Hello, Nmisra!Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you foryour contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check outGetting Help below, ask me onmy talk page, or place{{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember tosign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in theedit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing!XLinkBot (talk)08:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] Getting started A tutorial •Our five pillars •Getting mentored How to:edit a page •upload and use images Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Getting help Frequently asked questions •Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view •No original research Verifiability •Reliable sources •Citing sources What Wikipedia is not •Biographies of living persons Manual of Style •Three-revert rule •Sock puppetry Copyrights •Policy for non-free content •Image use policy External links •Spam •Vandalism Deletion policy •Conflict of interest •Notability The community Build consensus •Resolve disputes Assume good faith •Civility •Etiquette No personal attacks •No legal threats Community portal •Village pump Signpost •IRC channels •Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing •Develop an article The perfect article •Manual of style Stubs •Categories •Disambiguation Pages needing attention •Peer review Miscellaneous User name •User pages •Talk pages Clean up:General •Spam •Vandalism Join a WikiProject •Translation Useful templates •Tools •User scripts

Hi, you're doing great work… just a note: it would be great if you (and is actually very important to) mentionsources for whatever you add to Wikipedia. For example, you added toRaghuvamsha that it contains 21 metres. When you add it, please mention the name of the book (or whatever other source) where you found this information. You can just add it any way you like. If you need any help, please feel free to ask. Otherwise, your wonderful contributions, like possibly the entireSribhargavaraghaviyam article may end up being deleted by misguided editors insisting onverifiability. Regards,Shreevatsa (talk)07:53, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added the reference - difficult to find ISBN numbers for many Indian books, especially dealing with Sanskrit. Question: How to talk effectively and post the signature with time? Regards, (talk)

I agree... many Indian books don't have ISBN numbers and ISBN was only started in the 1960s, anyway. It's ok not to have ISBN numbers. Just author and title is the bare minimum (sufficient), though year and publisher are useful, and ISBN numbers etc. are nice to have if easily available. To post signature with time, type four tildes ~~~~. When you save, they will be converted into name and date. Regards,Shreevatsa (talk)10:50, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Message for you on the talk. --Redtigerxyz^Talk16:42, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ashtavakra: Thanks for making it consistent. About IAST, there is no concurrent policy. However,Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Dharmic) exists, which is no more part of official policy. --Redtigerxyz^Talk11:32, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

InSribhargavaraghaviyam, the verses are important as you are discussing poetic nuances.Ganesha is aWP:Featured Article (FA) ("Featured articles are considered to be the best articles in Wikipedia, as determined by Wikipedia's editors", check the link to find more about how articles become FAs), can be identified by a golden star on top right.Hanuman et al are not FAs and may not beWP:Peer Reviewed. In articles about epic characters, deities; it is the meaning of the verse that matters, not the exact words. There is no ban of using IAST. The words like Sanskrit[1], Prakrit[2], avatar[3] areEnglish words, no more just Sanskrit words that need IAST. For non-experts (someone who has never heard of IAST), Rāma isRama with fancy marks, but how many non-experts are going to know Saṃskṛta is Sanskrit, Śiva isShiva (standardized English spelling for the deity), Lakṣmaṇa is Lakshmana? --Redtigerxyz^Talk12:03, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Message for you onTalk:Sribhargavaraghaviyam.--Redtigerxyz^Talk12:04, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bhaṭṭikāvya uses IAST, but not for words like Sanskrit, Prakrit. SeeTalk:Sribhargavaraghaviyam. If you want to add the verse, it is best to put the translation in the article and the original Devanagari in a footnote with the reference. --Redtigerxyz^Talk12:30, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My opening comments atTalk:Jagadguru Rāmabhadrācārya. Please seeAhalya as well. --Redtigerxyz^Talk12:27, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on Ahalya.--Redtigerxyz^Talk17:57, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on Ahalya. --Redtigerxyz^Talk05:45, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Message for you onTalk:Ahalya. --Redtigerxyz^Talk17:17, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on Ahalya.--Redtigerxyz^Talk17:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The articleGitaramayanam has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Looks more like an advert than an article. Notability is questionable.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may bedeleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the{{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in youredit summary or onthe article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. Thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.Sitush (talk)13:59, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It's my pleasure to inform you that Ahalya is now aWP:Good article. I would think to make it aWP:Featured article. Do you think any facets of Ahalya are missing from the article? Do have any literature that shows these facets? Thanks. --Redtigerxyz^Talk17:58, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good work, appreciate your efforts. I will take a look sometime on the weekend. Thanks.Nmisra (talk)02:51, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Redtigerxyz^Talk17:19, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstart :) --Redtigerxyz^Talk05:35, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For the sheer volume of work that went intoJagadguru Ramabhadracharya. Keep it going! (I did promise a Kannada translation ;) , will get that done shortly!)Lynch704:13, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Khamgatam. You have new messages atTalk:Jagadguru_Rambhadracharya#Requested_move.
Message added 17:22, 28 August 2011 (UTC). You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Alternate suggestion as "Swami Rambhadracharya"Redtigerxyz^Talk17:22, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On your response in Swami Vivekananda article, I think you can start a discussion aboutRamakrishna article to move it to Ramakrishna Paramhansha. Ping me in my talk page if necessary. Thanks! --Tito Dutta(Send me a message)08:52, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	All your edits made toJagadguru Rambhadracharya and related article shows a brilliant piece of perfection. Just a tribute for that. :)♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛TalkEmail17:17, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	Hinduism
	For makingJagadguru Rambhadracharya a GA, creating many articles on his works and uploading relevant images for the articles, you are awarded the Hinduism BarnstarRedtigerxyzTalk11:10, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have undone your revision ofTeaPartyFreedom76's edits toRaj Rajaratnam. Although the information he supplied radically changed the article, he did cite his sources, and I feel that this means a revision should at least be discussed on the talk page before being hastily undid.Please consider this in the future. Thank you.— Precedingunsigned comment added byRubleTuesday (talk •contribs)01:48, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On28 October 2011,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleRambhadracharya bibliography, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was... that theworks of Jagadguru Rambhadracharya include more than 90 titles, including published books and unpublished manuscripts? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,quick check) and add it toDYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page.

