|
User talk:Nemonoman/Archive 1Changes in AurangzebYou are unilaterally changing content with misleading edit summaries. Also you are blanking weeks of work. Please add, not blank and remove NPOV consensus to make the article somewhat one-sided. Thanks. --Ragib 17:51, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
WelcomeWelcome! Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. 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! --Ragib 3 July 2005 22:05 (UTC) New sections to talk pageNemo, can you please add newer sections to the talk page at the bottom? That's the wikipedia convention ... to add a new section, just click on the + button to the right of the "edit this page" link .. that should add a section to the end automatically. Thanks. --Ragib 4 July 2005 17:08 (UTC) Thanks for historical addition stuff to Auzagreb page.Well done! Thanks Rick Boatright 4 July 2005 17:34 (UTC)
Reference added by anonHi Nemo, can you properly format the info added by anon IP 203.* ? He is quoting a big paragraph, it may be better if the information was paraphrased, or smaller quotes were used, or the info is merged with the section we already have in the article. The book reference should go to references section. It is better to quote smaller parts, and paraphrase and refer than to copy whole paragraphs ... :) . Thanks. --Ragib 5 July 2005 15:37 (UTC) Please read my comments on the Talk page for the article. I am sorry, but I think the net effect of what you and others have done, by including only published, "authenticated" material is to remove any hit of divergence from the official Indian view that the man was a monster, plain and simple. Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aurangzeb#Tolerance.E2.80.94or_the_lack_thereof . Once upon a time, I was very happy at the balance we had been able to bring to the article. But what has happened since has shaken my faith in the Wikipedia itself. —iFaqeer (Talk to me!) July 7, 2005 03:58 (UTC)
Thanks for the edits ...Hi Nemo, nice to see you come back periodically and clean up articles. The religion based hatred is so strong between some (not all) editors, that they keep coming back and adding POV stuff to articles villifying anyone belonging to the other religion. Same goes for Country pages like Pakistan and India. To maintain NPOV, you've gotta keep a sharp eye on articles. You are doing just that, and thanks again for your watch on the NPOV-status of the articles. Keep up the good work. --Ragib 15:21, 5 August 2005 (UTC) HebbThanks for adding Bobby Hebb to the Cresskill article. How did you find out he lived/lives there? I couldn't find info about that online. Badagnani 05:07, 20 September 2005 (UTC) Wow, that is very cool. I had never heard of him but I'll check him out. Some things I post (like that Halim El-Dabh lived in Cresskill) are things I know from my own experience (he's a professor here at Kent State) but aren't common knowledge. Happy editing, Badagnani 20:14, 20 September 2005 (UTC) The Japanese interwiki link was changed to ja:シャー・ジャハーン , which is correct. If this shows up as ???? on your computer, it's a font issue. What browser and operating system are you using? -- Curps 02:35, 28 September 2005 (UTC) Yoga external linksI have at your suggestion reread the Wikipedia:External links criteria and I don't recognize specifically which criteria you believe the deleted links violated. Please explain, or I will continue to revert your changes. You apparently do a fair amount of editing and from the comments on your talk page from other users, appear to do so without regard to the nature of what your editing. These pages have a lot of personal effort, love, and compromise associated with them, and those involved would appreciate a scalpel not a sledgehammer as you edit. May I suggest that if you find the article problematic, you insert a clean up flag rather than simply cutting without documenting your reasons. Thank you. --Nemonoman 07:23, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
3RRI'm sorry to inform you that you have been blocked for 24 hours for breaking the Three revert rule on Yoga. Please use the talk page more next time and try to keep to around two reverts a day. Take care :). Ryan Norton T | @ | C 06:38, 17 October 2005 (UTC) If you want you can still discuss here with us :). Ryan Norton T | @ | C 06:41, 17 October 2005 (UTC) Persian Names, etc"Persian names of Mughal Emperors Hi Vpensdse: You have added Persian versions of names of various Mughal Emperors, and these Persian transiliterations have been added and deleted in the past by others. I am very interested in these emperors, and am trying (slowly) go give them a little more scholarship and weight. What I'd like to ask is: What's the deal with persian versions of these names? Why did you feel the need to add this information? It seems very superfluous. I have seen some add Turkic versions of the names after the persian versions, for example. I think I have deleted these transliterations in the past based on my feeling that they only added confusion. So I'd be very pleased if you could help me understand why you felt the desire to add the persian versions.--Nemonoman 13:23, 26 October 2005 (UTC) Also, why do you sometimes add Urdu to articles about this era, and in other cases Persian? Very interested in understanding this. I ask these questions with sincerity and respect and because I think your responses will be valuable addtions to my understanding. I am not asking them as a means of generating an argument. --Nemonoman 13:31, 26 October 2005 (UTC)" Hi, I find that when studying a language, you read many articles related to it. For example I am studying Urdu, so I read about times when Urdu was in very large use, such as the Mughal period. When you read the name in the original Urdu script, you can recognize it much faster when reading Urdu texts, and therefore greatly facilitates the learning process, I believe. In addition to this, many, if not most other wiki pages already followed the practice of including the original Urdu script of the subject matter when it pertains, so it was also a matter of conformity. As for the "Persian" designation - the Shah's of the Mughal Empire were of Persian origin, I believe, which is why I listed their names as so. If Urdu would be a better fit than please change it. Vpendse 10:23, 28 October 2005 (UTC) تمام کچ کے بعد یہ صفحے دکھ: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_%28Arabic%29 YogaLove your new intro! it's on the same lines as the original one but framed very well. Thanks!--Pranathi 01:50, 17 November 2005 (UTC) India related linksHi, I thought you might be interested in these:
--Pamri • Talk 03:36, 12 December 2005 (UTC) Taj MahalHi, I normally wouldn't have added the cleanup tag to the article and am probably as conservative as you, but I am adding a cleanup tag to Taj Mahal since it is an important subject. I have already pointed out on it's talk page the issues with the article. Using the Version 1.0 assesment criterion, the article can be rated as B-Class. And consider the other articles tagged at priority cleasn board. Most of them are better than Taj Mahal in terms of organisation, references,etc., The reason I added the tag was to make this article a priority for cleaning it up. If you still want to remove the tag, you can remove it and probably we can look at other ways to clean it up. Regards, --Pamri • Talk 07:48, 12 December 2005 (UTC) Taj Mahal, cleanup, etc.,Hi, If you want to add a cleanup to any article, you can insert {{cleanup-date}}. BTW, Image:Loc-Agra.png is POV, since it doesn't indicated the areas disputed between India, Pakistan and China. And there is no license to boot. You can instead mark Agra on this map. Finally, you can move the rewrite of Taj Mahal to a seperate page on your userpage, say User:Nemonoman/Taj Mahal, instead of cluttering your talk page. Please feel free to ask for any help. --Pamri • Talk 08:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC) map. Taj MahalHi Nemonoman please gather complete before Editing the Fatehpur Sikri page and Agra page ....because i think you are wrong ....No one can know more about Agra than me because Agra is my Hometown and i've been there for 20 years.....Fatehpur Sikri is in Agra Distric only .....and the pic u edited as itmad ud daula is actuallt inside pic of Agra Fort.......more precisely it's pic of Deewane Khas in Agra Fort. here is the proof of concept ...link of UNESCO site which shows where Fatehpur is http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/255 so plz don't edit this again
Work area for Taj ChangesClick here to see work area for taj HindiYeah, we try to write the localised version of subject in all articles. I´ve already requested an Urdu version too. You seem to be new to wikipedia. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:03, 1 January 2006 (UTC) This procedure has not been followed in any of the articles I have worked on. Taj article has been up with my input for more than 3 years and it's the first time Hindi name has entered the picture. So please don't be too surprised by my question. If it is best practice, you might want to consider creating similar entries in Agra, India, Belgaum, Ahmednagar, Kuldabad, Jama Masjid, Delhi, Humayun's tomb, Itmad-Ud-Daulah's Tomb, Pratapghad, Pataleshwar, Ellora Caves, and Deccan: I have made edits to all these, and none have local language entries. "New to wikipedia" covers a lot of territory. I've been editing for 3 years before creating username Nemonoman. In any case, I have only been active for about a year. I'm certainly no expert. --Nemonoman 17:57, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Re: Abe BurrowsI appreciate very much your time and concern, and also want to state that you do make a good point about context. Our discussion so far has pretty much been over two issues: is it appropriate to add an ethnic identification to the opening sentence of a biographical article and under what conditions, and whether it is appropriate to use ethnic identifications in general. Most of my objections in my input on the talk page were regarding the second issue, however, after your comments I can now see how your argument regarding the first is very valid. I think a case that you described as being appropriate is Sholom Aleichem. In this article his background is mentioned