User talk:Trphierth

Welcome
Hello, Trphierth, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers: We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- The Red Pen of Doom  12:03, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Modern Dharmic Writers navigation template
Please note that it is a standard policy on Wikipedia that such navigation templates should only be placed on the articles linked in the template. You have placed this template on multiple articles not linked in the template. Please correct this. See WP:NAVBOX: "every article that transcludes a given navbox should normally also be included as a link in the navbox so that the navigation is bidirectional." Personally, I believe that the navbox should be eliminated as the subjects are too loosely connected and a category should be used instead. If you add a link to every article you have added the template to, it will be too large a template. Yworo (talk) 18:16, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your message. What you cite is not a hard-and-fast rule or policy, take for instance a look at the template Buddhism, it is linked in many, many articles that are not on the template, like Mantra, Guru, Dhammapadda, Enlightment and Sutra, most of which, but not all, are in the category, and there are many more examples. IMHO, I don't believe that the scope is too large. But I agree that I should not have put it in article on which you removed it for not being a writer, although I took care not to put it inside non-writers. Anyways I have stopped. --Trphierth (talk) 10:55, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


 * It's promoting certain authors on the pages of other authors, and it's not appropriate. I'll be removing it from all the articles not linked in the template. You should really be doing that, not me. Don't make useless work for other editors. Yworo (talk) 16:34, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


 * And thanks for pointing out that the Buddhism template is also being misused. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is never a good argument. Yworo (talk) 16:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

AfD
I see that you contested a PROD on Rajinder Singh (Sant Mat). The article is now at Articles for deletion/Rajinder Singh (Sant Mat). You may like to contribute to the discussion. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:14, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

please delete ajaib singh, and put that @#$% gurdass out of his @#$ misery, and while you're at it, delete his @#$% friend sirio carrapa, or crapola, or whatever its called.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.187.74.72 (talk) 09:57, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

"Dharmic religion"
We shouldn't have a category something that we don't have an article for. From what I can see, Dharmic religion is a synonym for Indian religions, and is so defined in that article. Our categories need to be source based. What sources is this category based on? What scholars define it as a category? How is it different from the category "Indian religions", which the article defines as the very same four religions which were included as subcategories of "Dharmic religions". Why are there no source supported _articles_ in this category, that is, all the articles which were in the category actually belonged in one of the subcategories? Why should we have a category called Category:Dharmic writers when we have no corresponding category Category:Dharmic religions? Yworo (talk) 06:22, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, I can answer that last question because I clicked through. The category "Dharmic religions" was deleted in a deletion discussion as "a neologism invented on-wiki; content has been completely moved to Indian religions for some time; the category should follow suit." "Dharmic writers" appears to have been overlooked when that category was deleted. It's made up. Yworo (talk) 06:40, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Dharmic writers
Category:Dharmic writers has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. Yworo (talk) 08:08, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Modern Dharmic writers listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Modern Dharmic writers. Since you had some involvement with the Modern Dharmic writers redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Yworo (talk) 20:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Judeo-Christian writers
Category:Judeo-Christian writers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Jayjg (talk) 00:27, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hindu writers
Hi Trphierth. I've added your additions to the templates also to List of modern Eastern religions writers. Greetings,  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   19:25, 27 May 2013 (UTC) Ok, thanks. --Trphierth (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Navigation
Hi Trphierth. I've created a portal on "Indian religions", which contains a lot of links. I hope it suits your wish for quick navigation. Greetings,  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   05:57, 2 June 2013 (UTC) Ok, it looks nice. --Trphierth (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Reading tip
this book may be of interest to you. Greetings,  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   07:07, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)