Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
Just a note, I think you are being a little heavy handed in your dealings with ]. Jumping straight down his/her throat for making a few edits is going overboard. Please assume good faith in your dealings and if they is a dispute please try and discuss it on the talk pages instead of engaging in edit wars and plastering large scale warnings on the users talk page. Calm down, step back and treat these issues like the adults you are. ] ] 14:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Just a note, I think you are being a little heavy handed in your dealings with ]. Jumping straight down his/her throat for making a few edits is going overboard. Please assume good faith in your dealings and if they is a dispute please try and discuss it on the talk pages instead of engaging in edit wars and plastering large scale warnings on the users talk page. Calm down, step back and treat these issues like the adults you are. ] ] 14:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
==VANDALISMWARNING==
==Vandalism Warning==
]
]
You continually seem to edit removals from ] page, this has gone on too long. Links to relevant subjects are not yours to decide to remove. Your last removal of links ] and ] is ridiculous as these are subjects ] addresses as you well know. Your claim that since he is not himself either one of those is outrightly false and irrelevant at same time since he is involved in those issues or identifies with them. --] 14:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
You continually seem to edit removals from ] page, this has gone on too long. Links to relevant subjects are not yours to decide to remove. Your last removal of links ] and ] is ridiculous as these are subjects ] addresses as you well know. Your claim that since he is not himself either one of those is outrightly false and irrelevant at same time since he is involved in those issues or identifies with them. --] 14:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Line 298:
Line 298:
These warnings are there to show you've been warned. Thank you--] 14:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
These warnings are there to show you've been warned. Thank you--] 14:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
] This is your '''last warning'''. <br>The next time you ] this page, you ''will'' be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. <!-- Template:Test4 (Fourth level warning) -->
] This is your '''last warning'''. <br>The next time you ] a page, you will be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. <!-- Template:Test4 (Fourth level warning) -->--] 16:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
== Vandalism Warning. ==
] This is your '''last warning'''. <br>The next time you violate Misplaced Pages's ] rule by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to ], you ''will'' be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages.<!-- Template:Comment4-n -->
Please see the difference. You cannot change the disputed text without discussing it on Talk pages.
This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 20 days are automatically archived to Talk:Hkelkar/Archive 2. Sections without timestamps are not archived.
I read your anti-Buddhist comments on the article. It is better you concentrate on Hindu Religion, Caste System and Untouchability. That is your religion. Buddhism is a religion based on Equality, Liberty and Fraternity. It is difficult for ShudraVarnaHindu people like you to understand Buddhism and its great heritage. You people are caste ridden and you have forgotten your own Varna-Ashram Dharma. Understanding all religions with their good and bad sides is a good key for religious peace and harmony. Don't be anti-Buddhist Or anti-Christens because these people convert others. Better understand good and bad things of your religion before you blame others. Because of Hindu Casteism and Hindu Untouchability many oppressed people are converting to Buddhims and Christenity. Dhammafriend17:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Which Varna Do you belong?
All so called Hindus must ask a simple question to their own heart 'Which Varnas they belong?' Especially as per Hindu philosophy every Hindu is a Shudra by birth and only by Karma he can change his Varna. So those who are not priests in Temples are not Brahmins by Varnas, Those who are not in Military are not Kshatriya those who are not businessman are not Vaishya so majority belongs to Shudra Varna. So Mr. Kelkar Shudra like you should understand your own religion first. Especillay this is Kali Yuga so all non-priests are Shudra! What is wrong? Its a VarnaShram Dharma preached by Veda and Dharmaśāstra like Manusmriti etc. So in next birth you will certainly become Brahmin. So don't just be anti-Buddhist Or anti-Muslim understand your own religion first. Even Geeta mentions Varna castiesm by Karma etc. Please read the book Shudras who were they? Riddles In Hinduism written by Dr. Ambedkar for more information. Be a positive contributor don't try to hide the truths. All so called Hindus are Shudra then its not a wrong thing. They can certainly become Brahmin by doing good Karma. That is Karma Yog by Geeta. Dhammafriend17:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Bodhisattva Dr. Ambedkar has single handedly and non-voilently led a Buddhist revival movement