in the first sentence, but it is within a context because it notes that he was a writer in Yiddish, a specifically Jewish context. I do see that, in the case of Abe Burrows, even though it has been hypothesized that the work of Jewish musical writers has a connection to Jewish culture, there is no mention of it within the Abe Burrows article, and therefore it can be argued successfuly that in that specific article it is inappropriate to add an ethnic identification in the first sentence. Although I'm not sure you want to go to every single article with "Jewish-American", "African-American", "Arab American", etc. in that situation and engage in this debate with others, I concede that you have made a successful case as to why "Jewish-American" should not be placed as it was in Abe Burrows and therefore I have no objection to your reversion. With that settled, I think we can (with no thought of hostility) discuss whether ethnic identifications are demeaning, not regarding the Abe Burrows article. I call irrelevant heritage information essentially demeaning because such adjectives suggest that there are, for example, "ALL" inventors and some sort of subclass of "Irish-American" inventors. Demeaning because the adjective suggests that Joe Blow shouldn't be considered as part of "ALL" inventors or compared with "Non-Irish-American" inventors. I don't really believe that the adjectives really suggest that. When Wikipedia says that George Washington Carver "was an African American botanist", I don't see the conflict that you describe above. When I read this sentence, I do not interpret it as to mean that GWC is not a real 'botanist' but rather only an 'African-American botanist', but I understand that GWC is 100% botanist AND African-American. I believe that when I say that that he is an African-American botanist, the reason that the two characteristics are listed consecutively is not because they're dependant on each other, but rather just because it is a way to compactly summarize information. Therefore I do not believe that the use of "Joe is an Irish-American inventor" suggests that "Irish-American inventor" is a sub-class of "inventor", but rather 'Irish-American' and 'inventor' are two independant criteria that are listed next to each other as a summary. The former defines what is is known for, and the latter describes the context of his background. Therefore to me "African-American botanist" means that GWC is (1) African-American and (2) a botanist, not some qualified and interdependant mixture of the two. Further demeaning because it suggests that one's heritage is essentially defining, and to be associated with one in perpetuity. Likewise I don't believe that the "Irish-American" in "Irish-American inventor" is defining at all, rather it is "inventor" that is defining and it is "Irish-American" which provides context. I assume from your username that you are a Proud Jew, and I would certainly understand that you wish to extend your pride to Mr Burrows by noting his participation in that heritage of which you are (justly) proud (or so it would seem from your username). I am not proud if pride means asserting one's heritage above others or other criteria (such as what the person did), but yes, I am proud if pride means asserting that that heritage has value itself. It was not pride that led me to simply add "Jewish-American" to the article, however, but rather what I thought was a routine addition of biographical information. I never thought of it as anything more. grew up through times when becoming aware of the subtlety and pervasiveness of racist thinking was a hard-fought personal battle. Before the PC police existed, individuals had to face the nature of racist language and thinking as individuals, and come to their own conclusions. I came to these conclusions independently, and have tried to live by my conclusions as best I can. I do understand your concern. I believe it must remain a personal battle, however. Even a KKK member who has been bred to hate has the capability to realize that racist actions are wrong, because natural law is universally accessible. The PC advocates telling us that racism is wrong because they "know it is right" is not different than hate groups telling their children to hate because they "know it is right". Reason tells us that hate is wrong and immoral actions are wrong, not a social or political construct. PS I'm not going to get into a revert war if you want to put the adjective back. Well, as I stated above I understand your point and think its ok to leave it out, and the Jewish-American category left at the bottom doesn't seem to be as controversial because it is not attempting or is not perceived to be attempting to define the person in question. Therefore the article debate has been resolved, but if you want to continue discussing the abstract issues in question I'd be glad to, and no I did not suspect that you meant any hostility, and I didn't. Thanks for your input. Yid613 01:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC) Re:I DON'T think that he should be called an "Afro-american" in the first sentence. I do see your point. The problem, as I must point out and you can imagine, with suggesting that "African-American" be removed from the first sentence of George Washington Carver is it would by responded with much backlash both because people would as an automatic reaction question the intentions and also because people often take up the issue GWC as a matter of African-American pride. Indeed, the first time I heard of him was when I was a kid watching television and commercials were showed honoring Black History Month by featuring GWC. I know the intentions are good and the argument valid, but other people might tend to assume things as a knee-jerk reaction. Also that Hindu is being used as a replacement for Indian or Indio-. Based on the limited knowledge I have, the reason people think "Hindu" can be used synonymously with "Indian" is because literally and originally the word simple means "Indian", or someone living beyond the Indus river (Hindu#Origins of the word Hindu). The problem as you very well know is that today "Hindu" has a religious connotation and obviously not all Indians are religiously Hindu. For example a lot of discussion about changing the name of article Arabic numerals to Hindu-Arabic numerals. Like they were made by persons of a religion, not of a geographic area. You definately know more about all this stuff and feel free to correct me, but the article says "Arabic numerals were first developed in India by the Hindus around 400 BC. They were then adopted by the Arabs, who call the numerals 'Indian numerals'" (Arabic numerals). Regarding your second sentence, as I've been taught "Hindus" really refers not to a religious group (as in Christianity and Islam where religion is seperate from ethnicity, I've been taught that in Judaism and Hinduism such a dichotomy does not so simply exist). From the "Hindu" etymology section: Until about 19th century, the term Hindu implied a culture and ethnicity and not religion alone. But I hardly know anything about this subject, so feel free to correct me at any time and don't take offense if I say anything wrong. Lastly, regarding Abe Burrows being Jewish, I had always assumed and suspected that he was Jewish just because of the context. as you can read in Secular Jewish culture, a vast majority of Jewish musicals writers during that period and since were Jewish. Burrows worked with Jewish Frank Loesser, and a PBS documentary stated that they all went to the same high school in Brooklyn with each other. So I had previously assumed that he was Jewish but never would have added something to an encyclopedia because of my own assumptions. However two nights ago I decided to surf the web to search for confirmation, first under his son James Burrows, for which many confirming sources were found. Later to a lesser extent verification was found for Abe Burrows. My real interest is not in the Abe Burrows article or any individual's article but rather List of Jewish American Entertainers#Theater and List of Jewish American Playwrights, both of which I've tried to contribute to greatly. Thanks for the discussion. Yid613 07:05, 3 January 2006 (UTC) Image Tagging Image:Class1x.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Class1x.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or {{fairuse}}. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Sherool (talk) 20:32, 6 January 2006 (UTC) Re:Reduction of headingsI've reduced the number of headings in the article per your suggestions. Thanks for helping out!--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 16:51, 7 January 2006 (UTC) Public Domain or GFDLI noticed that an image of yours is marked as {{PD}} when it is actually a picture of/by you (as you have written in the description page). Such images should be tagged with {{GFDL-self}} (which applies to self-made images). Please make the necessary changes.