock puppet to add nonsense to the article or has invited a friend.  I finally reverted the article to the version at the start of the day.  This version has been created by various editors over the years through consensus.  It maintains a neutral point of view, contains no original research and violates none of Wikipedia's guidelines for biographies of living people. In contrast the other editor keeps claiming that she is either a recluse or is dead and in a discussion with them keeps stating that he does not have to prove that she is missing or dead, that everyone else has to prove that she is alive.  You can check out my discussion with them on their talk page. TheRingess (talk) 07:36, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If you believe there is sock puppetry ongoing, you should report it. That does not excuse the edit warring behavior you have undertaken with . Resolve the issue through a discussion on article's talk page. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:16, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Really, you should just stop editing the page and discuss the matter. I've reported TLS at WP:ANI, and mentioned your involvement in the edit warring there. (The admins would have noticed your involvement whether I mentioned it or not.) WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:36, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. In future, I will attempt to open discussions with this editor. TheRingess (talk) 19:21, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, Ringess. It's nice to know that some things never change. Sardaka (talk) 10:22, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Who are you?TheRingess (talk) 21:55, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Livestream
I just noticed a recording of a recent livestream on the SY website: https://siddhayoga.org/2023/january/shri-guru-gita/satsang (in case another editor claims her "disappearance"!) Ram1751 (talk) 01:14, 12 January 2023 (UTC) right:0.5em; flex: 1 0 40px;"> Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on . All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)