in Indis with 22 vows and his strong philosophical weapons. In world Buddhist Conference in 1954 the Buddhist world awarded him the second highest title in Buddhism i.e. Bodhisattva. He faught against Hindu Caste System and Hindu Unotuchability forever his life. So his views on Hinduism are more relevant to understand the present India Buddhist Movement. Dhammafriend12:34, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Wasn't Nehru a Kashmiri Pandit? That makes him Hindu by default. I did not see any coherent arguments to suggest his athiesm (just one section in the talk page that said "search google"; I did and found no credible evidence to suggest a declaration of athiesm).I did not see any argunemts in the talk page archive either.Care to point me in the direction of any talk page argument or debate to that effect?Hkelkar02:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
(1) Please note, in general, that henceforth the religion people were born into, especially for twentieth century figures, cannot be taken as being the religion for WP purposes unless we can cite their self-identification. (2) IF you had read the article itself, much less the talk page, you would have seen two fairly anti-religion quotes in the quotes section. If the first page of google results were not enough for you - surprising enough - try google books for explicit references. THe point is, you did neither, merely removed a long-standing element in the page without checking. (3) I fail to see how pointing this out and noting that it is something that will lead to assumptions by others about your willingness to take the time to check your edits is a violation of any WP policy. Please stop throwing all this around. Hornplease06:38, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately I have had to remove the speedy tags as it does not qualify as an attack page (nor for any CSD criteria). Your only recourse is to file an WP:AfD - sorry for the inconvenience - Glen13:40, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Please abstain from mentioning Hinduism as ethnicity as the literate world recognises Hinduism as religion and not as ethnicity..and wherever you mention that write also why and on whose authority do you write Hinduism as an ethnicity.TerryJ-Ho00:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Right now i have my midsem papers. Anyways, i dont have much knowledge about the subject but i will try to help you out once my papers are over.nids(♂)16:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Concerning the question you asked on my talk page, I will try to add as much as I can. However, I am not greatly literate on that particular topic so I will first have to do some research.
Also, I am not so sure that I have read anything on any one of Guru Gobind Singh's family members being skinned alive, although I have read about his four sons' and father's martyrdoms.
When you say it renders poorly what do you mean? If it's too long then... yes, that's a problem because there's not enough text to go with it and you can always {{clear}} it. For me it renders perfectly in both Firefox and IE. If you mean that it extends past its section then that is just what happens sometimes with larger data sets. It may not be preferable but I think it is better than having data as a raster image that you have to click to enlarge. If you really wanted you can make it into a show / hide box (like on Template:Cold War) but that seems unecessary. grenグレン09:51, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Imagine the mess if we all discounted others comments. It'd be, well, it'd be Misplaced Pages :) Have a nice day. -- Longhair12:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
mistake with template
I had posted that welcome template to several IP's talk pages, and I feel bad for what it said. I've corrected most of them, but I'm sure other used it in that time too. Oh well, life goes on. Desertsky8545101:29, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes it was a mistake. I meant to give it to a particular user but mistakenly put in in the welcome template. I will apologize in the taalk page.Hkelkar04:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I came off as abrasive when I first appeared on the talk page. But, if you really want constructive dialogue, why do use section headers like "Indian Buddhist (so-called) Movement"?—Nat Krause17:42, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Indian Nationalism
Thank you for your informative edit summary. I am not reverting your removal at the moment. I would like you to answer however, why Rana Pratap and Shivaji are treated as identical in their opposition to 'invaders'. While the Mighal empire might arguably be foreign for the Confedracy in that it was from the North, Pratap was fighting an army including large numbers of his fellow Rajputs under the banner of a fairly liberal ruler. Unless you want to remove the reference to Akbar right below? Hornplease02:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt response. You are entitled to your opinion about what you call (grin) the 'Second Islamic Empire'. However, the fact that Akbar was supported by a large proportion of Rajputs who were only too happy to fight Rana Pratap suggests that in that case, at least, saying "what he viewed" is appropriate. Please be prepared to compromise now and then! Putting in qualifiers wherever they are appropriate encourages readers to think about whether or not they are justified, which may be helpful in making the points that it is possible you wish to make. Thanks.Hornplease02:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
