User talk:Ramashray

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome to the Wikipedia

Here are some links I thought useful:

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. The Wikipedia:Village pump is also a good place to go for quick answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be Bold!

[[User:Sam Spade|Sam Spade Arb Com election]] 12:32, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Agamas

Yes, Ramashray It is. Agamas alone would direct you to lizard.

Raj2004 12:36, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Also,

I think we should keep it Hindu Agamas becuase it is a plural version. (there are three Agamas, three forms, one to Vishnu, Shiva and Devi. Agamas alone refers to lizards. Brahms sutras (authored by Veda Vyasa) should be separate from Yoga sutra (patanjali) as it is different and separate. Keep it as but if modified it should be divided into 1) Sankara 2) Ramanuja 3) Madhva (three well known acharayas) and Ramakrishna (great in 19th centuy, Vivekananda and imprtant for Hindu revival in 19th century) and Sivananda (important in 20th century) Those personalities must be included. However, I think one should however leave it as it is. It is good enough. Raj2004 02:29, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC) I have changed the temples so Hindu Agamas would show up as Agamas. Now it's fine. Raj2004 14:33, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC) Ramashray, I don't have any thoughts at this time. If I do, I will let you know. Raj2004 18:01, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Indian wikipedians' notice board

Hi. I would like you to be an active member of Wikipedia:Indian wikipedians' notice board. utcursch 07:35, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Seeking you support

I am seeking your support and participation for starting the "Indian Collaboration of the Week". Please enlist your support on the page Wikipedia_talk:Indian_wikipedians'_notice_board if you would like to support. Thanks Arunram 08:54, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Can website article be used?

I saw the article on Ramakrishna Mission which seemed to me mere perfunctory. I would invite you to visit here. I wonder whether the entire article as appearing in the above-referred website can be given. Is it allowed? Or something NEW has to be written? I am still new to wikipedia! Swami Vimokshananda 11:55, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vivekananda audio

I have listened to the speech and it seems pretty authentic! As of now I have linked Vivekananda article with the audio recording. Do check that out!Calvinkrishy 06:37, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

Ok I take that back. I have seen reports in the blogosphere that seem to indicate that the recording in question might NOT be authentic. Thanks for making me look at it a bit more deeply. I have yanked the link to the recording from the the Vivekananda article.

Calvinkrishy 07:48, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

It is good that you removed the link! I recount one funny experience of a monk of the Ramakrishna Order regarding the 'Voice of Vivekananda'. He was presented with a CD supposed to contain the 'original' voice. The moment he heard it attentively he remembered that he had heard it before. It struck him that there was one cassette of N Vishwanathan who had read out some selected lectures of Swamiji. This was brought out during the Centenary commemoration of Chicago Parliament of Religions in 1993. He played the CD and the cassette simultaneously and lo! both had omission of one para from the lecture of 27th Sept, 1893. Not only that - in narrating the story of Frog in the well, Vishwanathan had expounded in a little dramatic way by modulating his voice, Swamiji's lecture also had the same style! Wherever Vishwanathan had pronouced the word 'often' as 'often, Swamiji in the CD also had the same pronounciation! More over before Swamiji's lecture begins, there is an announcement in female voice. The written down records of Parliament of Religions show that there was no female announcer at that time! It appeared to our monk that the new CD has been produced by increasing the speed of the lecture and adding 'noise' level so as to appear as ancient one. Vishwanathan's cassette is still available for sale from Udbodhan Office, Kolkata.Swami Vimokshananda 18:11, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Whose voice can we claim it is? :) And as Swamiji has noted, could it be the voice of N Vishwanathan? Anyway the file is available in wiki commons as Vivekananda1.ogg Calvinkrishy 17:53, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Guru

Hello.

There is a long ongoing dispute at the article on Guru. I was wondering if you would like to give us your opinion of the article as it stands. --goethean 12:29, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ramakrishna Paramahamsa

NPOV Dispute RESOLVED? - After 2+ months of work, I suggest that we have an article that is well on its way to being NPOV and encyclopedic. As the person who invoked the NPOV Dispute in the first place, I am tentatively suggesting that we might consider removing it. Not that our task is finished; there is more work to do; but if you, Ramashray, agree that what we have is a disinterested, neutral review of the facts and NOT a slanderous jeremiad against your guru, then I feel that we can move on. Are we agreed? Or have I entirely misread the situation....Let me know...Thanks. Emyth 11:31, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

Dear Ramashray
  • Very kind of you! I am also pained to see the observations of some scholars. I can try my hands in re-writing the entire article. Originally it was not written by Ramakrishna Mission. Nor any monk of the Ramakrishna Order had entered into the dispute. Still one scholar presumes that it makes him “suspect that it is written by the Ramakrishna Mission”. Alas! Hands are tied down even before they start typimg ! Under this situation do you think an article by me – a monk –would be acceptable to the other wikipedians?
  • I would like you to go through the Talk:Adi Shankara page - Saundaryalahari para. Therein I have received unthinkable personal attack. I do not mind that. But without going into the arguments if one proferrs epithets like arrogant, ignorant etc I just wonder whether I have any place at all here.
  • When I first saw wikipedia a month ago I was so glad that here people can interact demolishing the myth of geo-boundaries. But I am sorry to note my experience is otherwise. Nevertheless, I don’t want to enter wikipedia incognito. My identity is for every one to see. Now I understand that the very identity is posing a problem in communication here.
  • Today I saw the comments of Emyth who says that he was responsible for NPOV. He seems to be willing to come to an understanding with you. Why don’t you agree? Once agreed at least the NPOV tag would go away! And all of us can put our mind together in finding some solution to perplexing questions. Regidity from both sides has to be given up. In this I am ready to provide some inputs. But is the other hearing? And am I welcome?
  • VMO 17:39, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
I am putting up a re-written article on Sri Ramakrishna see Draft/Sri Ramakrishna. Please go through the same. Any suggestion?
  • VMO 10:16, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Obviously I HAVE misread the situation. Instead of talking with me and working collaboratively within the Wikipedia project, you are taking advatage of our openness to push your Ramakrishnan agenda. You did note my willingness to work on understanding you and my good-faith offer to remove the NPOV tag, but then you go ahead and do what you want anyway, ignoring our Wikipedian values and concerns. What's the problem here? What is the misunderstanding? Are you willing and committed to working this through? If so, then please continue and I'll outline where we're coming from (a bit strongly, I'll admit, but it is annoying to have our work meddled with by people who don't understand what we are doing. Please forgive my harshness and continue... we can work this out if you will engage in dialog.)

