User talk:Sfacets
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(I will answer most posts on this page.)
I reserve the right to tidy up, format, edit, and yes, even delete messy, disorganised, spurious or insulting messages.
[edit] The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VI - November 2006
The November 2006 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 21:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RE: (Very) late reply: Sahaj Marg / Shri Ram Chandr Mission NPOV
> The POV template is usually taken down by consensus between the editors of the article, there is no committee as such, unless no consensus can be reached for a long period of time, in which case moderators are called in.
> So yeah, I'll see what I can do to make myself useful...
Thanks for your interest and help. If you see anything that's obvious, go ahead... Ironically, The vast majority of the text I would consider non-NPOV was written by the same person that posted the POV template. I don't disagree with the POV status, just the fashion in which the article is written.
I've decided to forgo editing this article. I'm involved with the meditation group, and while I don't feel that this would overly bias or hinder my contributions in any way, I do wish to avoid any lengthy or drawn out confrontations. It is more important to me to foster an atmosphere of love and cooperation than to feel that my meditation group is represented fairly online. Weirdly enough, after giving the matter a considerable amount of thought, I'm content to simply let the POV status stand as-is.
Thanks again for taking an interest in the article, and on a personal level for everything you're doing for the Wikipedia project. As an avid WP reader and sometimes-editor, I appreciate everything you've done. Keep up the good work!
MatheoDJ 16:12, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Congratulations!
The Editor's Barnstar
The Editor's Barnstar | ||
Thank you for helping to monitor POV edits on the Hinduism page! Come back anytime to help out with the Hinduism project, where we have a lot of pages that need quality edits by editors like you. HeBhagawan 03:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC) |
[edit] Just wanted to know.
Just wanted to know your views of my edits being POV and not a matter of general knowledge (at least of Hindus?Swadhyayee 04:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] I am waiting for your reply.
I am waiting for your reply to revert my edit claiming to be POV. Being a Hindu, I think it is a matter of general knowledge which I hope you will agree.
Swadhyayee 03:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay; general knowledge edits are not enough, since many readers and contributors are not knowledgeable of Hindu traditions and beliefs. For this reason (and to avoid any editing conflicts) it is important to back assertions with reliable sources. Sfacets 03:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
You may have your views but things of general knowledge does not need backing by reliable source. Jesus was crucified or Bible is holy book of christains do not need backing even as per Wikipedia policy.
Swadhyayee 03:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Do you think spending some more time while editing would have done me and the article some justice?
Isn't God beyond perception? and this is a significant experience of sages. Shashtras say that there are 3 stages of any existence, 1) Birth (Janma) 2) Decay (Jara) and 3) Death (Mrutyu).
Why God is beyond perception a POV?
According to the monotheistic and pantheistic theologies of Hinduism, God is, in the highest sense, One: beyond form, infinite, and eternal. God is changeless and is the very source of consciousness. God is beyond time, space, and causation and yet permeates everything and every being. God is beyond gender.
I am not understanding the need to write "God is, in the highest sense, One: beyond form, infinite, and eternal". The para of 7 lines had use of God six times and quiet more sentences beginned with the word "God", so I felt it to make a compound sentence to reduce frequent use of the word "God".
Which is proper, "God is beyond gender" or "God is genderless"?
The belief that God provides and cares for me tends human to project human's similar relations - mother and/or father upon God.
Does the current edit provide rational for projecting fatherhood and motherhood upon God? Without stating rational, will it not be seen as idiotic or superstitious who attack Hindus for having crores of Devatas?
Hindus worship these personal forms of God for a practical reason: it is easier to cultivate devotion to a personal being than to an abstract principle.
Where is the rational? What was wrong in, human mind needs an object to concentrate and so it is easy to cultivate devotion to The God in human form than to an abstract entity. Worshiping God in human form help in seeing the possibility of sublimating an individual to The God's state - imbibe sublimated virtues of God within one's self.?
Do you think spending some more time while editing would have done me some justice?
