User talk:Zeuspitar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Jaya Govinda 2 Talk:Venkateswara 3 Request for admin 4 Vaishnavism's relation to Vedic religion 5 Your RfA 6 Bhakti yoga 7 Question about Western scholars section to the Vaishnavism article 8 Merger of Ekadasi and Ekadashi 9 Thelema/Crowley on Krishna 10 Vaishnava religious leaders 11 Thanks! 12 Articles 13 Non-Hindu views of Krishna 14 Thelema/Krishna 15 Reply 16 Vaisnava-Sahajiya and Vaishnavism 17 Venkateshwara WP:NPOV 18 The 1.0 team 19 Unfounded accusations and personal assault; from an ISKCON fanatic 20 Venkateshwara edits 20.1 Talk:Venkateshwara 21 Re:Wikidas and you 22 Sri Vaishnavism 23 Svayam Bhagavan 24 Welcome! 25 Welcome! 26 Sri Sampradaya 27 Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Zeuspitar 28 Avoid Cult 29 TfD: Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs 30 Vote

[edit] Jaya Govinda

Dear Govinda Ramanuja dasa,

Just yesterday I heard a beautiful story of how one Gaudiya Vaishnava guru from ISKCON visited one of the main temples of the Southern branch of the Sri Sampradaya. While staying there, he and his disciples were given the honor of speaking about Krishna in a hall normally reserved only for members of the Sri Sampradaya. The devotees of both sampradayas danced and sang together in the street, and performed joint worship of Vishnu in the temple. Do you think that God, in whatever form is pleased more by devotees co-operating and serving Him in this way, or by continually arguing and fighting with each other?

I have an interest in ISKCON and Gaudiya Vaishnava, that is a fact, but that shouldn't affect anything. I try and make my edits in Wikipedia as a-political as possible.

With articles such as Bhagavata Purana, not a lot of editors have put that much time into building the page up. Thus it needs much improvement. Unless someone actually sacrifices some time to improve an article, then what happens is that, over time, various editors will come along and edit as best they can see fit, and quote from the sources they have to hand, or know best. There is no big conspiracy, or hidden agenda, at least not that I know of? I do not take any of your comments personally against me, but simply beg you as a devotee, to please try and act in a mood of co-operation. If some Gaudiya Vaishnavas or specifically, members of ISKCON have acted innapropriately to you in the past, then please don't take that as an indication of the mood of all followers of Sri Chaitanya.

My sincere regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 19:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Venkateswara

Answered you there. Sorry, if i hurt your feelings. Happy editing. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for admin

Hello Zeuspitar. I have added your request for admin to the talk page of the Vaishnavism wikiproject at, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hinduism/Vaishnavism. I hope this will draw more attention to your request and especially the general need for admins in the Hinduism and Vaishnavism projects. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 21:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I tend to think your request will be denied. So far as I can tell, your first edit was on November 19, 2007, with a total of roughly 410 total edits. Generally, people are looking for at leat 6 months and a few thousand edits. I've transcluded the page onto the main RfA request page, so you'll be getting a few more responses shortly. If, as I think might happen, you do not get confirmed as an admin, I would very much recommend taking part in Wikipedia:Admin coaching, which would probably help a lot for a possible later RfA. John Carter (talk) 18:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vaishnavism's relation to Vedic religion

Hello Govinda Ramanuja dasa. I have added this discussion to the Vaishnavism Wikiproject talk page at, Vaishnavism's relation to Vedic religion. Please feel free to add any comments. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 16:43, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA

I'm sorry, but I've closed your Request for adminship prematurely. Simply put, you've only got 414 edits on Wikipedia; while edit count isn't the only determining factor, and numerous people have their own personal standards that they judge RfA candidates by, there was no chance that the RfA was going to pass.

I'm sorry about this, and hope you don't take it personally. If you continue to contribute to the project in a positive fashion, I'm confident that you could possibly run a successful RfA in the future. You may want to consider submitting yourself to Wikipedia:Editor review for feedback on where to get some good experience, and when you're ready for RfA again, there's a great Wikipedia:Admin coaching program for you to use, as well as a guide to requests for adminship.

