User talk:68.173.46.79

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires no personal information, and gives you many benefits, including:

We hope you enjoy your time here on Wikipedia and that you choose to become a Wikipedian by creating an account. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, you should sign your name to your posts and comments with ~~~~. Pacific Coast Highway 00:35, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] 06-Nov-2006

Thank you for experimenting with the page Mark Regev 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.Chris Kreider 19:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

Hello, 68.173.46.79, 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! 

Links for Wikipedians interested in Hindu content

I saw your edits on Hinduism. You could contribute more efficiently if you registered and participated in our many discussions, before making sweeping changes.

ॐ नमःशिवाय Śaiva Sujīt सुजीत ॐ 21:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Sweeping changes. I did not really mean that to be very strong in rhetoric. I just meant that you've made significant changes in sections of the article that many other editors who have spent a lot of time on that article, have been discussing, in order to provide the best possible article.

Also, as for anonymity, you are more than welcome to continue without an account, and without participating in "edit wars", as I also avoid, but it is more convenient to contact fellow editors by an account name than by a fickle DHCP-leased IP. I am not aware of how you got the notion of anonymity by the writers of smrtis... Every work written by Acarya Abhinavagupta, Adi Sankaracarya, and Gurudeva, are easily associated to them.

ॐ नमःशिवाय Śaiva Sujīt सुजीत ॐ 21:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Dwaipanya Krishna wrote six hundred thousand verses but that is not what we call the Mahabharat. One of the descendants of the Pandavas preserved one hundred thousand verses, and this is referred to as the Mahabharat. Upanishads are a part of the Vedas. Vedas are not smriti they are shruti; they are apaurusheya. This is not an attempt at anonymity; it is simply divine origin. ॐ नमःशिवाय Śaiva Sujīt सुजीत ॐ 17:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Obviously, texts can not be of divine origin; Dwaipanya Krishna did indeed write and also split the Vedas into four vedas. However, the sounds of the vedas are shruti (they were heard). I guess you are not a Hindu or just not familiar with Hindu traditions. ॐ नमःशिवाय Śaiva Sujīt सुजीत ॐ 21:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


I guess I offended you, and I apologize. I thought that you may not have been "a Hindu or just not familiar with Hindu traditions" because most Hindus do not think of Vedas as smriti, but instead believe them to be apaurusheya shruti. I understand that wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and it does indeed have articles consisting of scholarly facts, but the Hinduism article is meant to describe Hindu beliefs, practices, and culture. ॐ नमःशिवाय Śaiva Sujīt सुजीत ॐ 00:35, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

I noticed that you made several good edits on the Hinduism and other pages. However it would be helpful if you Created an account on Wikipedia, since that will enable others to communicate more easily with you through your Talk Page. That way, if someone disagrees with a particular edit, he/she can discuss the issue with you rather than simply reverting the change; and in addition you will gain access to some nifty tools like Watchlists and Pop ups.. You also may want to take a look at the Hinduism Talk page, since some of the topics you addressed in your edits have been discussed there and your input would be appreciated.

If you have any comments or suggestions, you can leave a message on my Talk page. Thanks and welcome ! Abecedare 21:05, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion on Hinduism page

Hi, Just wanted to let you know that the comments you had placed on the Hinduism talk page have not been deleted; rather they were moved to the Hinduism Notice Board Talk page by Swadhyayee, since he felt that they were of general interest to the subject and not directed specifically to the Hinduism page. While Swadhyayee's decision may be disputed, I think he meant well and did not aim to censor your comments. Please feel free to add on to your comments here.

Also, as you rightly state it is not necessary for one to register on wikipedia in order to contribute fruitfully. However registering an account does help other editors communicate with you more reliably, (through a stable talk page), while enhancing your anonymity as explained here (if you don't believe that, try determining my city/country of residence, gender, age, background etc). Of course, the final decision is completely yours. Abecedare 21:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] In Use tag

I have placed an in use tag at the Hinduism page, so that nobody else edits it while you reorganize the sectioning as per your best judgment. Please remove the Template:Inuse when you are done with your edits. Thanks. Abecedare 01:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't sure if you check your user talk page - so I left the same message on the Hinduism Talk page too. I didn't want someone to come along and revert your partial edits and thus creating further confusion ! Happy editing. :-) Abecedare 01:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tantra

I think both D-Boy and you are making good-faith points on the inclusion/exclusion of Tantra from the Hinduism article. While my POV is closer to yours (i.e. I support inclusion of the various aspects of Hinduism with the constraint being placed on the level of detail rather than number of POVs, in order to keep the article at a readable length) I do think remarking on the editors rather than the issue of discussion is unhelpful. As Saiva, I and now D-Boy have pointed out we would prefer that you register an account since that simplifies the mechanics of communication on wikipedia - nevertheless we all recognize that the decision is yours and finally, all that matters is the quality of your edits and the cooperative nature of your editing, which in my (and others') opinion has been top-tier.
Therefore I request you to assume good faith on the part of other editors contributing towards the project, and extend them all the courtesy that you would rightly expect to be extended towards you. Thanks. Abecedare 21:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Karma section

I just finished saving my critical analysis on the writing in the Hinduism article, using a paragraph from the karma section as an illustrative example; and then noticed a message from you, informing the editors of your recent rehaul of that very section. I now realize, that given the coincidence of the two events my review may appear to be personally directed, but I assure you that that was not my intent. I didn't consciously realize that the section had been edited recently; though I wonder now whether my choice was subconsciously influenced by the "Karma and reincarnation" edit summaries in my watchlist. Anyway, I hope you'll read the review positively and chime in with your comments on the Hinduism page or my talk page if you have any personal objections. Thanks. Abecedare 04:19, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edits to Hinduism

I checked out the one revert that covered four of your changes, and you are correct, they were unwarranted, and I don't remember making the revert either. Yours is not the first complaint, so apparently, my version of VP is not working correctly, I only make changes manually and when I see obvious vandalism. So, I will delete my version of VP and use Popups (which never made incorrect changes) until another, more reliable program comes around. Thank You. Neonblak 05:48, 22 January 2007 (UTC)