User talk:Thegreyanomaly
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Welcome!
Hello Thegreyanomaly, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some good places to get you started!
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
- Template messages
- Sandbox
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please be sure to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or just three tildes (~~~) to produce your name only. If you have any questions, or are worried/confused about anything at all, please either visit the help desk, or leave a new message on my talk page at any time. Happy editing, good luck, and remember: Be Bold!
FireFox T C E 18:38, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed undone by an automated bot. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. If you feel you have received this notice in error, please contact the bot owner // Tawkerbot2 06:27, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Indian Buddhist Movement
User Thegreyanomaly the article "Indian Buddhist Movement" is about Religious movement which is growing in India slowly since last 50 years. If you are anti-Buddhist we certainly don't have any objection about your religion. You can be a Brahmin-Hindu if you are a priest by profession in any temple otherwise you are a Shudra-Hindu because all non-priest i.e. non-Brahmins are SHUDRA in Hindu Religion. In Kali Yuga Hindus have only two Varna as per the religious philosophy of Hindus. If you are from India then you might be knowing that Buddhism in India was totally killed. Some blame Brahmins Or some blame Muslims for that, it is a vast topic of study. I don't want to blame anybody. Hindu Castiesm and Hindu Untouchability became very strong after fall of Buddhism in Indian sub-continent and before British came to India. Education to all non-Brahmins was banned and the rigid Hindu Religious laws made by Brahmins like Manusmriti, VishnuSmriti and other DharmaShastras became the laws to govern the non-Muslim society.
British gave education for all and broke the anti-Human Hindu Laws. After Independence Dr. Ambedkar revived Buddhism in India. He also established "Buddhist Society of India" certainly NOT Navayana Society! So there is no meaning branding the movement as Navayana. Because the founder of India's Buddhist Revival Movement which is certainly against Hindu Casteism and injustice that Hindus are doing since hundreds of years called his movement as Buddhist Movement. Also Dr. Ambedkar said that 'He will convert whole India back to Buddhism' but he was killed just within 6 weeks after his conversion to Buddhism. Some people blamed Brahmins for his death. It is not sure how he died. I dont want to blame anybody. So you can discuss current Buddhist Developments in the article "Indian Buddhist Movement". About Hindu Caste and related things you better write to Hindu Articles Or Caste Related to Articles. If Navayana is a anto-caste publication then you should put that link in Caste Related article.
In India legal system we have Hindus, Muslims, Christens and BUDDHIST as different religion. Expecially our 2001 cencus gives more details about different religions population. We dont have any 'Navayana Buddhist' in whole India neither it is recognized legally anywhere. Officially we have around 1% Buddhists in India. This population unofficially can be 4% also because thousands of people are converting to Buddhism. But lets take official figures.
Caste is a problem of Hindus certainly not the problem of Buddhists. Be a contributor to wikipedia but don't just try to vandalise different articles. Dhammafriend 09:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Some blame people who think the caste system is Hindu s opposed to Indian. Sadly Muslim castes (Sayyad - high, Bhangi, etc - low) cannot even be in the same graveyard. At least Hindus ashes all flow in the Ganges.Bakaman Bakatalk 23:15, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] dispute resolution
- Hi man. I'd like to help you in any dispute resolution process by participating in it. If you'd like to initiate a mediation cabal or an RfC/RfA I'm fully game. Please inform me if you do. This is regarding Bodhidhamma and Truthlover's borderline racist POV pushing on Indian Buddhist Movement. Thanks and have a nice day.Hkelkar 01:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Could you please verify the latest anon edits to the Indian Buddhist Movement as of now? They seem to be unsourced and I'd like your verification if that's ok.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indian_Buddhist_Movement&diff=78614384&oldid=78613985
I mean the bit about Taiwanese collaboration (I may have heard something about this so am inclined to believe it, but could you check plz).Hkelkar 01:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Hkelkar you reverted the Indian Buddhist Movement article even though I gave links and proofs for the contents. One more thing BodhiDhamma is my brother in USA so we are not like you people because we are bold and truth speaking people. Don't vandalise the article without proper understanding. Study the present status. Dhammafriend 11:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Indian Buddhist Movement again
- Might want to look at it. User:Yeditor has removed the navayana stuff. I have had trouble with his tendentious edits before.Hkelkar 13:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- Hkelkar This shows you both are more interested in Vandalising the Indian Buddhist Movement article again and again. Be positive. Come forward for open debate. I have told you people many times that if you want to debate face to face we can arrange our Buddhist friends meeting with you. So be open minded and know the truth about Indian Buddhist Movement Dhammafriend 11:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Hi, Thegreyanomaly your edits are very helpful and informative. Please look more in the so-called Indian Buddhist Movement. Thanks. Holybrahmin 15:27, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Indian Buddhist Movement poratl
How can we expand the portal? Holybrahmin 13:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Indian Buddhist Movement
Hi,
I'm writing to you because I noticed that you contributed to the article and talk section of "Indian Buddhist Movement". I saw the article on the RFC page, then read the article and the talk page. I posted a lengthy analysis of the article on it's talk page and have watched it since.
