Misplaced Pages

User talk:Dangerous-Boy

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SouthernNights (talk | contribs) at 02:27, 23 October 2005 (can i get your vote?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 02:27, 23 October 2005 by SouthernNights (talk | contribs) (can i get your vote?)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Hi! welcome to Misplaced Pages!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Misplaced Pages. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Misplaced Pages. Drop a note at Misplaced Pages:New user log.

-- Utcursch | Talk to me

Arunachal Pradesh

Please keep your anti-Christian rants off Misplaced Pages. If you have any grouses against Christianity, you are free to vent it on numerous blogs and forums on the internet. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia and not the place for POV comments. Kindly refrain from making biased remarks in the future or else I shall have to report you. Nichalp 19:01, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

  • I'm with Nichalp on this Brookie 19:59, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I'm a roving Wikipedian.Brookie 20:04, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Nichalp- such remarks should not be made, wikipedia is an encyclopedic website for articles and information for everyone, it not a place for religious and offensive arguments and comments. --Electricmoose 13:42, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

"traditions"

hi -- how are you going to draw a line between Category:Hinduism and Category:Hindu traditions? The rituals are tradition. The texts are tradition. The teachings are tradition, hell, what is not tradition? It will be inherently pov to classify stuff as either "true hinduism" vs. "merely tradition". I suggest we scrap the category. If you created "Hindu sacrifices" or "Hindu rituals" it may be possible to classify stuff more objectively. regards, dab (ᛏ) 09:06, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

"Hindu rituals" would be better, I suppose. Still, is a given mantra a ritual, or a text? (could be added to several categories of course). As for merging, I think you have to do it manually, i.e. put a note on the Category page that it is deprecated, and change the Category for all members. Once the Category is empty, it can go on WP:CFD. Category:Hindu Worship is another Category that should go, imho, already because of capitalisation, and also because of inseparability from other categories. best regards, dab (ᛏ) 06:28, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
well, which categories exactly are we talking about at the moment? which do we want to create, and which should be emptied? Editing categories is no different from editing articles, say, click on Category:Hindu rituals and start editing (mainly, specify a super-category. the categorized articles will appear automatically). dab (ᛏ) 18:23, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Nataraja

Hello Dangerous Boy; I am the one responsible for putting "Category: Hinduism" back into the Nataraja entry, and if you just reversed that I think I was hasty and must apologize. I did it because I could not your reasons. You know, Hinduism refers to the religion. Hindu refers both to the people and the religion. Yes, Nataraja belongs to the "Category: Hindu Tradition", I agree. Since Nataraja is a religious entry, I could not understand why "Category: Hinduism" should be removed. What are your ideas on it? --Subramanian 22:49, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC) Hello. I read your answer, thank you for it. I just checked and I saw that Nataraja is now under the Category "Concepts in Hinduism" - Nataraja is not a concept, but a Deity! Karma is a concept, dharma, chakras are concepts, but Nataraja is an Entity hindus believe - not an idea. I suggest we remove that and, as an appropriate settlement, we put Nataraja under the "Category: Hindu Tradition" and the "Category: Hinduism", so that readers can choose where to click. Would that be ok? Thanks. --Subramanian 04:45, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thnak you. It's good that we could come to an agreement :-) --Subramanian 20:35, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Server problems

please see Meta:Image_server_overload_2005-03. -- User:Docu

Heo Hwang-ok

Hi Dangerous-Boy - I have re-reverted the revert you made of my edit to Heo Hwang-ok. Please note the comment at the top of Category:Historical stubs: NB: For biographies of historical characters, use {{bio-stub}} or one of its subcategories, instead of {{hist-stub}}. Please do not add hist-stub to this biography again! Grutness| 10:13, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hindu temples?

Hi, I notice the Category:Hindu temples in Cambodia category which you've created. Most of the temples you added to the category are, to the extent that they are active temples, Buddhist (and have been for most of their history). To call them "Hindu temples" is therefore at best misleading. How about Category:Former Hindu temples in Cambodia? Any better ideas? Mark 09:00, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

How about Hindu-Buddhist temples? Meursault2004 10:38, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not sure...

Hi, and thanks for your interest in the enigmatic Heo Hwang-ok. I'm really not sure what comments you're talking about, although I vaguely recall having made some, somewhere. If you can give me a little context, I might be able to find them or remember them. ... The comments might have had something to do with my skepticism regarding her Indianness. I've never been able to figure out where the Ayuta=Ayodhya theory came from, although it has certainly become popular.