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 12:36, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Re:Mumtaz picNothing Nemonoman. I just thought this one was more elegant and is definitely larger in size than the previous one. Besides the source of the old pic was not mentioned. --Deepak|वार्ता 23:25, 3 February 2006 (UTC) Yoga schools versus stylesHey Nem, There are 4 Yoga lineages...Bhakti, Karma, Raja, Jyana. You know that. There are several Yoga schools with legitimate Sat-Guric lineages...Sankya/Raja/Jyana (Swami Rama), Raja/Ashtanga (Krishnamikurti/K. Patabi Jois; Sri Satchinanada; Sri Sivanada; BKS Iyengar, etc.), Raja/Bhakta (Vivikenanada; Yogananda, etc.), Karma (Ram Dass, Neem Koroli Baba)... Everything else is a derivative style, or presentation: Power Yoga (Beryl Bender Birch) Anasurya (John Friend) Yoga Zone (Alan Finger) all forms of Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga (Baron Baptiste; Shiva Rea) Bhikram Yoga Anahata Yoga Om Yoga etc... ...and therefore, in my opinion, reference to it is POV, as most of the style/presentation derivatives are driven by the need to market a product or present a personal interpretation of the sutras by a single individual, usually someone more than once removed from a lineage, and in many cases not even a Sadhaka (initiated disciple). This is akin to a black belt, who is generally considered a beginner in traditional martial arts practice, opening a school, versus an "inner door" disciple doing the same. And this a lot like the issues we have in martial arts. Unless, you can trace the lineage of the style you practice through your teacher back to the developer/founder (Chen, Ling, Ueshiba, Musashi, etc.) in a straight line, what you're doing is likely dervative. Like, there isn't a hell of a lot of difference between Shotokan Kai, Seido, and Oyama...but Nakamura Sensei (Seido) and Oyama Sensei (Oyama) are presenting Shotokan Kai in a personal/family dervative form. So Shotokan is a lineage, but Seido and Oyama are dervative styles. The same could be said of the Kung Fu lineages...there are 5 legitimate Temple lineages. Everything else is derivative, even someone like Vincent Lin, who can trace his Ling Gar system back to his 23 generations back grandfather. On a personal note, I am both a Sadhaka of Sri Swami Rama, and an "inner door" disciple of the Lung Men Taoist Grandmaster Li Ten Tung. I would neither presume to present my own style of Yoga, nor open a martial arts school. It reflects ego, and presumption. It's a slippery slope, and one upon which I would welcome debate, but I felt it was it legitimate distinction. Mjformica 11:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Do as you wish, I have no investment in it. Mjformica 16:35, 5 February 2006 (UTC) Aram Baughyou have edited my post on Aram Baugh now here are some fact that the Place was called Aram Baugh the Babur body was kept there. Noor jahan used it. yet in one stoke you have taken away most of my work because a large part was based on an article which appeared on Business line a newspaper would that not be free source? Re: YogaI should have discussed the matter on the discussion page. Apologies for that. Yoga is central only to Hinduism and not to any other religions. It is because of ignorance that people do not link Yoga to Hinduism. In fact, any person who performs Yoga is actually practising Hinduism. It is also because of ignorance that people think of Hinduism as a religion. Actually Hinduism is nothing but a way of living. I do understand your concerns but it is my belief that Yoga is central only to Hinduism. The very fact that other cultures have adopted Yoga doesn't mean that Yoga looses its Hindu identity. Gautama Buddha is believed to be an avatar of Lord Vishnu in Hinduism - now should I remove Buddhism template from the page claiming that Gautama is not central to Buddhism only. Buddha never preached Yoga, neither did Guru Nanak nor Mahavira. But Krishna does. Yoga plays a much more significant role in Hinduism than in any other religion. People in other religions look at Yoga as a mere stress buster and fitness exercise but for Hindus it is mean of coming in contact with the Supreme Being and to know the inner self. Many Hindus consider Yoga as a form of prayer which clearly shows the importance Yoga plays in Hinduism. Fact remains that people are highly ignorant about Yoga. Yoga is a much more broader term than Anahata Yoga (I guess you haven't read the Bhagavad Gita. What your yoga instructors teach you is a fitness exercise not a form of spiritual prayer). Not adding the Hinduism template to Anahata Yoga article is justified. But I strongly oppose the removal of Hinduism template from the main Yoga article. Thanks and I would like to express my apologies again for not using the discussion page --Deepak|वार्ता 03:21, 7 February 2006 (UTC) I hear you Deepak, but I must maintain my position. I first read the Gita over 40 years ago, and have now read at least 11 translations, as well as 4 translations of the complete Mahabharata of which it is but part. When it comes to Hinduism, do not doubt me, nor my scholarship. You would be hard pressed to find a Westerner more loving or familiar with Hinduism than me. Hinduism may not be my native language, but I speak it quite well. It is my love of Hinduism and my scholarship that makes me say the things I say about Yoga. It is apparent to me that Hinduism adopted elements of Yoga. This view is controversial. What cannot be argued is that Yoga has expanded beyond Hinduism. Using my Western culture as figure, the Christmas analogy is very apt. I have been in Bombay, Pune, and Ahmednagar at Christmastime, and seen the plastic trees and wreaths and candy canes and Christmas lights shaped like OM on Hindu and Muslim houses. Is it legitimate for me to demand that those people accept Christ as their personal savior? In Japan, Christmas is a huge celebration, and there's not a Christian in sight. Should the Christianity template be used on the Christmas article?? As to your Anahata comments, please forgive my very poor description of that remarkably wonderful practice and do not judge it because of my inadequacies. I find that Anahata is extremely pure and spiritual, and as Hatha Yoga goes, much more Hindu in essence and practice than the foolishness taught at many so-called Hindu ashrams. That said, I am very disturbed that Hatha Yoga and Yoga are terms so interchangable to most westerners, and if I had my way, the Yoga article would start: This article is about YOGA, not the exercise regime most people imagine when they hear the word. That's "Hatha" Yoga. And REAL Hatha Yoga is not about bending or sweating or twisting into a knot. If you're interested in that stuff see Hatha Yoga Isn't Really Yoga. I have watched the Yoga article deteriorate over these last few months, and it needs an overhaul. The Hinduism Project category is a problem I think for non-hindus who may still be well versed in many aspects Yoga. I think it sends a very wrong message, quite literally, telling potential editors to shape up to Hinduism Project standards to ship out. I particularly read to mean that my scholarship is not welcome, since it is at variance with a strictly Hindu interpretation. Anyway, while I'm autocratic and unbendable about changes Aurangzeb and Taj Mahal, I make every effort to pre-discuss changes to Yoga, because it is, at its heart, the path all of us must eventually tread. We might as well get comfortable about describing it. --Nemonoman 03:53, 7 February 2006 (UTC) Dear Nemonoman, as you deleted previous posts about ethnicity of Meher Baba ....: 'Persian is an ethnicity and it refers to an ethnic group. I agree that it may also be equivalent to Iranian as the name of the country was Persia before 1935. However the word's main meaning is related to Persian ethnic group. Parsis of india are from persian ethnicity, as you probably know. Being from persian ethnic group has nothing to do with the nationality of the person. One may be from Tajikistan or Afghanistan or India or Israel and be Persian at the same time. You wrote: an't see how he's both a "persian person" and an "indian religious figure". Born, lived, died in India. He's Indian. Yes he is indian and at the same time belongs to persian ethnic group. -- Mensen 16:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Your efforts are appreciatedI see that you've faced inevitable criticism and more than enough harsh words. I wish to add I appreciate your efforts on the Meher Baba page and wish I had said so in my comments, not because of any other reason than to express my feelings and respect toward you and your work, for such reciprocating wholly and not merely the thoughtful part is in my opinion moral in almost all cases.BeyondBeyond 04:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC) History of HinduismI haven't insulted you in any way. I observed the changes you made to Aurangzeb without the concensus others. Many people thought what you were doing was unilateral and rude. We've also had many troubles with fundamentalest muslim on articles such as these. I disagreed with your about your veiws about shivanji and the goa inquisition. If there was no shivanji, India would would be like indonesia. And there Goa inquisition is important because it was covered up. I have like scholarly references for the article since it still need a lot of work.--Dangerous-Boy 04:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC) In response to comments on Hindus in Yoga talk pageNemonoman, 1) How can you say Hindus are doing political agenda? 2) How can you pass judgement on the age of Hindus taking part in Hinduism portal? Do you know them personally? 3) How can you proove that you are not spreading Christian/Western agenda here? Your approach here is truely reflecting your unpleasant personality as you have mentioned in your user page. It's good to know that you have ALMOST started tolerating YOGA these days.... !...Self explanation...! --Holy Ganga 07:21, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
1) How can you say Hindus are doing political agenda?
2) How can you pass judgement on the age of Hindus taking part in Hinduism portal? Do you know them personally?
3) How can you proove that you are not spreading Christian/Western agenda here?
Your approach here is truely reflecting your unpleasant personality as you have mentioned in your user page. It's good to know that you have ALMOST started tolerating YOGA these days.... !...Self explanation...! --Holy Ganga 21:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
You have just repeated same things by adding more words. 1) If your opinion is different, that doesn't mean that person is spreading agenda and you are innocent. 2) Accept that you passed personal judgements. In any case, if your opinion is different from others, you have no right to pass judgements on all Hindus here. Universal Comments like age, maturity, personal agenda etc. on a particular group have nothing to do with discussions on wikipedia. Also, i have seen their user pages, i didn't find them Young. Even if some are young, still i think nobody should have any problem. 3) You raised points and it was you who edited portions of this article without much discussions. So, you should follow what you preach. 4) Ok i believe you that you are not spreading personal agenda , i hope you will not bring rigid attitude again in between discussions and i also hope that you will also not assume that Hindus are spreading any kind of agenda. Thanks --Holy Ganga 07:21, 13 February 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia Policy on use of Copyright MaterialsThis article [1] started you is a copyright voilation and direct lift from [2].