If you have any other questions about becoming an administrator, please don't hesitate to ask me. Good luck! GlassCobra 19:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds great! I look forward to working with you. :) GlassCobra 21:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bhakti yoga

Please do add that prospective, with references to prove it is not WP:OR.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 05:28, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question about Western scholars section to the Vaishnavism article

I think I agree with you, but could you be more specific. Thanks. Take care. Ism schism (talk) 17:56, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello Govinda Ramanuja. To my knowledge, both Tamal Krishna Goswami and Hridayanada Goswami are notable academics. Satsvarupa wrote the ISKCON biography of their leader, this seems to be his distinguishing feature, though I am not sure it is enough to justify his name on the list. I think a few prominent leaders from each denomination should do, the question is which ones. These three could be justified as representing ISKCON, but more than three, I feel, would over represent this organization. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 20:20, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merger of Ekadasi and Ekadashi

Both articles discuss the same subject - the day known as Ekadashi. I propose that the articles be merged, as they discuss the same thing. What do you think? --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 20:34, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thelema/Crowley on Krishna

Thanks for notifying me about the discussion. See my comments on the WP:HINDU Vaishnavism talk page. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:22, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

The Thelma page is the correct destination for this information. I believe this to be a central agruement concerning including something so trivial into the Krishna article. It could start a "trivia" spree across other articles, as has happened with many biographies on wikipedia. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

See Talk:Krishna#Content and references for the Others section - Abecedare wants to keep the Thelema section and has proposed that instead of removing it, we add references to determine the weight it must carry in the article. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vaishnava religious leaders

Hello Govinda Ramanuja dasa. I have been looking through various articles of Vaishnava religious leaders. I have noticed an over representation of biographies of living Vaishnava gurus who are unsourced. One example is the article discussed on the Vaishnavism talk page on Stephen Knapp, another is Swami B. G. Narasingha. There are also various other swami and guru articles of living persons who have never done anything notable, except trace their guru back to "so and so" or simply to be a Western convert to Gaudiya Vaishnavism or ISKCON or others. Like book advertisements that have been through the Afd process, many of these articles appear to be advertisements as well. Any thoughts? Also, for this Vaishnavism discussion group, I have also posted concerns related to this at, Religious leaders and reliable sources. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 16:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe that the articles suggested at Religious leaders and reliable sources need to be nominated for the process Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Any thoughts? Please note any articles that you have come across such as advertisements for books or articles based on personal guru websites. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 19:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Thanks I hope everything goes well for you too. I would also like to award you with this barnstar for signing! User:Wwesocks/Guestbook/barnstar Good luck, wwesocks^sign 05:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Articles

For non-notable Vaishnava and ISKCON religous leaders, please see articles at, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 05:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Non-Hindu views of Krishna

Govinda Ramanuja dasa, please see Non-Hindu views of Krishna for the solution I am proposing. Please let me know what you think. I do not think the Thelma issue is anything but trivial concerning Krishna. Any thoughts? Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 06:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I have added my comments to Talk:Krishna#Non-Hindu views of Krishna on the Thelema debate. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thelema/Krishna

Glad to see that we are finally beginning to reach a peaceful compromise on the subject, as opposed to the potential edit wars and blocks I had feared. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 05:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Just to update, if you haven't seen the Krishna article, the Thelema section has been shortened a lot (the rest is now mentioned in a footnote) and now other beliefs have been added. The article no longer puts so much weight on Crowley's views. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 04:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

Yeah? That's cool. If you want to help with Wiki project FreeMasonry, try adding discussion to the pages or completing "to-do" tasks. Thanks! --InvisibleDiplomat₆⁶₆ 17:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vaisnava-Sahajiya and Vaishnavism

Please note the discussion on Vaisnava-Sahajiya and Vaishnavism, per Sri Ramananda Raya article. The discussion is located at, Vaisnava-Sahajiya and Vaishnavism. Any thoughts you have would be appreciated. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 21:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Venkateshwara WP:NPOV