Anyway, happy editing, and let me know if there's anything I can help you with. Cheers! -- Visviva 13:37, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Kakawin Bharatayuddha

Yes I'll expand this article. But perhaps not today :) BTW the correct title would be Bharatayuddha (or more correctly Bhāratayuddha. How come do you spell it with an 'j' instead of 'y' do you happen to come from the Netherlands or Germany? Meursault2004 08:25, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Asian-Indian

People with original ancestry from India who live in America should call themselves Asian-Indians. I am not an Asian-Indian, but I was in a Hindu club (They are all Asian-Indians) for 5 seasons e.g. summer, fall. I was also in the American Indian club for 6 seasons. Both these groups like to call themselves Indian only and never use Asian Indian or American Indian to refer to themselves. These terms are a concession to the other group. They create order and unambiguity. I hope you see things my way. Dark Tichondrias

Metal Gear Solid Original Soundtrack

Presently, I only edit Final Fantasy & related articles, but I got to say I am a big fan of Metal Gear. Following your request, I'll try to clean up the article as soon as I finish Black Mages II: The Skies Above album. --DarkEvil 22:07, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Labelling Edits as Vandalism

I noticed that you revised the article Morrigan Aensland due to vandalism. I have no problems with the revision, but please do not label edits as vandalism when they obviously are not. The edit you reverted was not vandalism, but another user's interpretation on how the article should look. --Js2756 13:28, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Publisher = Label

I had never thought about that. I think publisher is what you write in label, but I'm not certain. The description of the record label section says, in resume, that the record label is a brand created by a company that can be associated with the artist. When I try to look on the web, publisher and label differ sometimes, but not always. It could be the name or logo you see on the cover even if it's not the publisher, but it's not certain. You should try asking someone else who knows more on the subject. --DarkEvil 13:49, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Reamker

Actually, I was hoping that someone else that would expand the Reamker article. But I will see what I can contribute. Check it in a few days or so. --Dara 22:12, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Names unsorting

Was this message really for me? I have no knowledge of these pages and never edited theme.

Removing the information you mention looks as clear vandalism. You may inform WP:VIP about the problematic user and hopefully he will get blocked (current Misplaced Pages mechanism to deal with vandals are rather weak, unfortunately but one could always try). Pavel Vozenilek 18:44, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Dangerous Boy?

As in, from WOT and GF? Interesting. 151.205.12.40 14:09, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

WOT=War on Terrorism, GF=GameFAQs. 151.205.12.40 15:34, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
And your are?
Ashamed to hail from that neck of the woods is what I am. I used to find your posts amusing though, but most users from the era where you would have been around have disappeared. 151.205.12.40 15:50, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Soul Calibur

I thought you might like to know something about the names you've been sorting with the Soul Calibur characters. In Asia, the last names come before the first names. So Chai Xianghua's last name is actually Chai, not Xianghua. Heishiro Mitsurugi's last name is Heishiro, and his first name is Mitsurugi. Hwang Sung Kyung's last name is Hwang, and his first name is Sungkyung. Seung Mi Na's last name is Seung, and her first name is Mina. For more information, it's strongly recommended that you see the discussion page for Seung Mi Na. So I'm going to change the category page you've worked on just for the Asian names, now that you know this. --Shackleton (24 July 2005)

Bhakti

Thank you, for 'cleaning up' the article. I want to know why we have still to keep it as a 'stub'. Is it not properly expanded now? How do you remove the 'stub'? Thanks again.--Profvk 21:14, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

This is profvk. Thank you for telling me about the stub. Well, regarding the Wikiproject-Hinduism, I am certainly interested. Just please give me some idea of my obligations, if I sign up. I have been working on Wikepedia articles only for the past two or three weeks. --Profvk 01:52, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Deletions

I will place on VfD any page that I think ought to go there. Do not try to tell soemone else what to list for deletion on this site. DES 23:20, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

You wrote: Your deletion for Tekken characters was outline. perhaps we should deletes Soul calibur ones as well? --Dangerous-Boy

Yes I think you should. If you really think that my listing these on VfD (I did not delete them, merely sugested that they be considered for deletion) was improper, go to Misplaced Pages:Third opinion or WP:RFC and report it, and see what response you get. DES 23:25, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Subramanian ideas exchange

First, I´d like to thank you for your efforts on organizing Hinduism as a whole in Misplaced Pages. You deserve the compliment. Second, as I just told Raj, the book Dancing With Siva mentions 50 Hindus in Brazil, but I´m yet to find the other 49.  :-) I went to India, with monks of the Saiva Siddhanta Church, to spend some time among other Hindus. Subramanian 21:44, 28 July 2005 (UTC)


We really need an History of Hinduism article. As we rewrite the main Hinduism article, I suppose one of its sections will be History, and there we could mention main article: History of Hinduism.

You see, I´ve noticed that here in Misplaced Pages Hindus very much like Hinduism: full of details and colors and information and myriadic opinions. People just see the articles and add information without any structure or care, and Hindu articles end up messier than a street in India. That´s why I appreciate someone restructuring it as you are doing. I hope we can build all this and then keep it all clean and useful. I´m glad you like History of Buddhism, I also find the Buddhist articles a very good ideal to strive for.

I checked Early Hinduism and Modern Hinduism. I agree that they should be merged, certainly; but the text is very fragmented and lacks organization. I´m sure that if you merge them it will evolve in due time.

I also agree that Topics in Hinduism is waaay too big. As I can´t convince people to trim it properly, I have created the Hinduism_small template.

