User talk:Rajachandra

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

Links for Wikipedians interested in India content

Newcomers: Welcome kit | Register: Indian Wikipedians | Network: Noticeboard | Discussionboard Browse: India | Open tasks | Deletions
Contribute content: Collaboration Dashboard - India WikiProject - Wikiportal India - Indian current events - Category adoptions



I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop us a note at Wikipedia:New user log.

-- utcursch | talk 09:53, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] You deserve a barnstar!! :)

The Original Barnstar
Hi :) We havent met before but I have been following your invaluable contributions on Wodeyar related articles. You have done a great job bringing out the splendor of Mysooru and the Wodeyars on Wikipedia. Please accept this token of appreciation from me. Thanks. Sarvagnya 19:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

namaskAra mattu vaMdanegaLu saravagnya avare

[edit] Odeyar

OK...

Now if "Odeyar", "Wadiyar" or "Wodeyar" all there word will lead to the same page.

Thanks for the comment. I am new to wiki.

Sorry, If I messed up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mahesh b s (talk • contribs) 08:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC).

Rajendra, I put my opinion on Talk:Wodeyar too, A persons name must be spelt the way they spelt it in their lifetime. If this Odeyar spelling is retained, would lead to confusion. Wikipedia would perhaps be part of a minority of sources that would use that spelling. I think the spelling must be restored to the way they were in Revision as of 13:15, 5 January 2007 -- Hgkamath 17:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] [Kaveri dispute]

Rajachandra avare, tumba sorry. I was starting another round of cpedit of the article and also cleaning up the references. So 'sadhyakke' tegdiraNa aMta tegede. I always meant to bring it back. I wanted to leave a note saying this when I removed it, but I forgot. Very sorry about that. Also, there are few concerns about those contents. You will find them here. Please add your comments when you find time. Once I finish another round of copyedit and clean up the refs, we can surely bring it back. Sorry once again that I forgot to leave a note. Thanks. Sarvagnya 18:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Can you provide references?

Thank you for your interest in the article on the Sritattvanidhi. Can you add any book references for the material you have added? We are trying to upgrade the quality of references on many of the Hinduism articles, which are often without citations now. Also, the picture you added has no associated documentation on file explaining where it is from or what the connection is. Can you help with that? I would also love to find an ISBN or book supplier for reproduction of the work that may still be available. It is a classic that needs wider attention. Buddhipriya 18:30, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

In order to keep conversations in one place on Wikipedia, I will transfer a copy of your remarks here. Thank you so much for replying! If you could upload pictures of all 32 forms showing the text it would be a great contribution. These pictures often appear in degraded forms in devotee publications, often with incorrect identification as to which form is which. If you read the script, could you upload the pictures and also doocument exactly which form appears in each picture, as you did with Mahaganapati? Having the original pictures on file with a systematic documentation of the names of the forms as given in the text would be invaluable to researchers, whc generally cannot obtain access to the source text directly. We could then work together to get the 32 forms integrated into the article. Please reply to this here, on your talk page, to keep the discussion in one place. I will add this page to my watchlist. Also, please sign your comments by typing four tildes ~~~~ which will add your name and a link to here in all your submissions. It saves time for the readers.

Repost of reply: You can get the book from: Director prasaranga University of Mysore Manasagangothri Mysore-570006


you can also get the books from online sources like https://www.dkagencies.com/doc/Home.html and serch for mummadi.

I also feel the title srittavanidi for your post on ganapati is not right.

If you need any more info ot if you feel i should post all the 32 paintings along with the original kannada texts, kindly let me know. raja


Buddhipriya 17:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

i have since corected a bit of your post:

1. Maharaja died on 28 march 1868. 2. The first page, the author states thus: May the work sri tattvanidi, which is illustrated and contains secrets of mantras and which is authored by king sri krishna raja, be written without any abstacle. Salutation to Lord ganapati and goddess chamundambika...

Hence we cannot today doubt the authorship and say it was done at his command !

Rajachandra 17:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

i have added two pictures today. i will upload a new pic of mahaganapati later. i will also transliterate the kannada texts as i progress.

Rajachandra 19:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

You are doing great work, thank you. Regarding changing statements that are in published sources, if you have a source that gives a different version, as in the case with authorship, rather than change a cited sentence please add an additional reference with the other point of view, or raise the subject on the talk page so we can work together to get both in. The citation to Martin-Dubost would be considered a reliable source and thus should not be removed. Also, I recommend that we continue further dialog about this on the talk page for the article rather than here, to make it easier for other editors to find these remarks. I will copy this entire thread to there now to preserve some of the good points you have made. Buddhipriya 19:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/a/j/User_talk%7ERajachandra_0e8f.html"