NO... You are NOT invited to REWRITE the article. Most certainly you are NOT to put up some pre-existing article from the Ramakrishna Mission (or any like thing.) It will be reverted as soon as possible and if you persist in such missionizing steps will be taken to keep you from continuing.

Now, what part of the Wikipedia purpose, mission, principles and process do you not understand?

Here are some prinicples:

  • The Wikipedia is a free-content encyclopedia that any one can edit. This means that we are open and welcome your participation as long as you share the values, principles and purposes of the Wikipedia project. We profide introductions and clear statements of those values, principles and purposes so that you can clearly understand what it is that the Wikipedia is, is for, and how we go about doing it.
  • The Wikipedia is Neutral Point of View NPOV - This means that it is not Pro-Ramakrishna, nor is it Anti-Ramakrishna. We are striving for a purely factual, historical, non-dogmatic description of Ramakrishna, his life, his contributions to human culture. Information, not dogma... Information ABOUT dogma is fine and appropriate. But it must be described as opinion rather than asserted as fact.
  • The Wikipedia is collaborative - This means that you have a responsibility to engage with others as we work on a common goal, i.e. the expansion, renovation, improvement and creative enrichment of our Wikipedia. If you are NOT committed to this project, and rather are merely USING the Wikipedia to further and promote some other goal, say the spreading of Ramakrishnaism, then you are NOT welcome and will be watched and reverted as quickly and often as we can can make it happen.

All of this said, I'll be back and begin addressing each particular problem with the Ramakrishna article. We can work this out if we try. Emyth 12:58, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

Dear Emyth,

  • You have very nicely explained the wikipedia principles. I wholeheartedly support these.
  • My version is neither pro nor anti. I have only stated the factual life of Ramakrishna. It is meant for User:Ramashray. I have neither attempted missionising nor promoted any ‘ism’. I wonder: Did you at all go through the draft? Where was I dogmatic? No life can be written just out of imagination. Every writer has to depend on certain published works. I have also based on authoritative works.
  • I fail to understand why you got disturbed so much. What has enraged you? Is that the Draft culprit here? Well, I am ready to withdraw the draft on hearing from you. Please tell me how to do that. Should I simply select and delete? Will that do?
  • Of course I will definitely wait for your return.
VMO 14:47, 8 May 2005 (UTC)


Hey Vikas,

Thanks, I will try to incorporate any material I can find. But let the flame wars get over first --IMpbt 05:59, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Dear Vikas,

How long we need to wait? More than a month has elapsed. When would Emyth be back and begin addressing each particular problem with the Ramakrishna article?
  • VMO 14:41, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Kannada wikipedia

hi vikas, You might already know that there is a kannada edition of wikipedia. Please help us by lending a hand if can. We're building a community over there and help from fellow wikipedians would always be invaluable. --H P Nadig 06:41, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Number of indian langauges

The figure you added, 3372, seems incorrect as most estimates put the world's total at 6,000. Could you cite your source? --Erauch 05:10, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)


Hi, Please take a look at discussion on Talk:Pakistan page. Please contribute your view on the issue of including terrorism related content in the Pak article. The discussion is at the end of page. King1 07:58, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Emblem - No license?

The emblem that you placed in Ramakrishna Mission article has been recently removed with this comment: Image deleted from WikiCommons, no license. What does this mean? VMO 01:38, 6 August 2005 (UTC)


Thankyou for your message. I'd be happy to help you. I suggest that you upload the Ramakrishna emblem to English Wikipedia, NOT the image repository WikiCommons. In the accompanying information box you add {{fair use}} and the same thing you wrote me about respecting religious sentiments etcetera. Fair use is the copyright license, something all photos on Wikipedia need to have. Regards, Thuresson 14:14, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rama Survey?

Hi, ran into the above page created by you - it refers to Ramachandra mission. But I didn't get to know why it is titled "Rama Survey." I think the reason shd get reflected in the main page. posted the same query in the discussion page of Rama Survey page. regards, ---Gurubrahma 09:06, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Greetings

Greetings on India’s 57th Republic Day. --Bhadani 08:24, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Logo versions.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Logo versions.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:39, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Vedanta Kesari : cover page

Hi! The image was deleted because it was tagged as non-commercial or educational use only. Unfortunately, those terms are too restrictive for Wikipedia, and images like it are generally deleted on sight. See our image use policy for more information. Hope this helps! east.718 at 23:01, December 28, 2007

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:VK_cover_September_06.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:VK_cover_September_06.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Rettetast (talk) 16:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:VK_cover_March_2006.jpg

I have tagged Image:VK_cover_March_2006.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 16:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)