—HJ Mitchell |Penny for your thoughts?12:03, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, red links are not a bad thing, they motivate users to start pages. Linking to a foreign language wiki won't help readers who don't speak the specific language. RegardsHekerui (talk)20:50, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to move the article to FA status and have initiated a peer review. Your critic would be appreciated atWikipedia:Peer review/Ahalya/archive1 or onTalk:Ahalya. --Redtigerxyz^Talk11:52, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I would really love to but I am afraid this will have to wait - would be quite busy at work and with family for the next couple of months which means I would not be spending much time on Wikipedia. Will do it in 2012 if it is still not an FA. Apologies.Nmisra (talk)15:04, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can you please add the ISBN of Ahalyoddhāra in Ahalya? --Redtigerxyz^Talk17:01, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is none, like books from many Indian publishers. :)Nmisra (talk)23:40, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently editedRajiv Gandhi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageMcKenzie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:38, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for attending to what looked like some overlink in this article. Actually, I wonder if you knew thatWikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking#What generally should not be linked has recently changed to allow the first occurrence of something after the lede to be linked? I'm not going to revert you, though, as I slightly agree with your way. Regards, --Stfg (talk)10:20, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nmisra. I know that you disagree with me on the emphasis that should be placed on different aspects and opinions in this article, but I believe you will agree that factual information from credible sources that say "he said that" should not be deleted. Whether you or I agree with what he said, he said it. May I ask that if you see material like this being deleted from the article, you help by restoring it? I am getting weary of undoing edits that attempt to deny reality. It would be a relief to have another editor help maintain a balanced representation of the divergent views about this subject. Thanks,Aymatth2 (talk)01:24, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can help with undoing edits like removal of sourced content. Requesting to protect the page may also help.Nmisra (talk)05:32, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. The page has been protected at various times in the past, but compared to topics like global warming, creationism or Balkan politics this one only suffers from minor vandalism. It just needs watching and sourced material restored when deleted. Thanks again,Aymatth2 (talk)14:00, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IsChristian Today which describes itself as "trans-denominational Christian newspaper" (part of christiantoday.com more info [reference]),The Milli Gazette which describes itself as "Indian Muslims' Leading English Newspaper" (more info [here]), credible sources forEkal Vidyalaya topic?