He conducted Kurt Weill's Threepenny Opera on CBS Television. He was Conductor and Artistic Consultant to three shows of the PBS Television "Grow Old With Me" series. Dworkin served as Principal Clarinetist of the American Symphony Orchestra under Leopold Stokowski. He later performed for many years with the Metropolitan Opera Orchestra. Dworking has performed throughout the world, including four Carnegie Recital Hall chamber and solo recitals. He was a member of Musicisti Americani, based at the Sulmona, Italy summer festival. Dworkin is a graduate of The Juilliard School, where he studied clarinet with Daniel Bonnade and Robert McGinnis, and conducting with Jean Morel. He also earned graduate degrees in music and music education from Columbia University. He is the creator of Conductorcise, which combines an aerobic workout with basic conducting and listening skills.
From: http://www.dworkineliason.com/html/dworkin/dworkin_artist.html He has also conducted the New Jersey, Vermont, and Manhattan Symphony Orchestras in subscription, family, and young people's concerts. Dworkin conducted Kurt Weill's "Three Penny Opera" on CBS Television, and recently served as Conductor and Artistic Consultant to three PBS Television documentaries in the series "Grow Old With Me": Dworkin served as Principal Clarinetist of the American Symphony Orchestra under its legendary founding Music Director, Leopold Stokowski. He later performed for many years with the Metropolitan Opera Orchestra. Dworkin has performed throughout the world, including four Carnegie Recital Hall chamber and solo recitals, and was a member of Musicisti Americani, based at the Sulmona, Italy summer festival. David Dworkin is a graduate of The Juilliard School, where he studied clarinet with Daniel Bonnade and Robert McGinnis, and conducting with Jean Morel. He also earned graduate degrees in music and music education from Columbia University. He is the creator of CONDUCTORCISE™, which combines an aerobic workout with basic conducting and listening skills... These large scale coincidents definately don't look your own words. Using copyrighted work from othersIf you use part of a copyrighted work under "fair use", or if you obtain special permission to use a copyrighted work from the copyright holder under the terms of our license, you must make a note of that fact (along with names and dates). It is our goal to be able to freely redistribute as much of Wikipedia's material as possible, so original images and sound files licensed under the GFDL or in the public domain are greatly preferred to copyrighted media files used under fair use. See Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission for a form letter asking a copyright holder to grant us a license to use their work under terms of the GFDL. Never use materials that infringe the copyrights of others. This could create legal liabilities and seriously hurt the project. If in doubt, write it yourself.' Note that copyright law governs the creative expression of ideas, not the ideas or information themselves. Therefore, it is perfectly legal to read an encyclopedia article or other work, reformulate it in your own words, and submit it to Wikipedia.(See plagiarism and fair use for discussions of how much reformulation is necessary in a general context.) Linking to copyrighted worksLinking to copyrighted works is usually not a problem, as long as you have made a reasonable effort to determine that the page in question is not violating someone else's copyright. If it is, please do not link to the page. Whether such a link is contributory infringement is currently being debated in the courts, but in any case, linking to a site that illegally distributes someone else's work sheds a bad light on us. from Wikipedia:Copyrights If you find a copyright infringementIt is not the job of rank-and-file Wikipedians to police content for possible copyright infringement, but if you suspect one, you should at the very least bring up the issue on that page's talk page. Others can then examine the situation and take action if needed. The most helpful piece of information you can provide is a URL or other reference to what you believe may be the source of the text. Some cases will be false alarms. For example, if the contributor was in fact the author of the text that is published elsewhere under different terms, that does not affect their right to post it here under the GFDL. Also, sometimes you will find text elsewhere on the Web that was copied from Wikipedia. In both of these cases, it is a good idea to make a note in the talk page to discourage such false alarms in the future. If some of the content of a page really is an infringement, then the infringing content should be removed, and a note to that effect should be made on the talk page, along with the original source. If the author's permission is obtained later, the text can be restored. If all of the content of a page is a suspected copyright infringement, then the page should be listed on Wikipedia:Copyright problems and the content of the page replaced by the standard notice which you can find there. If, after a week, the page still appears to be a copyright infringement, then it may be deleted following the procedures on the votes page. In extreme cases of contributors continuing to post copyrighted material after appropriate warnings, such users may be blocked from editing to protect the project.
Thanks for noticing. I never finished cleaning up that article. Now it's fixed.--Nemonoman 14:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC) So what am I to imply?
A Google search of 'Benedict Romeo New Jersey' returns his phone number and address... on some of the pages. A search for 'military limber' returns relevant results to page 20. CrypticBacon 08:20, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Blank ǂ No....I had saw your edits in the article Comparison of FTP clients#Protocol support that you fill in the blanks in to "no". However, take a note that it does not mean that "blank" they do not support that protocol, but maybe was not filled in yet or not enough information. For instance, Captain Ftp actually supports ssl-ftp... http://captainftp.xdsnet.de/cftp/features.html GSPbeetle complains Vandalisms 11:44, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Accuracy (and Relevance) of Quote??Cross post from the Talk:Akbar
Taj featured articleHi Nemonoman, i am unable to understand which "See Also" are you talking about? I have seen all the noincudes on the page but they are only for removing images. Please try to clear me. Can you suggest me some reasons why do you think it is "bad link" for Indian featured article. Suggest me some articles to add for this list until we proceed Indian featured article candidates and Indian featured article removal candidates. Should we remove or we place it until it starts properly. Thanks -- Shyam (T/C) 15:44, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Deleting copyright material on DiwaliHi Nemonoman, thanks for doing that! However if you noticed you also deleted information that was not copyright. Awhile back, someone must have copied and pasted the information onto the page. But as you know, articles are constantly edited at Wikipedia, and you deleted some material which I added with permission and properly sourced. The truth is though that my additions won't make sense without the coprighted stuff but may you still be more cautious next time. Thanks DaGizzaChat © 07:19, 25 February 2006 (UTC) Hi Nemonoman, it would great if you joined. I'm going to research Diwali in more detail so that the article reaches at least the same state before the copright material was deleted. Perhaps I can even make it a Featured article! DaGizzaChat © 07:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC) Looking forward to your novelIt sounds like my cup of tea ... er, chai. Zora 09:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC) Please do not delete referencesI noticed that while doing your cleanup of Shirdi Sai Baba you also removed references (to the book by Rigopoulos). Thanks for doing the clean up, but please be more careful next time not to remove references. References are an essential part of Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Cite your sources and they took me a lot of time to collect. Thanks. Andries ShahjahanI think the information on Shah Jahan is very relevant for the article, and I was a bit puzzled by the comment on it. --Combes 02:27, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
It is notable and verifiable. I think you have a few self made cliches, and that you find it difficult to accept things that go against them. This is not a personal attack, just something you should think about. Wikipedia has even whole articles on this: Robert Baden-Powell's sexual orientation. The sources are the best on this particular subject. The official chroniclers were employed by the kings themselves, they couldn't write about "scandals" or about the Harem life. But the European travellers could and did. The most important and qualified contemporary writer on this particular subject (the Harem life during Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb) was in fact Manucci. (I assume that you're familiar with him.) On the incest part, De Laet was the first foreigne traveller to write about it. Bernier and Tavernier stayed in Agra, and they both claimed the same. However, the matter cannot be proved, and there is the theory that Aurangzeb exploited this rumour to make a scandal out of it. Shahjahans promiscuity is legendary and was quite infamous, it is no allegation at all. Of course this goes for the whole Mughal Era, but Shah Jahan is exceptionally infamous here. His affairs with the wifes of Jafar Khan and Khalilullah Khan, with the sister of Mumtaz Mahall, with the wife of Shaista Kahn (whom he violated with the assistance of his daughter), with his many slave-girls and dancing girls and so on made his reputation. --Combes 12:53, 24 March 2006 (UTC)  Look, the new sections are now at the end of the article. In some articles they are even in a separate article Robert Baden-Powell's sexual orientation, but that is not necessary. The incest part is stated as "allegation", and I think I will later add a sentence or two more about it to make it even more clear that it is not proved. Manucci is not a sensationalist self-promoting liar. He wrote the most detailed account of the Mughal Harem, and was the most qualified writer on the harem life during this time. Manucci said:"I must add, that I have not relied on the knowledge of others; and I have spoken nothing which I have not seen or undergone..." Especially for the later reign of Shah Jahan and for the reign of Aurangzeb, he cannot be ignored. "With rare exceptions, Manuccis statements, where they can be verified, are historically accurate, and a fair inferece is that, where there is no such corroboration, he may equally be accepted as trustworthy.."