I would like to invite you to read my analysis and post your opinion. This is a noteworthy topic, but it's currently incomplete and needs reorganization. The effort to improve this article has boiled down to two editors, dhammafriend and hkelkar, who are both engaging in edit wars and attacks on one another. There has been no substantial progress on this article since I first came upon it, so I'm hoping that you and other folks can come back an engage in a refocusing.
I greatly appreciate in advance anything you have to offer.
Sincerely, NinzEliza 03:05, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Gears of War Criticism
Regarding Gears of War Criticism, please see my comments in Talk:Gears of War#Criticism. --Rodzilla 06:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] South Asia
Stop pushing CRAPPY IndoPOV. It is you who refuse to discuss on the Talk Page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.102.23.91 (talk) 06:35, 27 January 2007 (UTC).
Kindly note that since 1914, when India still had not gained independence, the Tibetans has accepted its subordination to China:
- "It is understood by the High Contracting Parties that Tibet forms part of Chinese territory."[Point 1, Appendix, Simla Convention, signed by ROC, DL and UK/India]
For wikipedia, pls stop making factually-inaccurate statement.--218.102.23.90 06:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 3RR on South Asia
Hello, I've blocked you for breaking the three revert rule on the article South Asia. In addition, edit summaries such as this [3] unnecessarily escalate tensions, and I ask you to refrain from edit warring and making comments like that after your block is up. dvdrw 08:11, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
When does my block end Thegreyanomaly 18:55, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Nvm to my request I realized 3RR blocks are 24-hours Thegreyanomaly 07:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
It has been 24 hours since my last revert, but I cannot edit. The only edits I made were continual edits on this talk page, so I could view UTC time and see how much longer my block would last Thegreyanomaly 08:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Bioquetzalmon.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Bioquetzalmon.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 18:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Biostegomon.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Biostegomon.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 18:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Biothunderbirmon.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Biothunderbirmon.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 18:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Regarding your edit to The Lost Tomb of Jesus
Just wanted to remember to you that when contributing to a controversial page such as this one you must always remember to be entirely sure and have a proper source for your edit, because in this cases an unsourced edit has a chance of ending in a whole edit war, just a friendly reminder -happy editing-Dark Dragon Flame 04:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 3RR
You're more in danger of violating 3RR than I am. I reverted the POV tag once, and your statement twice. 3RR requires reverting the same info more than three times. You have now made three reverts on the same info. One more and you violate 3RR. I don't say this out of animosity; I just want to be fair, to you and me. Ward3001 02:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion over the expert comment
Thanks for the invitation to discuss, but actually, like you, I'm in agreement with Cfortunato's latest edit. If it stays that way I see no need for discussion of that paragraph at this point. Ward3001 02:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC) Ok then. No discussion necessary Thegreyanomaly 02:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- A couple of comments. Since the disagreement is resolved I think you should request that the page be unprotected. (And I have no plans to change the article as it is now.) Secondly, your request for protection states that "Christians have been continually citing non-statistical authorities..." How do you know if someone is a Christian? I reverted some of your edits. Do you know whether I am or am not a Christian? Please explain. I understand your request for protection, and even your disagreements with other editors. But don't make statements about other editors' religious affiliation if you don't know anything about it. It violates Wikipedia policy. And THAT is something that I will take to an administrator if necessary. Thank you. Ward3001 17:19, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- It is irrelevant to me whom specifically you targeted in your statement