| Revision as of 02:26, 1 November 2014 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,291,161 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Bladesmulti/Archive 4) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:22, 1 November 2014 edit undoQuackGuru (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users79,978 edits →No explanation for your revert: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
| Thank you have a wonderful day | Thank you have a wonderful day | ||
| ] (]) 06:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC) | ] (]) 06:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC) | ||
| == No explanation for your revert == | |||
| The archived discussion does not explain the . You continue to refute to explain why you deleted the text. See ]. ] (]) 05:22, 1 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:22, 1 November 2014
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
.
.jpg)
* Tips - Any tips/advises on recent edits.
* Grammar - Any copy editing, grammar, formatting tips.
SP?
I know you have a fine nose for SPs: Is this a new editor? Almost every edit gets reverted. He might have changed his strategy to disruptive editing: manipulation of religious statistics, unexplained change of religious demographics, unsourced and surprising change of ..., unexplained. JimRenge (talk) 13:54, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Mobile web edit is something rare, reminded me of Septate. Just revert him, and send some warnings. Bladesmulti (talk) 13:57, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Mobile web edit is something rare", but quite common on articles previously edited by Septate (throw-away accounts). JimRenge (talk) 10:44, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Hinduism and Judaism
The Śvetāśvatara Upanishad (400 - 200 BCE) is the earliest textual exposition of a systematic philosophy of Shaivism. As explained by Gavin Flood, the text proposes:
... a theology which elevates Rudra to the status of supreme being, the Lord (Sanskrit: Īśa) who is transcendent yet also has cosmological functions, as does Śiva in later traditions.
Do let me know what you think. Illuminati6 (talk) 16:01, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Halloween cheer!
Hello Bladesmulti:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Misplaced Pages, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
– Jim Carter 16:05, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
Infobox
See Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Military history#Should military conflict infoboxes, etc be used for mythical or semi-mythical conflicts?. I don't think the fact that something was in the article when it was written is relevant - if something doesn't belong in the article it doesn't matter how long it was there. Dougweller (talk) 16:44, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Mirza Criticsm
Dear Brother/sister, namaste and pranaam :) All the six reference I quoted are books from Sunni and Shia scholars of Islam. If you do not agree with their views does not matter post contrary information, but books especially there books can not be called unreliable sources. Also aliislam.org is the offical Ahmadi website, references 2, 7, 24, 30, 35, 37, 40, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55,69, 74, 80 in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad are all from this website, it is also hence not unreliable to state the Ahmadi point of view. Thank you have a wonderful day Adjutor101 (talk) 06:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
No explanation for your revert
The archived discussion does not explain the deletion of this content. You continue to refute to explain why you deleted the text. See Talk:Ayurveda#Violation of ASSERT. QuackGuru (talk) 05:22, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
- For dating to 400-200 BCE see: Flood (1996), p. 86.
- For Śvetāśvatara Upanishad as a systematic philosophy of Shaivism see: Chakravarti 1994, p. 9 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFChakravarti1994 (help).
- Flood (1996), p. 153.