(Irvine's introduction). Look, I can only repeat myself about what I said above on cliches. I don't want you to leave and I hope you came back. --Combes 17:24, 24 March 2006 (UTC) I'm sorry if I was unnecessary rude. As you have yourself hinted at, there's a lot of propaganda going on, and the unfortunate consequence is that one is sometimes unnecessary rude on talk pages. I apologize, and still hope you come back to Wikipedia sometime. --Combes 12:40, 29 March 2006 (UTC) ThanksI thank you for making the picture better. --Bhadani 14:28, 24 March 2006 (UTC) Thank you!Thank you for your kind words, very much appreciated :-) --Irishpunktom\talk 19:57, 31 March 2006 (UTC) TranslationsHey Nemonoman. Apologies for the late reply. Including a translation of Taj Mahal in Arabic makes little sense because the Arabs have little to do with the Taj Mahal. The mughals' main language was Hindustani while the architect was Persian. So including the translation of Taj Mahal in Hindi, Urdu and Persian makes sense, but Arabic.. Thanks for asking my opinion. --Incman|वार्ता 13:55, 6 June 2006 (UTC) New material on AurangzebHi, I understand that you have been contributing to Wiki since 2003. I’ve also read your comments on Aurangzeb’s war against the Rajputs, to which only two lines refer on the Wiki page of that Mughal Emperor. This is to let you know that I changed that page some months ago but was disappointed to see it revert to its present state. Even though you are no longer an active editor I urge you to edit that Aurangzeb page in light of the material presented below. That Aurangzeb’s war against the Rajputs was a turning point in the history of India, and was separate from the rebellions of Jats, Sikhs, Satnamis etc, is attested to in Sir Jadunath Sarkar’s massive four-volume biography of Aurangzeb. I have all four volumes in my possession—in Volume III one chapter is devoted to Aurangzeb’s policy of temple destruction and imposition of jaziya, another chapter covers the broad Hindu (and Sikh) reaction. Two separate chapters of that same volume describe the war against the Rajputs, at the start of which Aurangzeb had imposed the jaziya in 1679. The following are quotes from those chapters. All the spellings and grammar are as in the original work. On the reason for the war against the Kingdom of Jodhpur: “A special reason, besides its strategic importance, made the Kingdom of Marwar a desirable acquisition in Aurangzib’s eyes. It was the foremost Hindu State of Northern India at this time. Its chieftain was Jaswant Singh, who enjoyed the unrivalled rank of Maharajah and whom the death of Jai Singh thirteen years ago had left as the leading Hindu peer of the Mughal court. If his power passed on to a worthy successor, that successor would be the pillar of the Hindus’ hopes all over the empire and the centre of the Hindu opposition to the policy of temple destruction and jaziya. We know not whether Jaswant’s sins of twenty years ago—his presumption in opposing Aurangzib at Dharmat, after all the other nobles had declined to confront a prince of the blood, his treachery at Khajwa, his coquetting with Dara on the eve of the Battle of Deorai—still rankled in Aurangzib’s bosom, as Khafi Khan asserts, and he now sought to take a safe if belated vengeance. But it is clear that the success of his plan of the forcible conversion of the Hindus required that Jaswant’s State should sink into a quiescent dependency or a regular province of the empire. Hindu resistance to the policy of religious persecution must be deprived of a possible efficient head.” On the reason why the Rajputs of Mewar allied with Marwar against Aurangzeb: “But now the lord of Udaipur had to choose between rebellion and the loss of whatever is dearest to man. The Mughal annexation of Marwar turned his left flank and exposed his country to invasion through the Aravali passes on its western side, while the eastern half of his State, being comparatively level, lay as open to a foe as before. The mountain fastness of Kamalmir, which had sheltered Pratap during the dark days of Akbar’s invasion, would now cease to be an impregnable refuge to his successor. The annexation of Marwar was but the preliminary to an easy conquest of Mewar. Besides, Aurangzib’s campaign of temple destruction was not likely to stop within the imperial dominions. He had demolished and wantonly desecrated the holiest Hindu shrines at Benares, Mathura and Somnath. In Rajputana itself, even before the death of Jaswant gave him any pretext for interference, he had pulled down the great temples of Khandela and Sanula and all other temples there, while after Jaswant’s death, the Mughal occupation of his capital had been signalized by the wanton demolition of its temples and the public desecration of their idols. On the revival of the jaziya tax, a demand for its enforcement throughout his State had been sent to the Maharana. If the Sisodias did not stand by the Rathors now, the two clans would be crushed piecemeal, and the whole of Rajasthan would lie helpless under the tyrant’s feet. So thought Maharana Raj Singh, and so thought his clansmen, many of whom had already fraternized with the Rathor refugees in the Godwar district and opposed the Mughals under Tahawwur Khan.” On why Prince Akbar rebelled against his father during the Rajput War: “From an early period in the campaign emissaries of the Rajputs had been tempting Akbar to rebel against his father. Tahawwur Khan, the second in command of the imperial forces in Marwar, was the intermediary of these treasonable negotiations. The Maharana Raj Singh and Durgadas, the Rathor leader, told Akbar how his father’s bigoted attempt to root out the Rajputs was threatening the stability of the Mughal empire, and urged him to seize the throne and restore the wise policy of his forefathers if he wished to save his heritage from destruction. In this attempt to place a truly national king on the throne of Delhi, they promised to back him with the armed strength of the two greatest Rajput clans, the Sisodias and the Rathors.” On the results of the Rajput War: “The loss caused to Aurangzib by his Rajput policy cannot be measured solely by the men and money he poured on that desert soil. He had concentrated all the resources of the empire against two small States and had failed to achieve decisive success. Damaging as this result was to imperial prestige, its material consequences were worse still. In the height of political unwisdom, he wantonly provoked rebellion in Rajputana, while the Afghans on the frontier were still far from being pacified. With the two leading Rajput clans openly hostile to him, his army lost its finest and most loyal recruits. Nor was the trouble confined to Marwar and Mewar. It spread by sympathy among the Hada and Gaur clans. The elements of lawlessness thus set moving overflowed fitfully into Malwa and endangered the vitally important Mughal road through Malwa to the Deccan. In the incessant wars which fill the remainder of his reign, the Bundela clan and a few Hada and Kachhwa families supplied the only Rajput soldiers he could secure for fighting his battles. This was the harvest that Jalal-ud-din Akbar’s great-grandson reaped from sowing the whirlwind of religious persecution and suppression of nationalities.” On the ambitions of Akbar after he was taken by the Rajputs to the court of the Maratha King Shambhuji (this is in Volume IV): “Akbar’s one thought was, how to gain the throne of Delhi. He valued Shambhuji as an instrument of this design—to lend him money and men, escort him to Rajputana, and there joining the Rathors and Sisodias invade Upper India, rally all malcontents against Aurangzib’s rule, overpower the imperial forces, and enter the capital in triumph, as his own father had done in 1658.” On why this plan did not work: “But Shambhuji’s interests did not exactly coincide with Akbar’s. Why should he go out of the safety of the Deccan hills and jungles into the broad plains of North India where his troops would lose their natural advantage? Why should he denude his country of its defenders by accompanying Akbar in the wild project of invading Hindusthan, give Aurangzib an opportunity of conquering Maharashtra in his absence and cutting off his return home from North India, where a defeat would mean annihilation for the Maratha army? His work lay at home.” So the plan did not mature. But this alliance of Akbar with the Rajputs and Marathas forced Aurangzeb to rush all his forces south and begin the Deccan Wars that lasted till his death. Hence the Rajput War from 1679-80 and Prince Akbar’s rebellion 1680-86 are inextricably linked with the Deccan Wars from 1681-1707 and deserve a separate mention on that page. As of now the page has only a two line reference to the Rajput War, which as Sir Jadunath Sarkar points out, also affected the Rajput clans living in the neighborhood of Rajputana. While Prince Akbar’s rebellion is shown as starting from the Mughal court (!) with no credible reason assigned: “Aurangzeb's son Akbar left the Mughal court and joined with Sambhaji, inspiring some Mughal forces to join the Marathas.” Your commentsWell, it needs to be done. The deletionists, while clearly uninformed and ignorant, can be quite rabid and tenacious, like some kind of wild dog. I think one needs to be just as tenacious, while remaining level-headed and thoughtful, to deal with this and ensure that our project remains pluralistic and positive. You're welcome to join in the fun. BTW, have you watched the film all the way through? I'm having problems with streaming on my computer. Badagnani 19:48, 16 September 2006 (UTC) Help neededHi Nemonoman, to be bold is ok, but there are so many rules I ignore. Is what is going on in Meher Baba a content dispute, a revert war or plain vandalism? I have placed a test2a in Liam7's talk page, but I am not fluent with rules and wouldn't like to lead this in the wrong way. Can you please help me understand proper proceeding here? Hoverfish 08:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC) Thank you for your answer. I guess I reacted too soon and without enough know-how in