I think the "Supreme God" reference should probably be changed to avoid confusion, but perhaps (in the interest of WP:NPOV) a note should be added somewhere for the sects of Vaishnavism that do believe Venkateshwara is the Supreme God, preferably with a sourced link. While He is a form of Vishnu, nearly all Vaishnava sects believe that Vishnu is the source of all of His forms, and so to avoid confusion the note should be made. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:34, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The 1.0 team

Hi Zeuspitar, it's very easy to join: Simply sign up here. Can you tell me which aspect you are most interested in - article selection, improving core topics, or what? Thanks a lot, Walkerma (talk) 20:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Our new Core Topics Collaboration is Boat. Would you be able to help expand the article or clean it up! This important article really needs a lot of work. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 02:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unfounded accusations and personal assault; from an ISKCON fanatic

• Note: This person is an ISKCON/Gaudiya fanatic, who has fallen for the beliefs of the Gaudiya/ISKCON cult. He says that I have "an incorrect ideas" and I can not back up any thing I am saying, but, every thing that I have said, is absolutely backed by Shruti or the original scriptures, acharyas or founding teachers like the REAL acharya for Vaishnavism...Ramanujacharya, Sri Sampradayam and other hindu scholars and other aspects of the Hindu religion. Please beware of this ISKCON Cults propaganda and intentions. Sincerely Govinda Ramanuja dasa

"Hi, Govinda Ramanuja dasa, I appreciate your comments as being completely unfair. You seems to have an incorrect ideas and you are exchanging personal attacks with other users on the personal basis. You are incorrect and I did not write this[1] comment that you deleted and you should not have offended me making unfair assumptions, please see WP:FAITH. I suggest you should read WP:BP to have a better picture on what constitutes persistently making personal attacks; I wish you well and I hope this mistake will not influence our working relationships as editors. I actually do not have content dispute with you and will always try to find NPOV on all issues, of course you must provide verifiable references - in the future, I will not accept unverifiable references from you, because I suspect that you are unable to maintain NPOV on some issues." --Wikidās ॐ 07:36, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

When I refer you to WP:BP. You seems to ignore the basic rules and most of your posts result in personal attacks. This is exactly the kind of incorrect ideas I had in mind. I also think that it might be a good idea to remind you personally of one of our more important behavioral guidelines - conflict of interest, which, basically, satates that if you cannot, for some reason, address the content of an article in a neutral, non-judgemental way, or does so to advance his own position, you should refrain from editing such articles, as doing so could ultimately lead that editor to engaging in disruptive editing, which can be grounds for an account being blocked. I have listed the two reasons for you to have a look on WP:BP, before you continue in the same tone. Thank you. --Wikidās ॐ 09:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Venkateshwara edits

While I like some of the changes made to the article, I do not think that I agree with all of them. (See here for a comparison of the article from before Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA made changes to what is there currently.) Parts of it still don't comply with WP:MOS, and more importantly, large portions of the article have been removed. I think we should keep some of the changes, but restore parts of the original article. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 15:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Venkateshwara

As I said on the talk page, I really like most of the edits you had made - my main complaint was that a little of the information had been removed, and the lead wasn't perfectly written (although that wasn't exactly your fault). In any case most of the problems with those edits are currently fixed - now the focus should be on adding and editing the article to bring it to B-class. [I will say that, being somewhat of a perfectionist, I tend to be a little to picky.] --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 01:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Wikidas and you

Hi Zeuspitar, I would love to help you out but unofortunately too busy to spend too much time on Wikipedia. I will however, give you a list of experienced and fair editors and writers on Hinduism articles.

• User:Abecedare
• User:GourangaUK (I think he follows ISKCON but is unbiased)
• User:Rudrasharman
• User:Dbachmann
• User:Deeptrivia
• User:Priyanath
• User:Redtigerxyz

In addition to these editors, you can post on the WT:INB and WT:HNB, the Indian and Hindusim notice-boards respectively. Thanks Gizza^{Discuss ©} 22:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC) I agree with above note and had put a notice about it on here. Wikidās ॐ 10:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sri Vaishnavism

I have removed much of the problematic content (mostly POV and grammar) and as of now the article mainly needs expansion, and MANY sources cited - the article cites almost none. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 00:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I have started work on a Nathamuni article and will try to help with the Sri Vaishnava article as well. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 18:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Svayam Bhagavan

You are welcome to help at the article, but be Neutral, not biased for or against any organization.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

More certainly more them welcomed. Wikidās ॐ 16:19, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course you can help! We need more editors helping with this article. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 18:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

There is currently discussion of WP:OR, WP:NPOV, and WP:RS on the article - see the article's talk page. Any objective and unbiased comments and contributions are welcome. The article needs much improvement. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 19:42, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I would love to help. Unfortunately, I will be busy for the next week (because of school exams) and cannot do much right now but will help as soon and as much as I can. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 03:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome!

