User talk:B9 hummingbird hovering

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome!

Hello, B9 hummingbird hovering, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Contents

[edit] Vairotsana

Thanks very much for starting the article on Vairotsana -- However -- I worry that the text may not be licensed in a way that allows us to use it verbatim on Wikipedia (if indeed it was copied from the linked source -- I confess I didn't look at it *that* closely. ) In any event, I would be happy to work with you to expand the article, as Tibetan Buddhism (in particular Dzogchen) is an area I want to contribute more to. Feel free to leave me a note on my talk page, and welcome. Zero sharp 15:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

thanks for understanding. May many blessings attend you on your retreat. Zero sharp 21:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vairotsana

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Vairotsana, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.rangjung.com/authors/Vairotsana.htm. As a copyright violation, Vairotsana appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Vairotsana has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Vairotsana. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Vairotsana, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Calton | Talk 05:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Singing Bowls

Hi, sorry about the reverts, I must have been gettign sloppy. I've been trying to practice patrolling recent changes as quickly as possible. Might I suggest that you log in with your account in future, as it might prevent confusion of this sort? Boris Allen 13:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Probity

Nothing leaps out at me, but remember if someone reverts 3x in 24 hours, you can report them -- see [WP:3RR]. The article on Phurpa probably needs a lot more references -- I'll see what I can dig up there. Bottom line: don't take any of it personally :) Zero sharp 04:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ganachakra

I am sorry, I fail to see that Ganachakra is anything like transubstantiation. Is there supposed to be a real objective change in the underlying reality? Perhaps transignification is analogous, but, as far as I can see, not transubstantiation. Lima 05:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tantra vs. sex magic and other topics

While these are related, they are not the same. Sex magic is a Western practice which have the same goals as Tantra and may not use the same techniques. For example, some sex magic requires emission; Vajrayana practices prohibit it. In fact, it might be better to say they practiced Vajrayana, as the Tantra article is primarily about Hindu tantra. In any case, sex magic is a Western term coined significantly after the time of Padmasambhava. The use of it represents an editorial opinion. Can you cite a source that says they practiced sex magic? A reliable academic one? If not, WP:V says it can't be said. If there is someone who thinks they are the same, you could report on that and cite it, but it would have to be clear whose opinion it was describing.

On the other articles, I've done some sprucing up. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 15:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. does B9 stand for benign?

[edit] your articles

You'd want to start here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Buddhism. You'll want to talk to User:Nat Krause and User:RandomCritic will be able to help you.--D-Boy 06:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eagle 101's over-speedy deletion of article

Regarding the following book citation i created: *Gold, Peter (1994). Navajo & Tibetan sacred wisdom: the circle of the spirit. ISBN 0-89281-411-X.  Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions International.

I entered the chapter headings...i looked at another book article on Wiki, refer following, *Brown, Dee (1970). Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee. ISBN 0-330-23219-3.  and used this as a template. Note that they have the chapter headings in there. If this is not a violation please reinstate the chapter headings into the article and paste a response to this on my chat page. Namaste in agape B9 hummingbird hovering 09:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Religion project

First, I should note that the banner was only added to the Singing Bowl article because the Tibetan Buddhism and Buddhism banners had not yet had assessment parameters in them. Those banners now do have assessment parameters, and I am in the process of removing the Religion banners from inappropriate articles. However, I do note that it the Singing Bowl is significant in the Bön religion as well, and I am less certain if the adherents of or editors dealing with that faith would want to be grouped into the Tibetan Buddhism project. It is also a matter I cannot personally respond to, being a more-or-less orthodox Catholic whose major other areas of knowledge are the older Indo-European and Semitic religions. The intentions of the WikiProject Religioon are to provide "Project support" (including at least now assessment and peer review on request, occasionally copyediting and other activities as we have members and time, hopefully other things as well later) to all those articles which do not fall within the scope of any existing projects, including those articles which deal in subjects that cross religious lines, like Religion, God, Theology, and so on. Also, we hope, eventually, to be able to set up work groups similar to WikiProject Biography and WikiProject Military history to work with articles relating to specific religions which do not yet have that degree of focused attention. Personally, I would be more than happy to welcome any new member or participant, particularly anyone who could bring any existing knowledge or experience regarding any of those religions which lack project support. I'm not sure if that answers your question, though. If it doesn't, please feel free to leave a follow-up message on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion page, or contact me directly. Thank you for your interest. Badbilltucker 14:31, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sig

Go to your user preferences and write your signature as code. Then check raw signature. My signature Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] has the following code:

'''[[User:Nobleeagle|<font color="darkblue">Noble</font><font color="darkorange">eagle</font>]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Nobleeagle|<font color="darkred" size="0.2" face="Arial Narrow"> <nowiki>[TALK]]] [C]

