User talk:Paul Raj
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] 2005 North India earthquake 8 Oct
2005 North India earthquake --pradeepsomani
Bengali Translation ---- Hi Raj, just checked your message. I would be more than happy to do this translation. I will let you know as soon as I am finished. Thanks, pompeez
[edit] Image
The image you are linking to has some major problems which are noted in the discussion, and which I repeat here
- The Cross pattée (centre) is rather oddly placed - referring possibly to the Knights templar - which no longer exists,
- The triple crescent of Diane de Poitiers is supposed to represent wicca or mother goddess type neopaganism which unfortunately bears a strong resemblance to the Biological hazard Symbol.
- Notably missing is any symbol for Buddhism - normally recognised as a major world religion.
The new image has none of these problems. -- Jeff3000 19:31, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- I suggest keeping the new image. It solves all the problems. No need to do any work when the perfect solution already exists. -- Jeff3000 19:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- I quote the discussion from the page:
- "The Cross pattée (centre) is rather oddly placed - referring possibly to the Knights templar - which no longer exists, so maybe represents gnostic Christians - most of which do not exist. Ayyavazhi (bottom centre) is a small (on the world stage) syncretic Hindu sect, and also seems rather out of place. Lastly, I am guessing that the triple crescent of Diane de Poitiers is supposed to represent wicca or mother goddess type neopaganism which unfortunately bears a strong resemblance to the Biological hazard Symbol. Notably missing is any symbol for Buddhism - normally recognised as a major world religion. In light of your question, I feel that it is correct to edit the picture somewhat. If we were to represent nine religions, it seems to make sense to use the top nine organized religions found on World religion - namely Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Judaism, Bahá'í, Jainism, Shinto. Notable absences would be those excluded by the 'organized religion' requirement - Chinese traditional, Primal Indigenous, African traditional, and Secular/Atheists.. I have amended the picture for uses where it is meant to be representative of different religions. This should better reflect what I mention above. There is no ordering used in the image - I merely replaced some symbols with symbols from more popular reliigions. Moreover, I have thickened the lines used in order to make it more visible for Template:User religious pluralism. See Major world religions for the choice - I restricted the set to organised religions."
- The current picture already covers the most populous distinct organized religions. -- Jeff3000 19:42, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- I quote the discussion from the page:
-
-
- Given that Ayyavazhi is considered a demonition of Hinduism, it would not really be appropriate to put it in (as discussion above). Then all other demonitions would want to have their own symbol, not only from Hinduism, but other religions, like the Shi'a and Sunni in Islam, and different Christian demonitions. Furthermore the Ayyavazhi symbol is already in the Religion article in bright colours, so it's not like it's being censored. -- Jeff3000 19:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Ayyavazhi Templates
Vaikunda Raja, what you term 'vandalism' is in fact constructive editing and clarifying.
- What is the need to have two templates linking essentially to the same list of pages as seen in Template:Religion of Ayyavazhi and Template:Ayyavazhi? That is why the smaller template Template:Religion of Ayyavazhi was merged into Template:Ayyavazhi. Inserting multiple templates essentially pointint to the same list of pages is known as Forking and spamming.
- In the Template:Ayyavazhi, there are links to pages that are no more than a list of empty pages and two line stubs. It is misleading the users to have a grandiose template with numerous links to empty pages. It also borders on spamming. Links to Ekam, Vethan, Thirumal, Sivan, and The Trinity all point to Hinduism pages or disamb pages and are not specific to Ayyavazhi and so they were removed.
- The template was condensed further to make it more usable by removing links to empty pages or stubs. You can put these links back when the stubs are expanded. I have seen no activity on these pages in months. What is the point in keeping the links on this template. They were removed due to this reason.
- What is the need for the Template:Ayyavazhi large to practically list every stub article you have created on this subject? You have already listed the main topics in Template:Ayyavazhi. That is why this was redirected to the main template. I have reverted it back to a condensed version.