Swadhyayee 03:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Inappropriate reverts
Sfacets, this type of edit is not helpful. You reverted an hour's worth of work, because you didn't like the word "Hindu". [1] This is not good faith editing. In the future, take the time to actually change a section or supply a different source, rather than just arbitrarily deleting the hard work of other editors. --NovaSTL 05:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Well it became obvious that you didn't actually know what you were writing about and had apparently copied whole sections from an article with questionable validity. Sfacets 09:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] User notice: temporary 3RR block
[edit] Regarding reversions[2] made on November 4, 2006 to Sahaja Yoga
Re your mail: please read the rules carefully William M. Connolley 12:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] User:Sfacets/bckp/isps
Please do not "back up" copyright violating material from article space to user space. Copyright infringement is the same regardless of where you move the text to. Kavadi carrier 11:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Yup, removing that section from backup ASA block expires... Sfacets 12:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] User:Green23
I put togather a version which I thought would address the presumably legitimate grievances of this User. He seems to bent on attaching "Factual disputes" tags on very well referenced facts provided in this version . Kindly address this problem. This user seems bent on violently mutilating anything that attempts to establish as much as a trace of harmonious connection between Hinduism and Buddhism. Best Regards. Freedom skies 15:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- User:Green23, User:Saavak123 and User:216.254.121.169 are sockpuppets of the same person. They have the same patterns (see here and here) and what's worse is that they have started voting in AfD debates (You'll notice that the only two delete votes are given by Green23 and Savak123 here). This is in addition to them having the number 23 common in their ID and the same contribution patterns.
-
- I've worked hard and even mentioned their excessive quotes on another page altogather and linked it up, aside from mentioning every aspect of the earlier work. My good faith has met with arguments such as "read all edits...tagging until I add edits. Go to discussion page to get facts straight."
-
- Please take appropriate action and ensure the sanctity of the article.
-
- Freedom skies 16:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:RishiRich.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:RishiRich.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
- On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. -- Chowbok ☠ 00:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
Adding a link to the University of Virginia's "Religious Movements Homepage Project"[3], as a reference at the article on Sahaja Yoga, is not vandalism.[4] Please do not abuse warning templates. --NovaSTL 02:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
It wasn't a warning or a template... What are you on about? Sfacets 02:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Inappropriate use of Copyvio
There is no copyright violation at International Sahaja Public School. Again, you are being disruptive and misusing Wikipedia process. Please stop. --NovaSTL 03:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
...says the person who recently attempted to use the administrator intervention process in an attempt to resolve content dispute. I have stated on the ISPS talk page why there is copyvio. Sfacets 03:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] wikEd
Hi, I have seen that you are using the Cacycle editor extension. This program is no longer actively maintained in favor of its much more powerful successor wikEd.
wikEd has all the functionality of the old editor plus:• syntax highlighting • nifty image buttons • morefixing buttons • paste formatted text from Word or web pages• convert the formatted text into wikicode • adjustthe font size • and much, much more.
Switching to wikEd is easy, check the detailed installation description on its project homepage. Usually it is as simple as changing every occurrence of editor.js into wikEd.js on your User:YourUsername/monobook.js page.
Cacycle 21:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Welcome to Wikiproject India
Hi, and welcome to the India WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India.
A few features that you might find helpful:
- Please participate in any of our descendant workgroups that might interest you.
- The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.
There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:
- Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every India article in Wikipedia.
- Can you code? The automation department uses automated and semi-automated methods to perform batch tasks that would be tedious to do manually.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around!
[edit] done
See User:Sfacets/Yuvashakti. --W.marsh 14:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume 1, Issue 2 - November 2006
|
|
|
[edit] India
Hi! You just beat me to the edit; I was about to change it myself, with this edit summary:
- Revert change from BCE -> BC. The convention for this article is already established; it uses CE/BCE. Please note that both notation standards are considered to be correct on Wikipedia.
Instead, I'll send that note to the editor who made the change. :-) -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 01:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unreliable source?
Please return to Talk:International Sahaja Public School to explain why a paper that was recognized as the top national newspaper in the U.K. in 2004 is an unreliable source. -Will Beback · † · 07:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] THe Wedge (TV show) =
I was just wondering why you added an 'and criticism' on the Reaction part of the article. You are encouraged to discuss this if you want to change it. Shaggy9872004 00:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes you are right but the word 'Criticism' is not neutral enough. 'Reaction on the other hand is so therefore if we want a more balanced article it should be left alone before it was changed by. Thanks!Shaggy9872004 01:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Swami Ramdev
Semiprotection. You think its a good idea?Bakaman Bakatalk 05:57, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Questions in headlines
Hi, Sfacets. Could you please point me to the style guideline that applies to the changes you made to the subheads in the article on Transcendental Meditation? I'd really appreciate it. Thanks! TimidGuy 16:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
I think your removal of "distinguishing" was a good point. Thanks. I questioned your addition to the summary and made a suggestion in my Edit Summary. See what you think of my suggestion. I guess we should maybe discuss this on the Talk page. I had already been thinking of making the change to the lead that I suggest. TimidGuy 16:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Welcome to the AMA!