[edit] Welcome!

[edit] Sri Sampradaya

I have created the new article. I know that you are a follower of the sect, so if you would like to contribute to the article with your knowledge of the sect, here it is: Sri Sampradaya. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Zeuspitar

Zeuspitar, based on the above comments, you think that repeatedly raising allegations and calling other people by at least demeaning and potentially abusive language, such as using the word "non-sense" , is acceptable. Please read the policy on no personal attacks, of which I believe all of your comments in the last 24 hours are clearly and explicitly a violation. I note that you are yet to provide a single substantiation of your contention about how inclusion of verifiable information could be a cause for a your comments that are clearly breaching the code of WP:Civility. Regarding your allegations regarding my own, admittedly partial conduct, being improper, I would have no objections whatsoever to being subject to mediation or arbitration. In fact, you must know, I have already requested it once. Verification of this can be found on the User talk:John Carter page, who is an administrator and an editor on the WP:VAISHNAVA project. You should stop canvassing and bulling other users by your sectarian comments and canvassing, of which your userpage is an example (diff). Please revert with a confirmation that you will stop all such behavior from this point on. Wikidās-ॐ 13:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Avoid Cult

I would request you to avoid using the word Cult in any way for ISKON or any form of Hinduism like you did on the Krishna Talk Page today. I suggest you use the form or belief or even sect instead. ATG ^Contact 15:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I noticed this uncomfortable edit myself today (along with a few other points mentioned here). I would therefore humbly request that you refrain from POV terms such as cult in the future, especially if they can be construed as examples of attacks on civility. Simon Ives ^{(talk | contribs)} 11:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] TfD: Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs

I have nominated Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs for deletion as suggested. Please comment and support/oppose the nomination there. Thanks --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 01:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vote

You were recently contributing to articles that are in the scope of the new project WP:KRISHNA, I thought you may want to check the proposal of merger and cast your vote in relation of the additional section to article Krishna. Thanks. --Wikidās-ॐ 14:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Scope, update and voting Whats new at Krishna's project Wikipedia:WikiProject Krishnaism - whats new and happening! Discussion on the scope of the project: Krishna-worship. First DYK of he project Radha Ramana 22nd May 2008 Pages under construction Radha Krishna, Bala Krishna, Krishnaism. Consensus is now reached on the proposal of merger of the new article Krishna Vasudeva into a separate section of Krishna here: Please note the results of the vote on the proposal of merging new article on early worship of Krishna Vasudeva to the main article dedicated to the Hindu deity Krishna. Krishna Vasudeva may have been worshiped in 4 century BC as a monotheistic deity. This article is to be incorporated in a separate section of Krishna article. Also, if you are ready to help with editing and assessment of the scope, please see the project page, and add your name to the list of participants. More on the topic. How will it be defined. While the name of the project is WikiProject Krishnaism in common language many seems to prefer a wider term "Vaishnavism", which however appeared to relate to Vishnu. Krishnaism is more of an academic term. On the other hand even one of the first Indologists to use the term, Albrecht Weber was to consider that that the essence of Krishnaism, bhakti or the principle of "God is love", was pre-Christian. There were and are many traditions where Krishna is worshiped and His names revered. There was a discussion (and a heated one) on the scope of the project and the term here. Currently the scope is quite wide and aims at improving articles related to Radha-Krishna and associated traditions where they are worshiped: Manipuri Vaishnavas, Bhagavata, Gaudiya Vaishnava, Nimbarka sampradaya, Swaminarayana sampradaya, Vallabha sampradaya; If you see a need to widen or restrict the scope please voice your opinion - it is wanted! Just leave a few words here.