You say that only 'Rajput mercenaries' served with Akbar. Please see the Mahrana Pratap article: "Even Pratap's own brothers, Shakti Singh and Sagar Singh, were serving Akbar. Indeed, many Rajput chiefs, such as Raja Man Singh of Amber (later known as Jaipur) were serving as army commanders in Akbar's armies and members of his council. Akbar sent a total of six diplomatic missions to Pratap, seeking to negotiate the same sort of peaceful alliance that he had concluded with the other rajput chiefs. Pratap roundly rebuffed every such attempt. Pratap particularly insulted Akbar's special envoy, Raja Man Singh of Amber (Jaipur)." I think that the qualification is desirable here. Hornplease02:58, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
None of this is relevant. The fact that his brothers served under Akbar does not make Akbar "domestic". Many Muslims of the upper biradaris perceived themselves as ethnically Arab (still do). So even their perception of themselves is foreign.Hkelkar03:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
You've also replaced the Elst citation. With a note saying "per consensus". What consensus? I have no doubt Freedom Skies, Nobleeagle, you and Baka agree. (I must admit I havent seen you disagree, so pardon me if I'm a little un-amazed.) But, as AfD has pointed out, on WP consensus is more than numbers, its also what emerges through discussion. The discussion isnt over. Please remove the citation while it continues.Hornplease07:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
sub category
Should we create a sub category anti-hindu people in Category:Racism. There are plenty of candidates for that.nids(♂) 03:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
that.nids(♂)03:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Well many argue that Jews are not an ethnicity wither but anti-semitic people exist under racism. Also, the argument is not whether Hindus are a race but the category is for people who hold racist attitudes against Hindus, which people do.Hkelkar03:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Not sure I agree, but go ahead. Only I think that then people like Dalit campaigners and what not should not be part of any cat, as it is a little doubtful to categorise them as racists, however extreme they might be about Hinduism.Hornplease06:45, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
They say the same thing about Ahmadinejad too. The fact remains that if people make hate-speech against Hindus like Kancha Ilaiah then they will be catted.Hkelkar07:06, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid we will have to disagree there. Merely "hate speech against Hindus" is not racist. The Hinduism=Judaism analogy only gets you so far; Hinduism is not explicitly an ethnic religion as is Zoroastrianism and Judaism; and I would have thought that its a little difficult to be racist if you're claiming to be the same race. I'm sure that other people will be willing to take you on there, and I dont know enough about it to make pronouncements.Hornplease07:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Wow, that was rude, and, I think, quite unprovoked. What bit was arguing? Lets recap: I was suggesting to Kelkar that if he wants to avoid a bit of a hassle later, ask around first, as if I didnt think it was an appropriate cat, there would be others, more bold than I, who might agree. If you wished to avoid confrontation, I suggested that consensus first would be a good thing, and suggested that KAncha Ilaiah might be an excessively controversial cat. When Kelkar said he intended to cat him, I merely said that I disagreed with the basis that he had stated - "Hate speech against Hindus" - and indicated that I thought racism would be difficult to prove for everyone satisfying that condition. About Ilaiah, I know that his page has seen a lot of back-and-forth, and I have never been on it, so I dont know whether he views himself as a different race from the upper castes. So I said I couldnt make pronouncements. Now, any particular reason why that somewhat complex interaction was summed up so rudely and inaccurately by you? Hornplease08:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
What i could make out from your earlier post is that you think that a jew cannot be placed in a anti-semite category, no matter what he does. Am i right in my analysis.nids(♂)08:17, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Given that I spent that entire post explaining I wasnt arguing, it's likely I was talking about your one-line post, wasnt I?
And about your 'analysis': I see no reason why a Jewish person might not be called anti-semitic. However, all forms of anti-semitism are not, I think, considered racist. See, for example New Anti-semitism. So you see, there are subtleties. I merely indicated that I was unaware of Ilaiah's particular stand on race, so I could not speak about it. But "Anti-Hindu hate speech" alone does not a racist make. You also have to have beliefs about who is Hindu. Racism has a very particular definition.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hornplease (talk • contribs) .