Just trying to understand how.इति इतिUAनॆति नॆति Humour Thisthat201114:38, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I have to comment... A source can be acceptable even if it is not sympathetic to the subject of an article. Unfriendly sources may help to give a balanced view. To take an extreme example, many of the sources for the article onNazi Germany are hostile to the subject. If all these sources were removed the article would be less than complete. What matters is that the source may be assumed to be reliable. WhenChristian Today reports a statement byJohn Dayal there is good reason to suppose that he made that statement. WhenMilli Gazette publishes an article on the suspension of government funds, we can assume that they have checked their facts and the government did indeed suspend funding.Aymatth2 (talk)16:26, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would say an editorial from Christian Today (CT) or Milli Gazette (MG)may be biased, but in this particular article the two sources are cited primarily for quotes and facts. CT is cited at three places for (1) some authors criticizing Ekal (2) prominent people on board of directors (3) quote from Dayal - which are all true - one can disagree on whether the weight given to CT's article is undue as perWP:UNDUE, but I do not see any issue in citing CT per se at the three places. MG is cited for the stopping of government funds, for which we have another source (The Hindu), so the citation may be removed since a news source like The Hindu is sufficient and citing MG is not required. I have to add that to make the article better, we need to expand other sections apart from controversy - there is much more to Ekal Vidyalayas than controversy - coverage in mainstream English media is low so less popular news sources like CT, MG or India Currents, India Journal are cited. However, coverage of EVF in Hindi and regional languages of India is much more intensive and also focussed on actual activites and events rather than the controversy aspect. Irrespective of the side of the argument we are on, we should try to make the article better by expanding other sections - maybe add some photographs, et cetera.Nmisra (talk)17:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another question is are the two sources considered reliable? If you want to add some content, add from neutral sources.इति इतिUAनॆति नॆति Humour Thisthat201110:49, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did not add the sources. But as pointed above, I think Milli Gazette can be removed. CT may be removed but unless you find another source for the same quote, you would face opposition from some other editors who will insists that it stays. BTW some more sources in the article (NRI Today, etc) may also be considered to be unreliable. See my edits on this article and others as well before concluding that I added the sources. You are I are more likely on the same side of the debate. Vande Mataram.Nmisra (talk)00:13, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is just one side here, the Wikipedia side. If the sources are unreliable, then the sources should be removed that is the policy.

According to me, sources Christian Today is an unreliable source. Milli Gazette is also an unreliable source. I would remove contents from these sources. Controversial views better be cemented with reliable sources which I think is standard Wikipedia policy.ईती ईतीUAनेती नेती Humour Thisthat201113:07, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Be my guest, you will meet opposition though. Not from me.Nmisra (talk)14:35, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how to gauge the reliability of sources in general (unless it's obvious that it's user-generated), which is why I usually ask at theReliable Sources Noticeboard.Nightscream (talk)17:36, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I have put forth the query at above location. The link is [here].

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion atWikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Ekal Vidyalaya". Thank you. --Aymatth2 (talk)01:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Any idea where the discussion on reliable sources is going [here]?

Per me it is going in circles, the circles being François Gautier or John Dayal or VHP, etc. ie anything but topic of discussion viz sources!

It is weird that no one wants to just replace the sources with neutral sources for the same content. Perhaps I will do it myself if this discussion becomes pointless.इति इतिUAनेति नेति Humour Thisthat201120:15, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussions on Wikipedia are a colossal waste of time, I have indulged in some and realized that I would rather keep on improving articles of my own accord than try to convince others.Nmisra (talk)00:16, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It appears the same - the discussion on reliable sources is the most weird of all. Different authors give different meaning to it. Though the discussion above has given me some more clarity.इति इतिUAनेति नेति Humour Thisthat201108:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment onWikipedia talk:Hinduism-related topics notice board#WikiProject Rambhadracharya. Thanks. :)♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛^TalkEmail09:37, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Could you mention a few things about uploading images onto Wikipedia.

Thanks.इति इतिUAनेति नेति Humour Thisthat201109:53, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	Ahalya says Thanks
	Thanks for helping the article improve to FA standards in its early stages of development by your constructive comments on the talk ! --RedtigerxyzTalk18:21, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently editedTulsi Peeth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageGhaziabad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:51, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When you told me that you are not going to edit Wikipedia any more, it got really sad, but great to see that you are back with a new identity. :)♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛TalkEmail12:59, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On12 May 2012,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleTulsi Peeth, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was... thatRambhadracharya believes thatTulsi Peeth stands at the place whereRama gave his sandals toBharata, as described in theRamayana? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Tulsi Peeth.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,quick check) and it will be added toDYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk·contribs)08:04, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed onFile:JagadguruRamabhadracharya001.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visitthe page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent withWikipedia's policies and guidelines.Sfan00 IMG (talk)13:07, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As the primary contributor, why don't you nominate it toWP:GA? After GA, hopefully FA :) --Redtigerxyz^Talk13:56, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[4]

[5]

Can you explain what you mean in your edit summary?Curb Chain (talk)01:17, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploadingFile:Ashtavakra and Janaka.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under aclaim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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 for use on Wikipedia (seeour policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in anyarticles will be deleted after seven days, as described in thecriteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.Stefan2 (talk)17:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the currentArbitration Committee election. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipediaarbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome toreview the candidates' statements and submit your choices onthe voting page. For the Election committee,MediaWiki message delivery (talk)14:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]