about "Christians." My point is that you made statements on Wikipedia about any editor's religious affiliation without knowledge of it. In effect, you were assuming that editor(s) were adding, deleting, reverting, or making other changes because they are Christian. I think that is the basis for some (but not all) of your misunderstanding editors' intentions in their edits. I make no assumptions about an editor's religious beliefs unless the editor makes those beliefs known to me. I do not change an article based on an editor's religous beliefs. I would have no knowledge of your religious beliefs except that it was stated in your comment on Cfortunato's talk page. I reverted some of your edits because I disagreed with what you were saying, not because of your religious beliefs. I completely respect your right to disagree with any editor. But I think we could make more progress in coming to agreement on some of our differences if you did not assume that those who disagree with you are Christians and are making their edits because they are Christians. Ward3001 00:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- I never looked at your userboxes and never felt the need to do so, because your religious affiliation is irrelevant to whether I agree or disagree with you edits. I suspect that's the case with most editors, whether they agree or disagree with you or me. I begin by assuming good faith that an editor makes changes to the article because they believe it improves the accuracy of the article, not because they are waging a religious war. Most of the edits in the article are not a battle of Christians against atheists (or any other religious viewpoint). Apparently you feel a need to find out if an editor is Christian, and then you seem to assume that the religion of your "opponent" is what motivates their edits. And, in my opinion, THAT is the crux of much of your conflict with other editors. Please make your edits as you feel the need, but don't frame the conflicts as the Christians versus you. Thanks. Ward3001 14:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Two points. First, I did not say or even imply that you are anti-Christian. I simply said that you seem to be assuming (based on your sweeping generalization that Christians are making some of the edits, and your description of finding out that your "opponents" are Christians) that those who disagree with you are doing so because they are Christian. Secondly, if it's fair to say that you keep your "atheistic and Buddhist beliefs out of" your edits, it's only fair to say that Christians or a person of any religion can keep his/her religious beliefs out of their edits. I quite disagree with your statement that "being Christian ... will influence an individual to being, at some level, against this documentary." I have no difficulty accepting that Christians, Jews, Muslims, atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoist, Druids or anyone is capable of making edits for or against the documentary without regard to their personal religious convictions. Do you think you are the only person who can make unbiased edits without being influenced by personal religious beliefs? Ward3001 23:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- I'm perfectly entitled to respond to your statements on my talk page; you have no obligation to read or respond to what I write. If you don't want me to respond, then don't write anything on my talk page. Your logic is flawed: I did not imply that you make bad faith edits; I said that I assume others edit with good faith. Ward3001 00:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] diamond bar high dubious tag
regarding link to college board if you read the pdf, diamond bar high is listed there as an example of a large high performing school
[edit] regarding diamond bar high wiki page
the pdf linked to college board does include dbhs read through the pdf, don't skim —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Igeoffi (talk • contribs) 06:12, 18 March 2007 (UTC). Igeoffi 06:12, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
update: go to page 24 of the 2007 ap report to the nation from the college board link it clearly mentions diamond bar high as an exemplary ap calc ab program did you read the pdf before making claims that there was no mention of dbhs? Igeoffi 06:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hi
How r u? --Nirajrm Δ | [sign plz] 03:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] hi
hello, cozu know gujarati and you are the first person to use userbox created by me!!!! So, thanks again...--Nirajrm Δ | [sign plz] 23:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Walking with Cavemen
Those edits apear to be OR unless they're sourced. Corvus cornix 23:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Deliverying User talk:207.181.15.218 final warning?