How is your Italian coming along?! Parthi 23:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Stop inserting Ayyavazhi in irrelevant places
Vaikunda Raja, stop inserting Ayyavazhi into places that have nothing even remotely to do with it. Ayyavazhi is a small, miniscule, unrecognised, not notable sect confined to a few districts of Tamil Nadu. Nothing more nothing less. - Parthi 22:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- Vaikunda Raja, can you cite neutral (meaning not connected with Ayyavazhi) references for
- the current number of adherents
- the spread of Ayyavazhi in Tamil Nadu and elsewhere
- the number of places of worship
- Ayyavazhi does not belong in every page remotely related to religion. You may believe that Ayyavazhi is notable enough to be included everywhere, but as it is not a recognised religion, it fails the notability criteria. You may create hundreds of articles on this subject, as you have already done, but you cannot start inserting Ayyavazhi in all and sundry as you have done in the past. - Parthi 23:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Paul/Vaikunda, we have been through this numerous times. If Ayyavazhi is 'not known commonly' and '[hasn't] received official recognition' (according to yourself), then by definition it is NN|non notable. Stop inserting links to Ayaavazhi in general articles such as Dharma etc. You have already spawned WP with hundreds of stubs and forks for this unknown, miniscule and isolated faith. If you continue to do that I will be continuously deleting them. - Parthi talk/contribs 22:46, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Talib 72
Don't ever touch my userboxes. I designed all of the userboxes with symbols not pictures. I don't care how interested in the religion you are, only symbols, not pictures, may be inserted. If you want to reason with me contact me on my user page. User:Talib 72
[edit] Signing on talk pages
Hi,
While signing on talk pages please use four tildes, as in
~~~~
instead of
[[Paul]]
Using the second format will lead only to wikipedia mainspace pages rather than userpages. Cheers. -- Chez (Discuss / Email) • 04:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Ayyaavazhi
That specifically is the point. It lacks official recognition. That was the reason why a concensus was reached between wikipedia editors some time back on not to include Ayyavazhi on the page. I'm not saying that the religon lacks credibility. Rather, it is not notable enough to be mentioned in such detail on the Religion in India page. At present it is presented with even more prominence than Islam or Christianity. This leads to false impressions on readers unfamiliar with the Indian context. Since you seem to be very well versed with the religion, may I ask why it hasnt yet been declared (by the govt) as a religion seperate from Hindusim?--thunderboltz(Deepu) 14:15, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Very similar point, except more so, in regards to adding it to Wikipedia:Vital articles. It may or may not be a religion in India, but as a new, disputed, and not particularly famous religion is definitely not one of the 1000 most vital articles for an encyclopedia to have. AnonEMouse (squeak) 18:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Mutrikinaru2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mutrikinaru2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:18, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume 1, Issue 2 - November 2006
|
|
|
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Man with Thirunamam And Headgear.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Man with Thirunamam And Headgear.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ayyavazhi NPOV
I'm from Tamilnadu and visited most places in my 23 years and have not even heard of this so-called religion. I tried to google it, and didnt find much conclusive evidence, apart from pages caching WP. In the meanwhile, the article seems to be having a lot of unverfied claims and glorification on the sect, and all the proof seems to emanate from one person's book & a couple of other questionable missionary sources. It seems to me that, anyone with some knowledge of WP and two questionable books as citation could glorify any thing as a religion in the world. The article doesnt even seems to show that majority of Tamils even have no idea what this sect means, and I'm not convinced why this sect should be considered more than any other sects in Tamilnadu. I'm not sure this aspect is NPOV and wanted more discussion on that. Balajiviswanathan 23:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Can you provide me atleast two peer-reviewed papers. Non peer-reviewed articles that are not published in reputed publications cannot be considered. Anyone could write a paper, but unless they are peer-reviwed, it cannot be considered a concrete source. The book of G Patrick (if there exists such a person really) cannot be found in any of the major library references and searches and I sincerely doubt any such book even exists. If there exists a book really, it must be verified by atleast one of the admins and be certified that is indeed a worthy book for religious reference. There are thousands of books and pamphelts claiming everything in the world and we cannot take all of them to be true. Honestly, you cannot use an unknown book and sprinkle the world with some unknown grouping's principles. This thing has gotten to a point, where I need to request for neutral arbitrers and verify all the sources. Citing 70 sources of an unknown book, seems a very fishy deal to me. Balajiviswanathan 00:02, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- I'm sorry to hurt you. But, without having a conclusive proof you have managed to get around doing too many things in Wikipedia. We need the proof for all the actions and also want to resolve the case whether you had been using the names Vaikunta Raja, Paul Raj and other anonymous IPs to get your point. However, I don't question your great writing talent and Wikipedia usage knowledge. My point is that a totally unknown group is blown totally out of context and we need to tear down a lot of articles, including the portal. If you want to avoid this, bring us concrete proof. Notable news paper articles, official government material or notable peer-reviewed articles and books. Your book reference and paper references in the wiki pages are unacceptble as a concrete souce. Balajiviswanathan 00:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Dude, do you know what you have done to Wikipedia? You have put this whole project into lacking credibility. Send me some of the papers, and details of where they have been published. Btw, what is an university paper? Does it mean some reputed university has taken this a department for pursuing studies on it and publishes papers on this or some university professors publishing papers? Also send references about this as appeared in local newspapers. If it had been declared as a holiday, surely atleast one of the local English newspapers should have reported - Hindu or Indian Express. Balajiviswanathan 00:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Good, atleast there is a possibility that Vaikundar might be a real person, and atleast one sentence in a newspaper corner says it:). Send us more info about the real links for your grouping - no personal websites and blogs and no site that is caching Wikipedia content. If there are no detailed news articles (this is eng wiki, so eng newspapers are needed and for tam articles there is always tam wiki), then nothing more than a cursory article be allowed and anyway all the family of articles and portal have to be remobed. So, if there is enough proof for the existance of the so called "Ayyavazhi", the article on it could be retained and whatever it is, all the rest should go. If there is no significant proof, even that has to be marked for speedy deletion. Balajiviswanathan 01:14, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Community bulletin board
The Community bulletin board is NOT the place to have a discussion on religious portals. Take it to Wikipedia:Help desk --Tagishsimon (talk)
[edit] Wikipedia:Mediation
I strongly urge you two to take your dispute to Wikipedia:Mediation. You both care about the issue passionately; I cannot see how it will be resolved without damage other than by mediation. --Tagishsimon (talk)
- Okay, specifically, I would take it here: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal and frame it as a question of what is and what is not a religion for wikipedia purposes with respect to portals and categories. Follow their process. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:52, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume I, Issue 3 - December 2006
|
|
|
[edit] 3RR violation
You have now violated three reverts rule on Tamil people. I will be reporting you for appropriate action. - Parthi talk/contribs 10:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)