So i guess you have a problem if this is a subcategory to Racism. But you wont protest if it is a separate category.nids(♂)08:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I definitely have a problem with it being a subcat. As a separate category, I'm not really familiar with the term, but if it's used, then I dont think there's anything wrong with the cat. As long as the people in the category are cited as being anti-Hindu with the same level of precision as people in the -anti-Semite cat, I dont see why not.Hornplease08:36, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I thought I should duly warn you against removal of sources from Votebank as you did here and tagging bogus templates as you often do on many articles and presently has made article Lalu Prasad Yadav your no1 target. You can contribute on wikipedia in many ways.Since it appears you don't have anything substantial to contribute on any article,I advise (but it depends on you) to take rest till your head and heart is relieved of malice.Otherwise you know you may be forced to cool down. Ikon |no-blast12:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Allegations of Vandalism
With regard to your edit summary for diff "I've had enough. The next time a well-sourced statement gets removed I'm going to report it as vandalism.", please substantiate your claim, which to my mind appears to violate a million different WP policies as well as common sense. I note you have not responded to my several concerns about the two quotes under consideration that I raised some time ago on the talk page. If you have an explanation, I would be fascinated to hear it. Hornplease04:57, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Tipu Sultan
Hey, I stumbled upon your problem and did some quick research. In addition to the dodgy claims, the fact is that the claims are not made up by random pro-Tipu people. It's worse (in some eyes anyway), they are plagiarised by those random pro-Tipu people. See this Hindustan Times Article. Nobleeagle (Talk)07:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Just an FYI. Although Tipu is often creditted with early use of rockets for military purposes, some of the references that I have seen assert that Tipu's father Haider Ali actually deserves credit. (lthough it may be possible that Haider used the rockets while alive, but Tippu was the real motivating force -- I don't have the answer to that.) I can look up sources if you want. Regards. --BostonMA11:23, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I have temporarily blocked Dhammafriend for disruptive incivility. Make sure you do not respond in kind. I told him when he returns to comment on content, not other people; that is good advice for all of us. Tom Harrison12:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
1. No one can refer a user with Islamic Thinkers Society which is linked with terrorism activities.
2. cant tell a user efforts as "rubbish" with the hard work he has done to the article, infact which amounts to personal attack!
3. "Plus, there are entire countries in the muslim world that massacre non-muslims and spread hate against them (Pakistan against Hindus, Saudi Arabia against Christians, Iran against Jews etc.)" this also amounts to personal attacks on a relegion which is indirectly said to a user.
Pls explain why each of the obove "comment on content and not on contributor" does not amount to personal attack on a user.
Every one with whom you regularly edit knows actually WHO YOU ARE.So it is rather an easy guess that you have learnt a lot from your past experiences. Ikon |no-blast12:18, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
I know its Persian. In Hindi, however, due to the Persian influence, it is used as such. I meant Hindi/Sanskrit as Hindi and its more sanskritic base, as opposed to Urdu and its more iranic base (in terms of vocab, not linguistic roots which are both the same). Sorry for the wrong impression. Afghan Historian13:28, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Please follow the guidelines of Misplaced Pages
I have been telling you that we are two different persons. One liing in germany and other in USA.
All I am asking is before you publish anything related to buddhism on Hinduism pages please come forward with scholarly documents. Who on the earth in 21st century would believe that Buddha was an Avatara of Vishnu. Is there any valid documentation? Why Buddhism should be part of History of Hinduism? Those are completely diffrent religions. One believes in "Purusha Theory" Other does not.
I hope, that has made you happy and I am happy that I could bring that happiness to you.
Mr. HKelkar, Misplaced Pages uses, TimeStamp, IP addresses and blogging information to locate/indentify person. If you could have seen my timestamps and IP addresses, you could have saved the Administrators time.
Offcource we are one but only by mind. Physically there are hundreds and hundreds are still waiting. May the Truth prevail. Long live Indian Buddhist Movement.--Bodhidhamma17:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
I am sending you this link before he sends it to you. :-) I know you are buddies.
Please read his talk page and answer if you could.
The way you answer it , will decide whether you are an honest/credible person or just an hypocrite. (If this word is not according to wikipedia standards, my apologies.)
about your talk
Sorry if I got angry. It's just very difficult for me to tolerate obnoxious prosetylizing and virulent racism that comes from missionaries of any religion, and wikipedia is no place for such things anyways.Hkelkar20:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
My answer: People get angry when they do not have answers to their problem. As simple as it is. Get away for a while. Try to put urself in that person's shoe, and think what could be hurting him and why. You will find an answer and will help you calm. This solution doesnt work for hypocrites though. Respect and love, this what buddhism is based upon.
Why do you think it is vandalism?