Does this [4] allow me to give him/her a last vandalism warning? Thegreyanomaly 23:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- You can give a final warning at any point, dependent upon the severity of the vandalism encountered. The diff linked to AIV doesn't help me very much. If you have a diff that demonstrates vandalism after several warnings on the editors' Talk page then you can use that as evidence for a final warning tag. AIV is, I believe, for the reporting of vandals who continue on their reckless course past a final warning. Regards, (aeropagitica) 23:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Atheism
Please don't take this the wrong way, but I have a question. Your userboxes state that you are both a Buddist and an atheist. Just wondering, how this is possible? Thanks for answering (I hope), C0N6R355talkcontribs 23:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Notability of Fall Program for Freshmen
A tag has been placed on Fall Program for Freshmen, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}}
to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jauerback 20:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] RE: Kabul is not South Asia
I will provide more sources. However, lets keep in mind that I am from Kabul and you are an Indian with Pan-Indianism or Pan-South Asian ideology. -- Behnam 17:30, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] No offense, but Indosphere is pretty cheesy
The "Indosphere" is a poorly cited concept, unused in academia or popular culture. You'd have to really beef up the main article before papering WP with it. Also, your change has been deleted from Indonesia before, so please use the talk page before adding it again. Cheers, --Smilo Don 19:24, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Further, if we allowed every template created from a geographical permutation, we'd have 40 templates on the Indonesia and other country articles. It really doesn't provide that much value - just more clutter - "death by templates". sorry. --Merbabu 22:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Alleged Indosphere of Afghanistan
Please stop making abrupt and unwarranted changes to the article without getting a reasonable consensus in the discussion. Moreover, when the matter is still questioned by various Wikipedia users like myself, you for some odd reason, decided to remove the POV tag.Scythian1 04:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Gandhara instead of Afghanistan
Please see the template. Gandhara, which is the historically viewed name of Eastern Afghanistan, has been inserted in lieu of Afghanistan. Best Regards Scythian1 01:30, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I reverted your change to Gandhara. I, in good faith, put Gandhara to make this matter settled. However you abruptly changed it back to Afghanistan without even discussing the matter in the talk section of the template. Scythian1 02:04, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
I did see that Behnam did erroneously changed it. I will leave him a message as I am assuredly under the view that he may have not understood the matter fully. Though I highly appreciate your open-mindedness. Best regards Scythian1 02:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wikiproject Digimon
At Wikiproject Digimon, we are about to undergo a large project and we wish to see how many people wish to help and contribute. If you wish to help please sign here. Trainra 06:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Edits to Asian Capitals
Your edits to the template "Asian Capitals" consists of a double listing of Afghanistan's capital, Kabul. That seems rather rhetorical in nature, and instead should involve only a single listing under one geographic region, with a notation stating that it is sometimes considered a part of another geographic region. In the case of Afghanistan, the consensus on Wikipedia seems to be that it belongs within the realm of Central Asia, and is only sometimes referred to as geographically South Asian in passing by various English language news services. Inclusion of Afghanistan within the realm of South Asia goes against academic views on the subject, and in fact in many cases reflects a tenancy towards irredentism. As a result of this clear dispute, I am going to request an RFC on this matter. Atari400 00:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Afghanistan
On the fourth one I provided the source for Afghani. Please see talk page. Thanks. -- Behnam 05:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Neither The American Heritage® Dictionary nor Princeton's wordnet lists them as synonyms. It is dictionary.com that lists them as synonyms. And even if they had the exact meaning, they are still different words and are used and need be mentioned even if Afghan is more common. -- Behnam 01:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Byzantine religion
The Byzantines were all zealous Christians by c late 6th century and much of the Empire was Christian already before Rome fell in c 480 AD. Polytheism was struck a severe blow by Theodosius ITourskin (talk) 04:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, but the Byzantine Empire did not consist of the western proportions for very long. In any case its the official religion that is stated. The Empire allowed Jews, Muslims and others to worship, but these were not the Empire's official religion. Catholics worshipped at Constantinople but Roman Catholicism was not the official religion. Pagans may have worshipped in the countryside in secret. Again, not an official religion. The Head of State determines the religion and the Byzantine Emperor, being the Head of state, determined it to be Orthodox Christianity. Tourskin (talk) 18:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Indosphere
- I accept only cited facts. As of yet, you have given no sources to show that Afghanistan or Baluchistan belong to your notion of an "Indosphere", or a "Greater India". I am sorry, but you seem to espouse an Indian nationalistic viewpoint that as of yet, is not backed up with sources. After all, what makes Baluchistan or Afghanistan part of an Indosphere/Greater India, exactly. That has not even been addressed. More importantly, why do you even feel the need for such an inclusion? Atari400 09:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- I would also point out that Balochistan (region) is neither a country nor a territory. Each of the other countries and territories in that template is a recognised political entity but you will have a hard time proving Balochistan region is even a territory. Green Giant (talk) 03:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Afghani
The discussion you pointed to is only for the infobox. Nothing else. Also, this is a disambiguation page. You should look into what the purpose of a disambiguation page is (link]). CanadianAnthropologist (talk) 06:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] South Asia
It is ridiculous.