Hello Sfacets, I see that you have decided to join the AMA. I'll be the first to say welcome! We're always in need of more advocates, especially since were backlogged most of the time. Just a few pointers for what we do. We communicate by putting a template on our talk page. The template is {{AMA alerts}}. The AMA also has it's own IRC channel which reports new cases to us, and also new alerts. If you'd like to jump right into a case, you are free to check out WP:AMARQ, which is our new request for advocacy system. The instructions for how the technical part works is on it's talk page. You can also use the AMA userboxes that appear under here. If you have anymore questions about the organization, just ping any advocates talk page, including our coordinator, Steve Caruso. Again, welcome to the AMA! -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 00:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reverts to Parkour and Talk:Parkour
Hi Sfacets, I see you've reverted a couple of edits of mine at Parkour and Talk:Parkour with the comment "rvt - vandalism?". I've re-reverted them, since they're definitely not vandalism, but want to explain why... My Parkour edit was a removal of links that are being repeatedly added to that article by spammers. I probably should have included an edit description, but neglected to, given how many times I've reverted that content! My Talk:Parkour edit may have appeared as a blanking because I moved someone else's comment (from the top to the bottom of the page) before replying to it, but I did not actually remove any content, only moved it. I hope you'll agree that these aren't vandalism. Thanks.
(BTW, I have to ask since you're from Melbourne and editing the parkour article, are you practising or interested in parkour? Or were you just randomly reading the article?) -- David Scarlett(Talk) 05:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks for posting spammer warning
Hi, Sfacets. Thanks for catching the spam in the Maharishi article and for posting a warning on the guy's Talk page. Appreciate your vigilance.TimidGuy 18:44, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Images
You are uploading a number of photos with the claim that you took them yourself. Some of these photos are rather old, and yet you are say that you are an undergraduate student. Another image is on a website that is copyrighted. Are these licenses correct? -Will Beback · † · 08:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Yup. Sfacets 09:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- So you were at the Womens conference in 1995, when you were just a little boy? -Will Beback · † · 09:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- And in St. Petersburg in 1993? -Will Beback · † · 09:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Did I mention anything about my age? Sfacets 09:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- You have elsewhere. It appears that you're taking copyrighted photos from SY and SY-related websites and claiming to have created them yourself. -Will Beback · † · 09:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Can you prove this? Where elsewhere? Sfacets 10:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Your flickr account. If it's correct then you'd have been just a boy in 1993. Can you prove that you were in St. Petersburg in 1993 at an awards ceremony? Or at a Womens Conference in 1995? Or that you made a formal portrait of a Swiss music group? Or that you took a beautiful and widely-copied portrait of Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi, obviously decades ago, but you can't say which year? I think there's a mistake with these image licenses and we just need to clear that up. -Will Beback · † · 10:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- If we can't resolve these licensing issues I'll start removing the disputed licenses from the images. -Will Beback · † · 00:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- I'm going to remove the licenses from the images which appear to have been downloaded from SY sites. I'll leave a list here. -Will Beback · † · 06:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Image:Vndlogo.gif
- Image:Nirmala1.jpg
- Image:Subtlesys.gif
- Image:Riaabad.gif
- Image:Britney-rishirich.jpg
- Image:PetrovskyAward.jpg
- Image:Womanconference1995.jpg
- Image:BullehShah.jpg
- Image:Nbhkti.jpg
There are also a couple of non-SY images that appear to have had incorrect licenses applied. -Will Beback · † · 06:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Swaminarayan page
Why did u delete the: Swaminarayan Temple -Kenton Link?????????????????????? ?????????????????