such matters. I will remove the test2a. I don't know that Cott12 has any ownership feelings on the article, but someone should see to it that things remain encyclopedic, preferably a wider group of editors, so that no single one appears to be a "gate-keeper", etc. I also appreciate knowing your opinion on Pete's section. Hoverfish 08:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC) The thing with TownsendAfter you refered to groupies, I wish to share with you my view. I am no big fan of Pete, haven't attended any of his concerts, but I do find some of his earlier rock music better than of many others of his time. I can imagine that lots of his fans from the Who times still follow him as "groupies". However I receive feedback from some long time Baba lovers who have a totally different motivation for attending his concerts. They do not go to see a rock star of the past, but to share a loving musical evening in Baba's memory with the Baba part of the audience, which is not negligible at all. Often I receive YouTube videos from the concerts and honestly I don't think that the audience is in majority Who fans. So, if you accept this, let us try not to be unjust to the Baba lovers or likers who attend the concerts. I am quite with you as for the article mentioning, provided we take care not to discredit what is creditable. I also wish to encourage you not to feel as too biased to take part in the further editing. You have a longer experience with Wikipedia to know what is bias and what not. If we all stay inactive for this reason, then there will be only Cott12 who takes all the load (and possible blames) alone. By the way I am very glad we have finally started discussing. Your opinion and assistance may be of great value to my efforts soon, as I plan to start further articles on Baba connected literature. Hoverfish 13:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC) I had noticed your contributions but not the conflict on the Taj Mahal. Also the thermometer indication. Now they connect. I really hope the "Indian guru of Persian descent" is ok with you, since I was the one who suggested it to Cott12, hoping to stabilize things. On Townsend I will try to make a proposal, either via Tommy and the later devotional albums, or in a section of encyclopedically notable people who have supported Baba's message, with a mention to Tommy and the LPs. A peer review sooner rather than later could give us a more unbiased scheme to work on. As I said in my first discussion in MB, this article can reach the quality of the Bahai and surely it deserves it. I have to admit that Liam's deletion managed to wake up some active interest. Whether you wish to become more involved in it or not, I really hope you get to understand Cott12's position. He has done his best for the article, has researched very extensively for valid sources, has a lot of good material available and we could all be an effective team for a GA. Without mutual confidence and consensus we will not reach very far. You mention 50 years. You got me! I am only thinking of the next months and maybe years. Wikipedia is a living book. If in India there is social/cultural change, the Hinduism article will raise temperature, yogas will be disputed and modified, Bollywood fans will ravage film articles in favour of their stars, etc. If a new world development grows to reflect some of Baba's messages, the article may change too. Right now, however, it may not act as a crystal ball, neither a von Däniken sequel. The article is part of the Biography project and all conventions apply. Hoverfish 19:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC) Jai Baba, my friend. Hoverfish 09:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC) One more piece of information I found on the above topic: [3]. No implications of inclusion meant. Hoverfish 15:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC) YouTubeDear Nemonoman, I noticed that you are one of the few of us who have added videos to YouTube that appear under the search term "Meher Baba." Very cool. What is Temple Dancer? Chris 00:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
NotesI have left a message in the Meher Baba talk page about Abronkeeler's edit. I don't have any objection in him doing it, and I am glad to hear from you, a writer of books, that you liked it since it's my work. I am sincerely honored. As for Jay, I can make a logically debatable statement that "Birds of unlike feather don't flock together". :) Hoverfish 06:34, 11 December 2006 (UTC) Shirdi Sai Baba (experts)I think we should ask as many experts as possible, because the more experts we ask the faster they start doing smth about the article and the better it will be. 16:24 Kkrystian 11 Dec. 2006 (UTC+1)
Thanks for your references!Hi, Thanks for your citations for the Rock cut architecture article. I still have some problems with the article, which I have explicated on the talk page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC) That's for your feedback on Indian rock cut architectureI am no sort of expert but I love the concepts and photos so much. It captures my imagination entirely. Hopefully I can interest some experts in the matter. Are not the examples increditable and spectacular? (I'm gong by the wonderful photos which enter my soul.) Thank you for your feedback. Sincerely, Mattisse 04:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC) MessiahThanks for the heads up on that. I was populating an unpopulated category, and I figured that it was a touchy subject with some people. I think the category should stay, but I'm not willing to get into a debate over it. :-) CRKingston 00:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC) saints/gurusA guru is one who teaches a large number of people. A saint would be someone that devoted their life to serving people/preaching/ or serving a higher power. The cats are in some disarray though.Bakaman 22:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC) Mosque imageHello, I'd like to edit the Taj Mahal image and want to alter the image caption to Image:Mosqueceiling Taj.jpg - currently it states this is the Masjid dome - could you confirm it is of the Jama Masjid, Delhi. Many thanks. --Mcginnly | Natter 20:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Taj featured article questionsIs Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Taj Mahal the only time this was submitted to FAC or is there another? --Joopercoopers 14:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I've slept on the idea and concluded we should file a WP:RFC first to determine whether we need to include the P.N. Oak theories - it can all be sorted out from the off then and we can rewrite the article accordingly. --Joopercoopers 14:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
(UTC)
I've filed the RFC at Talk:Taj Mahal#Request for Comment: Inclusion of minority points of view. --Joopercoopers 16:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the barnstarThank you Nemo, for the terrific swirling barnstar award for the Baba articles. I have followed with interest some of the work you do here, and though I am not up on it as you are, it seems you tirelessly confront some amazing Eastern conspiracy theories and misinformation. I will keep watching. All the best. Cott12 Talk 00:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC) CommentsThe main problems I see with the Taj article at the moment is 1. Resolving the POV issues - which is now hopefully in hand - could you direct me to any registered users of the pro-oak variety - silence isn't consent so we need their comments. 2. Referencing - I find it really hard to reference others work so I've started a restructure and rewrite at User:Joopercoopers/Taj Mahal/restructure it kind of involves taking each sentence evaluating whether or not it's valid enough for inclusion and then getting a good reference for it - this is just for discussion at the moment but with a potentially contentious article we need a high level of referencing - so the first paragraph I was drafting probably has the required density IMO. I'll write it all up and then start chopping, changing, adding images and horse trading. For me, architecture is informed and inextricably linked to the people and culture that produced it, so setting the scene and explaining something of the nature of Jahan and Mumtaz's love seems a sensible start, particularly as we do need to deal with the notion, true or otherwise, about the interpretation of the building as a monument to Love - there are other interpretations of course which we'll need to include, but the human interest always creates a good read - but nothings set in stone and as I said we can take view later - right now I'm interested in getting well referenced material written up to edit down later. I've ordered a book from Ebba Koch - I read a review of it in the Architectural Review - she's widely regarded as a global expert on Mughal architecture, so when it arrives I see her as a good main reference - the contextual stuff I've done so far is just filling time until the book arrives. Unfortunately I was invovled in an admin misunderstanding today - thanks for you comment on the talk page - I was really concerned it was going to mess the RFC up, but it's all worked out ok in the end. I have no intention of editing the main Taj article for some time. Take care. --Joopercoopers 23:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
NemonomanI assume you know the allusion of your username: much like noumenon which means, roughly, 'the thing in itself' as it really is. Nice name. Cott12 Talk 17:50, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
All the better. I did not know any of that about the Odyssey. The noumenon allusion is indeed a complement as you are constantly working to correct articles to things as they really are. That you might be 'no one' too might not be inconsistent with such a philosophical notion, as you know. (-: Cott12 Talk 18:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC) WhilstSorry [4] I've used it all my life (and I'm only in my mid 30s) - only recently was I told it's considered archaic by American editors......I'm still breaking the habit. --Joopercoopers 17:42, 21 March 2007 (UTC) TajNemo,
I'm concerned you've thrown the baby out with the bathwater here. It's important to mention
The reasons why the myths abound are an important introductory paragraph to the section - I'm happy to see the prose tightened, but let's keep the content and try and work out an accomodation here.