Please answer the questions insted of pointing technical errors.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bodhidhamma (talk • contribs) .
I am here to provide positive information
Mr. HKelkar,
I am here to provide positive information/view. I have already apologised to the administrator for my technical errors. I am learning it.
I expect others to provide references/documentation before you claim anything. If there are supporting authorative documents who am I to challange that? But I do not want cooked stories to be published just like a street gossip. Wikipidia has to be an authorative source for any kind of information on any subject. And hence we should work together to bring the truth (what we collectvely believe and agree upon) in front of the word.
Please look up the puranas and make sure those are valid documents.(From an accnowledged library and other scholars have varified and used it as a reference) Once I get them I will send them to Buddhist Monks associations in various countries to varify the claim. As I am not an authority in Puranas/Vedas. I just read things about other religions from www.sacredscripts.com.
Make sure until that period the NPOV status is maintained. If you could not find valid documents I will assume that we agree to delete the section.
I havent provided any reasoning? They are all questions my friend? And these are very logical questions. You dont need special documentation for that. I hope you know basic geometry. If first triangle is similar to second triangle and second triangle is similar to third triangle then first trianle has to be similar to third on. Simple logic.
If Buddha = Vishnu's avatar
And Adi Shankaracharya = Follower of Vishnu
Then Adi Shakara should be Follower/believer of Buddha.
Hey. Regardless of what you think of FOSA, the sentence I edited out had to do with what FOSA thought about the edits. Surely FOSA themselves are a reliable source of their own beliefs! --Xiaopo
Sure I can. The section has to do with examples of the proposed changes to the textbook, not what the HEF thinks about FOSA's reaction to the proposed edits. In fact, I'd go so far as to say the article doesn't need to cover every claim and counterclaim made by all the different sides in this mess. --Xiaopo
Look, could you stop reverting the article there? You misread the citations; read the talk page. If you want to discuss specific portions of the edits, then we can do that. On the talk page. --Xiaopo
Check out WP:RS—there's nothing about tax-exempt organizations or organizations with ties to terrorists being more reliable. Both the HEF and FOSA are lobby groups, and thus only reliable sources insofar as they're primary sources. That means the HEF isn't a reliable source as to what FOSA thinks (and vice versa). And neither of them can be cited as an unbiased third-party, the way the Christian Science Monitor can be (for example). --Xiaopo
I did, RS states that non-partisan sources can be quoted qithout qualification and partisan sources must be handled with caution. HAF is recognized as a non-partisan org by US government and FOSA is not.Hkelkar03:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Uh, I don't think you understand what "tax-exempt" means. It just means the organization is a nonprofit—the National Rifle Association and MoveOn.org are tax-exempt as well. The IRS doesn't certify anyone as non-partisan—"non-partisan" means they're not a party to the conflict, which the HEF obviously is. See the paragraph under "Company and organization websites." --Xiaopo
Hey, thanks for working with me here. I really don't want this to get contentious, and I understand that you distrust several of the organizations and people involved in this. I'm a Hindu myself, so I want to make it clear I'm not approaching this from any sort of virulent anti-Hindu perspective. --Xiaopo
plz dont rv warnings and don't make personl attacks in edit summary.Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. This was regarding attacking edit summary. Ikon |no-blast11:53, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. .This was regarding . Ikon |no-blast10:53, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
User:Kathanar
Just a note, I think you are being a little heavy handed in your dealings with User:Kathanar. Jumping straight down his/her throat for making a few edits is going overboard. Please assume good faith in your dealings and if they is a dispute please try and discuss it on the talk pages instead of engaging in edit wars and plastering large scale warnings on the users talk page. Calm down, step back and treat these issues like the adults you are. Ben W Belltalk14:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism Warning
You continually seem to edit removals from Kancha Ilaiah page, this has gone on too long. Links to relevant subjects are not yours to decide to remove. Your last removal of links Shudra and Dalit is ridiculous as these are subjects Kancha Ilaiah addresses as you well know. Your claim that since he is not himself either one of those is outrightly false and irrelevant at same time since he is involved in those issues or identifies with them. --Kathanar14:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
- Stop removing the warnings from your page you have done this numerous times and will be reported for it.
These warnings are there to show you've been warned. Thank you--Kathanar14:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you violate Misplaced Pages's NPOV rule by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to History_of_Hinduism , you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages.