Go and take a look at Talk:Tibet/Archive_5#South_Asia, it is YOU who failed to convince all other editors on accepting Tibet forming part of S. Asia. And all those useless sources are hardly GEOPOLITICAL.
On Talk:South Asia I see that another editor has warned you half a year ago he/she would remove those crappy and offtopic citations unless you show us some genuines GEOPOLITICAL sources, and you FAILED.
It's a GEOPOLITICAL topic, those "language center/cultural centers"...blarblarblar are not authoritative on this matter and thus OFF-TOPIC. (Even if it's worth mentioning, please do it only as "Reference")
I have monitored this pages and your POV-pushing for years, so don't childishly think that we dont know it. You are the one who must be warned.
Hands off!
--210.0.212.59 (talk) 01:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Ha! There is no use sending me this. John Hill and I have proved that you push lies on the article. And I will unquestionably present this case to (other) administrator--210.0.212.59 (talk) 04:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Is it the first time you edit in Wikipedia??? Every editor knows that all disputed edits/citations cannot be added on the main article unless consensus has been reached with other editors. Can't you read simple english? --210.0.212.59 (talk) 04:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] RE:AIV
I removed your report to AIV because AIV is only for simple vandalism. Edit wars should ideally be settled by communicating on talk pages; I know that the user hasn't exactly been civil, and will leave a note on their talk page about that. If a 3RR conflict does arise from this, please use Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR instead. Thanks! Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 04:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Looking through the editor's contributions, it seems they're bent on having their way; I'll have one more word with them, and if they continue to edit war, then yes, you may report them to the 3RR noticeboard. Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 05:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] References Test (Everyone ignore)
[edit] Ref
- ^ Center for South Asia Studies: University of California, Berkeley [1]
- ^ Center for South Asia Outreach UW-Madison [2]
- ^ http://www.ii.umich.edu/csas/aboutus/contactus
- ^ http://www.brandeis.edu/registrar/catalog/one-subject.php?subject_id=6550 this sources admits in certain contexts that Tibet and Afghanistan are South Asian
- ^ http://www.britac.ac.uk/institutes/SSAS/about.htm Tibetan and Afghan flag shown
- ^ http://oscar.virginia.edu/asp/orgView.asp?txtId=26
- ^ http://www.hawaii.edu/asiaref/sasia/sawebsites.htm
- ^ http://southasia.rutgers.edu/
- ^ http://www.asianstudies.emory.edu/sa/languages.htm
[edit] Julian the Apostate article renaming
- I have recently filed a request to have the page moved so that 'the Apostate' will be removed. If you support (or oppose) the removal of this descriptor, please voice your opinion at Talk:Julian the Apostate Thegreyanomaly (talk) 06:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I have not been checking in to Wikipedia so much lately and apparently the poll is closed. Although I don't have a strong opinion on this I do think you are right. I'm frequently disappointed at how much bias and prejudice gets preserved in Wikipedia (this is not the most egregious example but still ...). --Mcorazao (talk) 04:26, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- Echo the above comment in all regards. Left a comment as requested. Unimaginative Username (talk) 09:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Countries of the Indosphere
Template:Countries of the Indosphere has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Victor12 (talk) 04:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Nice to meet you!