There's a few errors because of the nowiki things but just go into edit mode if you want to look at the actual code, leave out the blockquotes of course. If you want me to explain any of those functions I will do so but it pretty much speaks for itself. <sup> is used for superscripst. Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 03:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Big Bang

You know, I think I do have a copy somewhere, but it might be the original Ellipse boxed set of cassettes. I'd have to look around. It's hardly Micky Hart's Big Bang, though; he's just one of the artists appearing on it. I think I have off-the-board copies of Micky's live performance at Nelson's Ledges's Rhythmfest (2002) under the name Bembe Orishas, where I got a chance to meet him, Airto, Sikiru and Badal Roy though. I've been lucky enough to have been able to play with some of the Planet Drum folks at times, though never with Micky himself. It's been a dream for many years to have Micky Hart appear at Starwood, but Olatunji and Airto are as close as they've gotten so far. Zakir Hussein would be great, too. Rosencomet 17:18, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Satchitananda

Hi, in responding to this comment which you left at Talk:Devanāgarī, please be advised that an article Satchitananda already exists. You are welcome to improve it. Variations in spelling ought to redirect to the same article. Variations in topic, for example a person or place with the Proper name Saccidananda, should be in a separate article. Sincerely, --BostonMA talk 17:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, to make a redirect page follow these steps.
  1. create a link to the page which you wish to be a redirect, such as sat-cit-ananad. The link will appear red, because it doesn't exist yet. Such a link is called a red-link.
  2. click on the link, and you should get an edit window. If you don't get an edit window, your account may be too new to create pages. Wait a few days.
  3. in the edit window type:
    #REDIRECT [[Satchitananada]]
  4. click on the save page button.

Hope that helps/works for you. Sincerely, --BostonMA talk 18:17, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Already exists

Actually, an article already exists at Satchitananda. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] That Namkhai Norbu business

Mind terma. :-) A Ramachandran 14:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

text=thank you Thanks for all your work on Trul khor. Appreciated. ॐ Metta Bubble puff 23:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Hiya. To change your sig. Go to Special:Preferences and check the raw signature box. Then paste your new sig text into the signature field. Try something like:

B9 hummingbird hovering (talk • contribs)

Edit this page to copy the html code for the above into the clipboard and paste it into the sig field if you like. Then sign your name as usual using four tildas and it should all work. Also see WP:SIGHELP. You can edit any page on Wikipedia to preview another users signature or get ideas, or even mimic their sig. Take care. ॐ Metta Bubble puff 23:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Simone Weil

Hey B9,

Thanks for working to clean up the Simone Weil article, especially with the language concerning references to God. I want to warn you, however, to be cautious with your linking. Many of the blue links now go to disambig pages, and are only peripherally related to Weil's project or life, e.g. poor, connect, sugar, travel, food, stage, drive etc.

If you don't mind, I would like to go through and weed out some of them - in special cases, interwiki linking a term to wiktionary - to bring it more in line with other biographical articles of philosophers. Let me know, perhaps we can collaborate? I've been real busy as of late, but I'm hoping to get some constructive editing done somewhere on Wiki before February rolls around. Thanks, and keep up the good work. - Sam 17:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Usage of Wikilinks.

Just so you know, I see that you've added quite a few wikilinks to some pages. For the Multiverse disambiguation page, this is not generally appropriate- disambiguation pages want to make it very clear the senses of the word that can be linked to and then get you to the "real" article. Extra wikilinks are considered distracting there. It's over at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages).

As for other pages, I've noticed that you've added them at a similar rate. I think that this is a bit overkill- we don't want to have a gigantic sea of blue being the article, but rather to highlight only relevant wikilinks. Plus, once you've linked a word, you typically don't need to link it again immediately afterward. As an example from your edit to the Akhasic Records article, look at

"A Chinese gentleman named Sujujin was reported to need only the first name of anyone to access the Akasha and describe their life history. Another Chinese seer ..."