Better still it will be easier to do this on The rewrite. I've made good progress - everything is referenced to the nth degree, but it's still a way off yet - It will need whittling - the architecture section will become a content fork I think. I've got to finish the 'conservation and the future' section, the actual description of the mausoleum, jawab, mosque and terrace, then there's some information to add regarding artistic responses and influences, oh, and then I've got to sort the graphics out and provide a site plan. But I'm happy to start polishing and sharpening the prose on the bits which are finished. --Joopercoopers 17:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
One-sentence paragraphsJoopercoopers wrote:
Paragraphs are used to group thoughts into useful chunks. Sometimes the thought inside a single sentence is so big, so complete, that it deserves its own paragraph. Not to be used all the time, of course, but when applied sparingly, this rhetorical device can add real impact. Example:
Or from As I lay dying:
Or this:
--Nemonoman 17:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC) oakI doubt he is Knapp. I misquoted the title of Knapp's book and he didnt notice, but reproduced my error. Paul B 15:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Taj picturesThe panoramic picture fits perfectly and balances the table of contents. This was long ago agreed by all. W Donelson 18 April 2007, 10:28 UTC Taj Panoramic pictureTO: Nemonoman RE: My suggestion on the correct course of action -- Yes, I understand. But if you are going to remove something that someone else has added, then it's best to discuss it with them first. If you want to change your own additions, go ahead. If there is clear vandalism, go ahead. If there is an academic difference of opinion, discuss first. Cheers, William Making edits to others' contributionsNemonoman said "Discussing edits is NOT a requirement". Yes, it is just a Courtesy.
Hi, I have already left a message on user:Universe=atom's talk page. I suggest you leave a strong message as well, since his obsessive edits gave you a lot of extra work. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
You deserve a cookie Nemonoman, why did you write that there were no academic sources about Sai Baba? The Gale Encyclopedia of Religion is one such source. Please reconsider your vote. Best regards. Kkrystian 08:25, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
HelloThanks for getting in touch ([5]). I noticed that you have a message saying that you have ceased to be an active editor. Hope you will reactivate one of these days. Buddhipriya 17:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC) YogaThat edit was problematic for many reasons. No specific citation was given, and Neo-Buddhism is derived from Theravada Buddhism, so the statement was false. Arrow740 02:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC) Working on Robert Haas page.Thanks for your help. Thanks for your help on the Robert Haas page, Jay.--TomCat7 14:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC) New Seven Wonders IS effectively, a commercial siteNew Seven Wonders has generated MILLIONS for its directors over the last eight years. Although they claim "non-profit" status, this is just a cover to hide the salaries they receive as directors. http://blogulate.com/content/is-the-new7wonders-a-scam If you remove Explore the Taj Mahal, then you must also remove the New Seven Wonders links as well. Regards, William Donelson New Seven WondersTfD nomination of Template:New Seven WondersTemplate:New Seven Wonders has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Joopercoopers 11:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Shiva partThere is no need to include the shiva part because it is unnecessarily included there just to show hindu names. It is a finial and not a shiva thing. Search for finial and see what it is. Also Taj Mahal is not a hindu related building and no one can remove the muslim text from there. Talk pageThanks - I saw a similar thing on the talk of Intelligent design and thought it was a good idea. I should perhaps check in and let you know my current thoughts on the Taj article and related matters. I finished nearly all my reading a while ago - still waiting for Begley and Desai's book of translations and interpretations, but amazon promise me it is being flown over the atlantic as we speak. In essence we're going to end up with a triangle of articles - The main Taj article at the top, using summary style to describe the Content forks of firstly, The origins and architecture of the Taj including it's precedents, place in the Agra waterfront city, symbollism, interpretation etc.etc. and secondly The postconstruction history and culture - this will deal with the later European reactions, it's inspirational qualities, how it was used by the British right up to the recent 'symbol of India' aspects and some of the politcal scandals that have surrounded it in recent years. (currently sketched out in the later half of User:Joopercoopers/Taj Mahal/restructure). When the two daughter articles are finished we can look at properly condensing them down and tying them together in a brief and succinct way in the main article - the advantage is I can do this quietly beavering away without to much attention from the vandals. --Joopercoopers 15:33, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Smile Connell66 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Taj Mahal articlethanks for the enouragement Nemonoman. hopefully i will try and make some thoughtful, objective contributions to that artcical. Good Article review: Taj MahalAn article you have contributed to, Taj Mahal has been nominated for Good Article review. Upon recent review of the article, I found some issues within the article that might keep the article from GA status. So, I have asked for a Good Article review. You are welcome to contribute to the discussion there. Drewcifer 03:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Let's see: an 'excellent article' may no longer a 'Good Article' because some self-appointed guardian doing a 'SWEEP' of GAs thinks the vague criteria for being a 'Good Article' might someday be changed -- and you criticize MY RESPONSE? --Nemonoman 11:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
I assume good faith. I don't assume good sense.--Nemonoman 11:21, 29 August 2007 (UTC) :-) --Joopercoopers 11:24, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
I Quit Entirely I am sick to death of Wikipedia and its culture. I quit. My best wishes to some of the excellent human beings I have met while being an editor. --Nemonoman 11:29, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Yoga pollDon't take things personal Nemonoman. I've got a poll goinng on. I hope you may not be lost for Wikipedia. Thank's for serveral yoga articles of your hand I passed through! The standard text I would have send, were: Hi! There's some discussion on whether using "asana", "yogasana" or "yoga asana" as the article title. If you are acquainted with the subject, you are invited to drop your opinion at Talk:Yogasana#Opinion Poll on this article's name. Davin7 09:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC) Copyright terms as left by Meher Baba in his last will and testamentMeher Baba specifically left copyright of "sayings" and "messages" in Trust except where otherwise specified http://www.ambppct.org/trust/docs/Will%20and%20Testament.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meherbabalastwilltestament (talk • contribs) 20:24, 6 June 2008 (UTC) Perfect MasterDear Nemonoman, Could you please have a look at Perfect Master? One editor insists on making the only actual article for the term "perfect master" (Perfect Master (Meher Baba)) appear to not have an article by piping it from the word Meher Baba. I have tried to work with him but he wants to edit-war apparently. I was taken by surprise by this attitude as I actually sought out his help. See discusssion. I thought maybe some other eye would help. So please take a look. Thank you. Tommytocker (talk) 17:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC) GA ReviewThe link you provided is not a GA review. GA reviews are done here WP:GAN. If the article has not passed a GA nomination, it cannot carry the GA status tag. I will request clarification on WT:GAN ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC) See Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#Dubious_GA_nomination. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Articles related to Meher BabaHello, I see that you are well versed on the subject, and have contributed to these articles. Given this, I would like to point out that many of these articles are based on primary sources, and lack secondary sources not related to the subject to be able to be compliant with Wikipedia content policies. A subject as interesting as this surely has a variety of sources that can be drawn upon for a NPOV presentation of the subject. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:13, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
"Such a long article..."..."based on sources that are close to the subject". The problem is that persons writing about Meher Baba rarely stay at a distance. If they're interested at all, they're either attracted to him, or set against him (cf Brunton). The multivolume biography of Meher Baba, Lord Meher is extensively researched, albeit by a Baba follower. Here's Meher Baba -- a guy who has influenced to a huge extent literally hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of persons. Very few 'scholars' have researched him--yet there is a large body of legitimate references to draw on. To reject elements of this article out of hand because you have NPOV worries seems extreme. If the editors were actively avoiding alternate points of view, or basing the article on original research, I would much more be inclined to be in agreement with you. They are not. Remember that I have no particular dog in this fight: for example, I like your changes to MB, and Perfect Master, etc. That said, I am not convinced that you have raised a legitimate NPOV objection simply because you ASSUME without any proof that the material represents a non-neutral point of view. There is no particular reason to ASSUME that. If you have PROOF that the material presented or referenced is NPOV, I would make every effort to adapt. As it is you are raising a provisional objection without -- so far as I can tell -- material proof of non-objectivity. Your concerns are groundless (IMO), though they have merit. But I humbly suggest that you more fully consider why you are raising these objections. Please don't bounce back immediately -- take your time and consider carerfully. --Nemonoman (talk) 00:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I would like to discuss a few things off-wiki with you. If you are interested, please email me. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 15:40, 24 June 2008 (UTC) Two Barnstars
Thank you. This means a lot.--Nemonoman (talk) 13:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC) Sorry for removing your summaryI removed your summary at the GAR. In my experience it doesn't help to list the criteria again, and long comments discourage reviewers. I think this is a keep now anyway, but I will be away Tuesday to Saturday, so if I can't close it before Tuesday, and noone else steps in, there is still one more week in "limbo". Thanks for all your help and forbearance. Geometry guy 20:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Impalement artsThanks for your constructive and supportive comments in the GAR discussion for this article. I have been on the point of quitting Wiki because of the morale sapping effect of certain editors who seem interested only in negative criticism and a sort of "Wiki-insider" culture. Such was my frustration with the attacks on the Impalement arts article I decided (despite being the main contributor) to vote for it to be delisted - my thoughts being that this might cause the snipers to turn their attention elsewhere so the article can continue to be developed in a positive way. Knowing that there is someone who appreciates my work and has been nice enough to defend it has lifted my spirits a bit.Circusandmagicfan (talk) 20:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan
ThanksNice to see you too - I'm not around much, but check in occasionally - I frankly got utterly pissed off with the treatement of Giano, which is of course the result of an increasingly disfunctional community culture. I'm currently to be found posting photos on flickr as mcginnly. Regards --Joopercoopers (talk) 19:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC) Thank you for the welcome messageI made a few minor typo edits on Meher Baba. I find the article excellent for WP and BL viewpoints, but I am perplex when I read so much about the New Life and see no mention of the man-o-nash and Fiery Free Life period. It looks strange when you read the article, as if something is missing. I looked up in the history and discussion but did not find anything on this matter. Has this question been already put ? Thanks Gul-o-Khar (talk) 13:12, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
--Nemonoman (talk) 22:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
No, you are not who I thought you were! So I feel especially grateful for your generous efforts. I can still sort of read French (but write it? No way!), and I will look in on your work from time to time, if I my. I sincerely hope that the Fr. Meher Baba article will be FA, and we can steal good passages from it soon! --Nemonoman (talk) 22:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
What it's come to...{{User:UBX/MeherBabaIndian}}
{{PersianBaba}} 'Persian' changes to Meher BabaThank you for your determined efforts to add the adjective "Persian" to Meher Baba. I admire your determination and perseverance. I invite you to discuss this change on the Meher Baba talk page, as I believe it is (1) non-trivial and (2) wrong. The matter has been discussed at length on at least 2 previous occasions, and the consensus at those times was to call Meher Baba INDIAN, not Persian. Apparently this is a matter of some extreme concern to you, however, and others may share your point of view. I am very willing to be persuaded by your good reasons for wanting this change, particularly because I think others may agree with it. At the moment, however, your changes are extreme, unilateral, undiscussed, and not helpful. I will continue to revert them until you have discussed the matter on the talk pages and established a consensus about your views. Re Impalement artsHeh, you're welcome. I hate having to delist articles (or support their delisting) - I fully appreciate it's the fruit of someone's hard labour we're assessing, and withdrawing GA status is hopefully not a decision that's made without due consideration. I'm serious about the offer though - the prose is not bad in itself, but needs tweaking to comply with the GA criteria, and the article does have other genuine issues. I can't help with the sourcing of course, and I don't know how Circusandmagicfan feels about it, but I'm happy to help out where I can. EyeSerenetalk 11:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC) ReplyNo problem, my fault for having such a long sig :) As for the CfD, I'm open to your suggestion, it's just that I'm unsure (debating with myself, actually) if it's the best one. --Shruti14 t c s 15:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC) I will love if you could add to the article, give a PR about the article. I expanded and referenced the article, about a month or 2 ago and want to add more info. Will look into Meher Baba.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:50, 7 August 2008 (UTC) Lead of ParapsychologyThanks (: ——Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 03:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC) Heh. Yeah, ok. I'm just trying to keep you around. If people start attacking you, the less of a big target you present the better. Hard to keep a balance in those kinds of articles, you know? ——Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 01:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC) I responded on my own talk page, just to keep things together. ——Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 02:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC) about capsI am an usability buff, so, after seeing your comment on Martinphi's talk page, I just couldn't resist checking Google Scholar for articles on how caps reduce readability :D "All caps slows reading speed because it changes the shapes of the words to rectangles, and part of word recognition consists of recognizing the pattern of ascenders and descenders in a particular word'" STC's A conference proceeding from Society for Technical Communication "Ordinary typeface using upper and lower case is usually more readable than are some less frequently used styles such as italics, slanted, small caps or all caps" Readability Guidelines from a blindness site "The leftmost example erroneously uses ALL CAPS, which is rarely a good idea because it's harder to read." Jakob Nielsen "To complicate matters, two of these screenshots also violate the guideline against USING ALL CAPS, which reduces legibility by about 10%. When you mix cases, the ascenders and decenders produce varied letterforms, while all caps produce boxy shapes. Users recognize words faster when you preserve traditional word shapes." Jakob Nielsen again Using caps reduces readability by ten percent. Don't you feel guilty? :D --Enric Naval (talk) 03:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Re:ApologyApology accepted, but not needed.--Tznkai (talk) 05:13, 12 September 2008 (UTC) ArchiveDo you have Talk:Taj Mahal/Archive3 on your watchlist? --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:06, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank youHopefully, we can work together to improve Mughal-related articles. I have tried to improve the Babur article. Take care. Tājik (talk) 16:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC) Taj Mahal infoboxHello, and thanks for the heads-up about the infobox debate on this article. I've since looked at a few other articles of places that are World Heritage Sites, and found similar disagreements. I didn't mean to stir the pot, so I've reverted my own edits. Sorry for any trouble I caused. --Drm310 (talk) 17:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC) BalvinderThanks. It looks like he might be a bit of a problem, since he seems to be simply restoring repeatedly his assertions without linking them to any published sources. It would actually be interesting to know whether there is literature on links between the Taj and Rajput architectural traditions. Paul B (talk) 13:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC) There are Rajput influences on the Taj and other Mughal architecture, but I haven't seen anything documenting these to the extent of Balvinder's edits. Also, it's kind of hard to say which influenced who: the Rajputs and Mughals were so intermingled at the time: so seeing some architectural development appear in Rajasthan first, the followed by some Mughal instance -- Who's to say for sure? So it can become a matter of opinion. White marble, for example. --nemonoman (talk) 14:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Eggs Ackly. --nemonoman (talk) 15:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC) Help needed with the "Mohammed in Hindusim" viewsFirst of all, thanks for understanding that Islam has nothing to do with the Dashavatar! https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Talk:Da%C5%9B%C4%81vat%C4%81ra#The_.22Islamic.22_avatars_of_Vishnu.21 Right now, Wikidas seems to disagree with me and has said that it is quite okay to include "views about Mohammed in Hinduism". All these views are extremely biased and are just fringe views and seem to be desperate Islamic propaganda. We (Paul Barlow, Xerovim and myself) discussed and deleted the sub-section: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Muhammad#Views_in_Hinduism Now it has reappeared with a vengance! I cannot understand what Muhammad has to do with the Vedas and the Upanishads. My concern is that: Wikipedia is not a forum or blog where any crap can be discussed. Using the same yardstick, why can't we include an article which actually says that "Mecca was a Vedic Temple"? Here:http://www.hinduism.co.za/kaabaa.htm Your assistance greatly appreciated. Thanks freewit (talk) 20:12, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm...I slightly disagree with your "to challenge one needs to be smart" view:). We are smart, though we have not memorized our scriptures et al! Come on, after all logic and common sense seem to be the need of the hour regarding the "Mohammed in Hinduism article". By the way, it's getting pretty bad:(. And the Dashavatar-Islamic connection is still present and Wikidas seems to have left it alone. I would say delete it, but if you have any views let me know.freewit (talk) 19:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Thenk you:)...And I'm hoping again that we face no further problems with the Mohammad page. When you're free, please try to review the Matsya Purana page and give me your feedback. I've made quote a few changes and re-written the story in simple English. I still need a few more references and this is a work in progress. Here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matsya freewit (talk) 19:06, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Please see discussionPlease see (and participate in if you feel inclined) in discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Meher_Baba_related_entries. I have restored the notability tag on the disputed entries - after reading and re-reading the guidelines, that seems in order. Note that the tag says that the entry "may" be in violation of Wikipedia guidelines and invites editors with relevant knowledge to improve the entry. I ask that you not delete the tag again, at least while discussion in underway. --Editwondergirl (talk) 02:17, 21 October 2008 (UTC) Hello Nemonoman. Can you do anything about the references asked for on Hazrat Babajan? LittleDoGooder (talk) 10:19, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. LittleDoGooder (talk) 11:57, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Other than citing Lord Meher, I don't think there are are many English sources. --nemonoman (talk) 20:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC) NowCommons: Image:Fb2.jpgImage:Fb2.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Yoga posture forward bend variation.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Yoga posture forward bend variation.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC) License tagging for File:Garage2.jpgThanks for uploading File:Garage2.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC) Yet Another Thank YouJust a note to thank you for your reasoned responses on the CC article. I cannot completely grasp what is the problem(s) being raised, and I've actually talked both to some of their members and former members in the past - which I guess doesn't provide much additional insight on my part. Still, maybe he or she will clarify after your prompting. You really have gone well beyond the call, and I'm sort of ashamed to have dragged you into this - though so glad you took time to help sort things out. You've saved some of what hair remains on my head from being ripped out in complete frustration. Astynax (talk) 03:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Silence DayCan you plase help me with this. See Silence Day. I don't know how to handle it. 02:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redletternight (talk • contribs)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