Here is my gift for you. Please support Tibet and Tibetan people. Please share this image to your friends. Good luck!
Angelo De La Paz (talk) 23:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Add this article to your watchlist
Hi guy!
I think you may be interested in this. Please add this article to your watchlist as soon as possible.
Thank you so much and best wishes to you!
Angelo De La Paz (talk) 03:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Hiiiiii
Hi, How are you? --Nirajrm Δ | [sign plz] 01:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] anomaly
so im not the only anomly on wikipedia well besides my little brother but thats not the point .. nice to meet ya.--ANOMALY-117 (talk) 18:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Invasion of Tibet
Someone has proposed a move back to the original title of this article. It would be great to have your input. Please chime in. Thanks. Yunfeng (talk) 21:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Barking at people for no reason is rude. --Littlebutterfly (talk) 22:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
[edit] Littlebutterfly
Hola. Please see User talk:Longchenpa#User:Littlebutterfly. User:Longchenpa and I are going to start dispute resolution proceedings against User:Littlebutterfly and we thought you might want to join us. Yunfeng (talk) 17:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
LB doesn't seem to understand the distinction between a different perspective and deliberate obscuring and distortion of the facts. And he/she uses the same strategy I used to use against my little brother when I was 9: I'd bug him until I knew he'd hit me, and then I'd run to mom and say, "He hit me!" Longchenpa (talk) 04:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Heads up. Gimme danger has enlisted Littlebutterfly's help in improving the History of Tibet article to Good Article status. I raised my concerns about this with Gimme danger, who immediately erased them from his talk page. Longchenpa (talk) 00:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Houesse (talk • contribs) 05:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Gimme Danger's Wiki Project on Tibet
I did some checking up on Gimme danger's Wiki Project on Tibet. As far as I've found he has invited:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Littlebutterfly
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tkalsang
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rigsreco
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Samuraidude123
So far. Although I haven't looked earlier that April 14. I've informed Gimme danger that I would feel more comfortable if he had included any of the Tibet editors in his invitations. I'm going through the edit histories to see what's going on here. Longchenpa (talk) 17:19, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] April 2008
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. You're at 4RR
OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 07:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Indian_American and language
Hello,
I noticed that you removed the dubious tag from Indian American's language infobox.
I read the citation See page 4, and nowhere does it say that Hindi, Urdu, and Gujarati, are the three most common languages spoken by Indian American's in that order, which is what the Wikipedia article had said.
It merely says that amongst the [[Official languages of India] that aren't English, Hindi, Urdu, and Gujarati have the most number of native speakers resident in the United States of America.
Urdu, and to a lesser extent Gujarati, are not exclusively spoken by Indian American's, Urdu being the official language of Pakistan. As such, many Urdu speakers are not likely to identify as Indian American, and would identify as Pakistani American instead.
Thus it is incorrect to refer to those three as the 3 most commonly spoken languages by Indian Americans.
Arun (talk) 03:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Propaganda
I think they should both be listed as Propaganda. --Palming (talk) 23:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, TGA. Propaganda, apart from its technical dictionary definition, has a very negative connotation, and as such, whether a given work is propaganda is a matter of opinion. As such, articles should not describe such works as propaganda as a matter of fact, but only as an opinion that is properly attributed to a reliable source, as in the Criticism sections of such films. Describing or categorizing such films as propaganda is a clear violation of WP: NPOV. Please do not place that category in the films again. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 00:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Expelled
3RR warning you are close to breaking/have broken, the rule watch out. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 03:51, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Thegreyanomaly - Hello. I don't think you are following very closely. We are debating on the Talk page. I am also providing permutations of the edits I'm offering to improve the article and bring it into consensus territory. It's not 3RR. This is despite the fact that the discussion on the Talk page is providing no supporting facts or substance and can frankly be summed up by pointing to POV film critiques. I welcome your input in the debate. Regards, --Davidp (talk) 03:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Anomaly. Please use more descriptive, less charged edit summaries than this. Thank you. Nick Graves (talk) 01:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)