Does Chinese really need to be highlighted twice, or even once? Is it that relevant? Same with "gentleman" and "access," as I highly doubt anyone would be looking those up. Sujujin and possibly "seer" are the only ones that need linking here, in my opinion at least. I'd recommend checking out Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) for some more on that. SnowFire 17:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Please stop over-wikilinking articles. Before continuing, please read this section of the Manual of Style. Thanks. A Ramachandran 22:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Overlinking redux

Please clean up the overlinking you did to Bön or I will simply revert it to the last non-overlinked version. Several users have pointed out the appropriate section in the Manual of Style. You can't expect other editors to clean up your overlinking. I hate to see your other good work reverted, but that is what is likely to happen if you don't moderate your linking. A Ramachandran 15:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding God's eye

Wow. You did populate that article. How'd you know so much about God's eyes? Once the article gets a picture or two it will be great. Jason Quinn 16:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cicada

Nice to see that you're trying to add something about historical perceptions of cicadas. However, you're going about it the wrong way. What you do is a minimal paraphrase of external sources. That is still a copyright violation. Even if do still more rewriting, beware of plagiarism: taking someone else's ideas and presenting them in new phrasing is just as bad. You'll need to summarize much more (offline!) and give the sources you used as references. The current stuff of Plato and the other Greeks is still way too close to the original text. Also, if you want to treat this topic in so much detail, you should move it to its own article and only leave a summary and a link to the new article at Cicada. See Wikipedia:Summary style. Lupo 22:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, B9, I'm another admin on Wikipedia, and I've also noticed your several rewrites. It is important to only contribute original material to Wikipedia. Changing a few words or sentences, while preserving the structure and outline of a copyrighted text, is (unfortunately) still a copyright violation. You'll need to substantially rewrite information in your own words in order for it to be acceptable here. I know that you're only trying to contribute, and I appreciate your efforts -- I certainly don't want to discourage you! But we're pretty strict about copyright infringements around here. Basically, as a rule of thumb, if the original author would look at your contribution and say "Hey! That's my text, but with a few words changed!", then it's not something you should submit. All the best, – Quadell (talk) (random) 13:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Three Series of Dzogchen

I would appreciate a reaction to my remark in talk:Semde. Also, can you provide a source for associating Semde with clarity, Longde with emptiness? Thank you. And beware of what you present in a public space. Menmo 16:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tapihritsa

Reply at my talk page. Lupo 09:12, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tonpa Sherab in the Dzogchen article

I tend to favor 'quasi-historical' in lieu of 'mythical' which (as you observed) does carry a value judgement. It acknowledges that the individual may not be attested to as thoroughly as a historian might like, while not placing them in the realm of 'mythology' altogether. Just a thought -- thank you for your edits! Zero sharp 19:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with the page Left-handed issues on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. '•Tbone55•(Talk) (Contribs) (UBX) (autographbook) 23:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] sic

I have reverted your changes again. For sic to be used, the term has to be archaic or spelled incorrectly, neither which is true of mankind or chairman. That you believe the terms are inappropriate has nothing to do with it, and is your POV. -- Jeff3000 15:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll revert again, and note that you will pass WP:3RR more quickly than I, so I will report you to admins. Jeff3000 16:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Note, one more revert and you pass WP:3RR. -- Jeff3000 16:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
I will note again that for sic to be used the term has to be archaic or spelled incorrectly, neither which is true of mankind or chairman. They are in common use and to the general populace do not portray any negative light, and until they fall out of use, the use of sic is misplaced. -- Jeff3000 16:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
There has been some evolution of language but to disrupt quotes with a [sic] because of word use is far beyond anything in my experience. And that evolution of language hasn't reached the point that such terms are unusual. At the very least you've got the attention of two people who disagree with you B9 hummingbird hovering, even though we may agree with the overall aim and changes in norms to be advanced with the equality of women and men. The terms you keep amending just aren't that unusual even in Baha'i circles let alone the norm in wikipedia or in the world. These articles should not be leaps leading the way in change - they are to express the best understanding of the way things are and using language in novel ways will only lead to confusion for most people which would manifestly not be the best understanding. A more substantial way to contribute might be to extend the articles that deal with the equality of women and men. --Smkolins 18:29, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Poi (juggling)

I know that your edits are well-intentioned, but they're also very idiosyncratic. I believe that as an introduction to the subject, they're more inclined to raise questions for readers than to answer them. adamrice 15:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC) In response to your comments on my talk page:

  • Idiosyncratic: While I thought that word was clear enough, I will attempt to clarify further. Your recent edits use words and concepts that I have never heard used in reference to poi, Maori culture, etc, and seem to reflect what poi means to you rather than what it might mean to other people.
  • "Where is it set in stone that Wikipedia is just to be an introduction to a subject?" This is Wikipedia. Nothing is set in stone. There are, however, recommended practices, such as "Make your article accessible and understandable for as many readers as possible. Assume readers are reading the article to learn. It is possible the reader knows nothing about the subject: the article needs to fully explain the subject," "Use clear, precise and accurate terms." And lots more. I recommend you look at the linked help text.
  • "It is my considered opinion that this article requires some scholarly-sexing-up" It is my considered opinion that even if this were so, your edits do not provide it.
  • "The mind processes and forges new neural connectivity when it is confused which is why Zen Masters use koans amongst other methods. Are you familiar with NLP, hypnotherapy, trance~forms and meditation" I feel confident in saying that whatever a good Wikipedia article should be, it should not be a koan or be designed to deliberately confuse its reader in order to evoke some altered mental state. If that is your goal, I say again, your edits are idiosyncratic. NLP? Don't start with me on NLP.
  • "Juggling is a study in the resolution of bodymind confusion into an 'Artful Grace'." Well gosh, you'd better get started fixing the Juggling article, because it doesn't say anything like that. adamrice 16:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Where's the confusion? You start off defining one thing (poi) by introducing a new, obscure, and (to my mind) tendentious concept ("impartial art"). That is not clear writing. Crystal clarity shines like a torched fire poi hidden away in the inky depths of your imagination. Just because it makes sense to you doesn't mean it makes sense to anyone else. As I said, idiosyncratic. But you know, I don't have the time or desire to get into a revert-war with you, so I'll just take the poi article off my watchlist and you can have your way with it. Go to town. adamrice 17:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thoughtform

Hi, I have reverted this article as you have done a huge amount of original research and made numerous substantial edits calling them all "minor"! Springnuts 19:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I note that all, or most, of your edits are marked as minor. Please see the page Help:Minor edit: note in particular that marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. Springnuts 19:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tulpa

I applaud your efforts, but ripping an entire page’s material and pasting it into another is something that should be discussed in advance. (Ghostexorcist 09:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Christopher Hansard

Please stop adding information about Christopher Hansard to various articles as you did to Olkhon. Continuing to add negative information about this gentleman may result in a temporary block from editing. Shell babelfish 09:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your creation featured on DYK

Updated DYK query On 21 March 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Iron in mythology, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

- - Mgm|(talk) 10:16, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minor edits at Green Man

Please go look at the help page about minor edits. Your additions of information to the green man article were not minor, because they constitute an addition of new information, all of which was, by the way, unsourced.--Vidkun 13:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I've just looked at your contributions, and you mark most of your edits as minor. Please stop. It's not vandalism, per se, but has, in past content disputes, been seen as a dishonest way of pushing unsourced POV material into article so it won't be noticed.--Vidkun 13:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't care WHAT your background is. I don't care how long you have been working in what field. QUIT marking edits as minor that do not meet the minor standards.--Vidkun 13:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Your continued minor edits have been noted, as have your personal attacks. I was polite and tactful in my initial comment to you. Your response was accusatory.--Vidkun 13:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Have you read avoid self references? Wikipedia is not a reliable source. You put information into an article, source it in that article. Looks like you just don't understand the policies and guidelines around here, do you?--Vidkun 13:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Whoooooooooooaaa Vidkin cool it! Don't bite so. To B9 hummingbird hovering please do me a favor and click on the link above marked " my preferences" go to the edit tab and uncheck the box " Mark all edits minor by default" problem solved. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 14:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minor edits

This [1] is not a minor edit. These [2] [3] are not even minor edits. This [4] is a minor edit. If you do virtually anything other than correct spelling or punctuation, assume it is not a minor edit - that will prevent mis-use of the "minor edit" flag by accident or through misunderstanding. Please let me know if you have any questions. KillerChihuahua?!? 14:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I was using the minor edits incorrectly. I was of the understanding that a major edit was restructuring information or rewriting prior information in an article, not for the inclusion of new material. I have noted your advice which is essentially "to err on the side of caution" and when actioning other than minor punctuation and spelling edits that an edit is not minor. Thank you for your clarity and tact.

B9 hummingbird hovering (talk • contribs) 14:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Yup, that's it in a nutshell. Hope it helped!! If you run into any kind of dispute or problem in the future, let me know and I'll do my best to assist. KillerChihuahua?!? 14:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, KC, and thank you, B9. I hope you understand, I'm not saying your edits are worthless, vary much the opposite. But how they showed up made tracking exact changes difficult. I appreciate you adding Beer as a reference, but I would also ask that, if possible, cite a specific page, so that anyone looking for the information you are supporting with that citation doesn't have to read the entire book.--Vidkun 14:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
You're both very welcome - it may help to understand why we at Wikipedia limit "minor" to teeny-tiny-minor edits. On a Watchlist or Recent Changes, an editor can choose to not see the "minor" edits - this keeps them from checking what changed only to find out "jane fonda" has been corrected to "Jane Fonda", for example - but if anything has been added, removed, rephrased, or in any other way actually changed, they want to know about it. Hence, reserve minor edits for those edits no one will ever, ever care about. KillerChihuahua?!? 14:51, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/9/_/User_talk%7EB9_hummingbird_hovering_870d.html"