User talk:Indianstar
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[Archive1]
[Archive2]
Contents |
[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Alternative Alignments.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Alternative Alignments.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Shell babelfish 00:15, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks!
Thank you for the barnstar. Much appreciated :). I notice that you link to your talk archives on your talk page. You can use a prettier version with {{archivebox}}. Take a look at my talk page to see how I've done it. It's right at the beginning. --vi5in[talk] 20:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- Good Suggestion!!. Will do it.--Indianstar (talk) 16:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Adam's Bridge
Sorry for my delayed response to your message on my talk-page.
To answer to query: As far as I know Ivarta is a news-compilation-website/web-portal, not known for any high editorial standards ( see "Contributing Opinions, Articles and Content to iVarta.com" at [1]), and as such is not a reliable source for its original content (of course, we can use it as a convenience link for articles from reliable news agencies such as Rueters, UPI, PTI, TOINS etc). Furthermore as you'll note, the particular article in question carries a prominent disclaimer at the bottom:
The views expressed in this article (Ram Setu, SSCP Setusamudram Shipping Canal Project) are the authors own and not of this website. The author is solely responsible for the contents of this article (Ram Setu, SSCP Setusamudram Shipping Canal Project). This website does not represent or endorse the accuracy, completeness or reliability of any opinion, statement, appeal, advice or any other information in the article.
which makes it essentially unacceptable as a source on wikipedia. However, if we can verify that the author is a "Former IAS officer who has worked in Tuticorin port and is directly connected with the project" with acknowledged expertise on the topic, it would be ok to cite his writings; although given his COI, we would still need to attribute the statements to him, rather than state them as facts (just as we would do for, say, a statement by a GOI minister). On the other hand, if we cannot confirm that the author is known for scholarly writings on the topic published by reputable publishers, his article is basically uncitable, although we should feel free to use the ivarta article as a pointer to relevant reliable sources and then cite them directly. I see that you have already taken this approach , which I think is a good idea. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 00:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Adam's Bridge
Hi Indianstar,
It feels good to communicate to a fellow wikipedian, who feels so strongly about a topic and wants to see it communicated in the right context.
The reason that I included the statement "This conjecture must be tempered with the fact that there are no geographical pointers to the structure being Rama's Bridge in any of the ancient texts or Puranas" was not to prove or disprove the Rama's Bridge as true or false.
Ramayana is a great epic poem which portrays the story of SriRama, who is the seventh major incarnation of Lord Vishnu. Unfortunately, it does not lend itself to historical or geographical verifications. However, the Mahabharata is more prosaic and contains a wealth of information (astronomical information about position of stars, geographical information for historical verification and the actions of forceful personalities like Bhagavan Parshuram, Kartavirya Arjuna, Shambhara and Ravana). The Mahabharata and Ramayana events occurred in the timespan of 3750 - 3250 BC.
The war which Dasharatha fought, in which he gave the boon to Kaikeyi, was with the asura chief Shambhara whose ally was Ravana. Shambhara's domain was in central India as is stated in the textual prelude of Dasarajna (Battle of Ten Kings). Kartavirya Arjuna ruled over Anupdesh (Gujarat) and wanted to control the maritime activities for which he fought with the Bhrigus (led by Bhargava Parashuram). This is detailed in the contents of various ancient texts.
From the Ramayana stated within the Mahabharata and otherwise, there has been a certain geographical discontinuity about Lanka. Kishkindha which was supposedly in Karnataka, the Sabari story , Panchavati really throw questions on the position of Lanka.
Kubera was the lord of the North (one of the Ashtadikpalas) before the timeperiod of the Ramayana(The Rig Veda). So, Lanka was probably not the 'Srilanka' which we know now as the Lanka and was an island city more up north in the present day 'Arabian Sea' zone or the 'Bay of Bengal' zone. Lanka was a wealthy city because it was the hub of maritime activities due to which Ravana got into a skirmish and was defeated by Kartavirya Arjuna, who was also a strong naval lord. Kartavirya Arjuna's domain never extended beyond peninsular India, throwing another doubt on where Lanka is actually situated.
There are many other ramifications to these statements. I will mail you the list of books from which these points have been made. These books are not by foreign Indologists, but Indians who have tried to authenticate the epics so that stupid statements like the one made by the Government of India can be refuted with scientific clarity
Regards, Magisterkrishna
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Magisterkrishna (talk • contribs) 06:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