[edit] Images on the Bharatanatyam article
All the images on the article are from the same source (and almost all (maybe all?) feature the same person). This is spamming. Please see wikipedia:spam. They do not add anything more to the article either unless you explain each of the postures. I don't mind having one or two pictures from that source but don't bring them all back. I have already spoken with an admin regarding this. Cribananda 07:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WP:POINT
This is a reminder that we have a policy that prohibits disrupting the project in order to illustrate a point. WP:POINT. This edit, sourced to a blog, appears only intended to make a point about the list. -Will Beback · † · 01:10, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
It wasn't a)Disruptive b)A blog or c)Intended to illustrate a point. Sfacets 01:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- You're the same person who woldn't allow The Independent simply because they hired freelance journalists. So how is an "any may submit an article" website supposed to be a reliable source? And also. if you have time to add this aI'd appreciate it if you'd repy to the several outstanding issues, including on this page. Otherwise I'll take your silence as intentional. -Will Beback · † · 02:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- According to the criteria of inclusion specified in the article, it only has to be mentioned in a media source. Sorry about the delay in answers, I'll try and get back to you ASAP... Sfacets 03:28, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- The same requirements for reliable sources exists in that article as in every other article in Wikipedia. -Will Beback · † · 03:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Riaabad.gif
This website this image is taken from has its content licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0. Unfortunately this can't be included because Wikipedia's content needs to be allowed for commercial purposes as well. Personally I wouldn't care but unless you can get the image under an allowed license or claim fair-use, this will probably be deleted. Thanks, --WikiSlasher 09:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- Please reply whenever. --WikiSlasher 06:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bhangra
hey, i'm just replying to my entery for bhangra fm for Bhangra genre
Your linking to DVDs, and editing content to that respect. Thats more spaming because your encouraging them (ultimately) to buy it.. I've added that entry so people can actually freely LISTEN to the sounds. I don't think thats spaming.
I'm a registered member here (userid samrik).(not sure if i'm logged in but there was a message for my ip address and I thought i reply back quickly as i'm busy with other stuff in life too).
Talk to you later
[edit] Ownership issues
FYI; Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Sfacets.2C_Sahajhist.2C_ownership_issues. I've asked for other admin input. The next step, pending your return, will be mediation. It'd be best if we could find resolution without further bother. If it's any consolation let me say that while it may seem counter-intuitive, I've noticed that articles only- or over-edited by followers tend to be less complete and interesting than more collaboratively-edited articles. It may seem scary, but there's nothing to be afraid of. -Will Beback · † · 09:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Let me know when you're back. I think that mediation would be helpful. -Will Beback · † · 21:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Are you back from your break? -Will Beback · † · 07:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- No, I'm not back yet... Sfacets 09:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Well, you seem to be active. I'd like to seek mediation over the SY issues. If you're involved in editing the article I'd hope you could spend some time resolving problems. To continue editng the article while refusing mediation isn't helpful. -Will Beback · † · 09:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Just reverting isn't constructive. -Will Beback · † · 09:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I have been active today, and as you can see am spending time resolving problems. Am I or have I ever refused mediation? No, just reverting isn't constructive. Reverting unconstructive edits while leaving an edit summary why is. Sfacets 10:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Well if you're present enough to respond within a week I'll go ahead and start the ball rolling. -Will Beback · † · 11:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Thing is I don't think I will be present enough, Today is an exception. I will only be fully back enough to actively participate in discussions in about two weeks time. Sfacets 11:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] TM, here we go again....
Would you be willing to take a peak by the TM page? There is conflict about whether the Skeptic's Dictionary is a reliable source? thanks Sethie 01:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] stop deleting edits!
please don't delete edits unless you evaluate it first to see if the link is legitimate before removing! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cooljankey (talk • contribs) 17:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006
The December 2006 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:52, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Swaminarayan Dispute
Dear Sfacets,
Is it possible to create a separate article devoted solely to the Uddhav Sampraday (Original Shree Swaminarayan Sampraday)? Our friend Haribhagat has toned down his rhetoric but continues to insist that the article on Bhagwan Swaminarayan should be devoted solely to the Uddhav Sampraday. My suggestion was to devote the article on Bhagwan Swaminarayan solely on his life and have links to the separate groups within the Swaminarayan faith (e.g. BAPS, Uddhav Sampraday).
Again, let me know what you think. I am currently tied down but will get to the Bhagwan Swaminarayan article soon.
---
Sincerely,
Moksha88 05:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Buddhism and Hinduism
I think you may have made an editing mistake here [5]. You deleted the bottom half of the article. -Will Beback · † · 20:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)