Shanti, Subramanian


We could turn the sidebar into a footer, yes, but would people want it? I like the sidebar because it can be put at the beginning of the article; the footer has the advantage of doing no harm by being biggger, as it rests et the end of the article. I would prefer a shorter footer, but I wouldn´t drop the fast, small sidebar. Subramanian 16:09, 29 July 2005 (UTC)


Here:

Hinduism

Subramanian 13:28, 30 July 2005 (UTC)


Dangerous-Boy, vanakkam, I suggest that we trim the many links of the Links and of the See Also sections of the Hinduism rewrite. There are way too many links; each must be followed to see if there is good text at the other end of the trail. Also only articles on Hinduism should stay, articles on each other subsubject should be moved to their proper articles (such as links on saivism being moved to Saivism. You are good at organizing things, could you do that? Thanks, Subramanian 19:10, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

I don´t have either the time or the authority to check all of them. I trust you and whoever you want to ask for other opinions. I just ask you to keep in mind that links not directly on Hinduism should be in their own articles, i.e., a link to a good Saivite site should be in the Saivism article, not in the Hinduism main one. It´s in your hands. Subramanian 02:02, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Sure..

Sure, I'd be glad to help with those articles and contrubute what I can, but currently I'm working on the Cambodia portal. Almost finish though, so as soon as I'm done with that.... --Dara 06:24, July 29, 2005 (UTC)

user page edit

to aid in my effort to delete a number of redundant redirect pages, I have changed one of the links on your talk page... i am relatively new hear and am not sure if this is bad wikiquette. Let me know if this was ok or not.

Trying to be bold, --jonasaurus 08:48, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

user page edit

to aid in my effort to delete a number of redundant redirect pages, I have changed one of the links on your talk page... i am relatively new hear and am not sure if this is bad wikiquette. Let me know if this was ok or not. Just Trying to be bold, --jonasaurus 08:48, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

A tip

If you make a new article, you have to explain what it's about, like "blah is a soundtrack album from the anime blah". That might help stop hotheaded new page patrollers from Vfding them. Kappa 23:53, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Asia Vandalism

I thought he was a vandal because of this comment he left on Asia: "asia was seemingly invented by the middle eastern part of europe in the early 1000bc by persian tribes migrating east to get away from roman armies, mixing there language with ancient neolithic languages and new age persian. also forming a text by scribling, that no one can read." That last comment about scribling is pure vandalism. As a result, I read his further edits from the POV of him being a vandal.--Alabamaboy 18:10, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

This guy seems to be regularly editing Asian, Asia, Asian American, Race (U.S. Census) and Indian American. Whether or not he's a vandal, he sure seems pretty over-zealous about it. It looks like he's here to 'enlighten' everybody with his copy of the 2000 Census... 213.210.13.209 00:55, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
I'll post something on his user talk page--I'd suggest others also do this. There needs to be consensus (see Misplaced Pages:Consensus) on a change like he's promoting. To get consensus, he needs to raise the issue on an article's talk page.--Alabamaboy 00:08, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Hinduism in Philippine mythology

Hi! If you could identify elements of Hinduism in Philippine mythology, please let me know. I'm not that well versed in Hinduism.Thanks.--Jondel 07:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)


Rajesh

Hello Dangerous-boy...

Why do you want the article Kalari to be cleaned? If you have any sujections please let me know on the subject.

sincerely

Kjrajesh|talk

Rajesh

Thank you for your advice

Hey

If you have any article requests on the Philippines pls add the request in this link --Noypi380 08:18, 28 September 2005 (UTC)


cleanup Hinduism

Is the Talk:Hinduism/temp#External_links portion part of another cleanup running parallel to the main article edits? I'm confused. You did the external links cleanup there but not in the main article... ?? --Pranathi 12:19, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Pra Lak Pra Lam

Dude, I have expanded Pra Lak Pra Lam. --LaotianBoy1991

History of Hinduism

I have made some changes in History of Hinduism. Perhaps you can develop it further. Thanks.

Smarta tradition

Smarta tradition is quite prevalent and defines the Western view of Hinduism. It is dominated by Advaita traditions.

As I said in monotheism, "In Hinduism, views are broad and range from monism, dualism, pantheism, panentheism, alternatively called monistic theism by some scholars, and strict monotheism, but are not polytheistic as outsiders perceive the religion to be. Hinduism has often been confused to be polytheistic as many of Hinduism's adherents, i.e., Smartas, who follow Advaita philsophy, are monists, and view multiple manifestations of the one God or source of being. Hindu monists see one unity, with the personal Gods, different aspects of only One Supreme Being, like a single beam of light separated into colours by a prism, and are valid to worship. Some of the Hindu aspects of God include Devi, Vishnu, Ganesh, and Siva. It is the Smarta view that dominates the view of Hinduism in the West. After all, Swami Vivekananda, a follower of Ramakrishna, along with many others, who brought Hindu beliefs to the West, were all Smarta in belief. Other denominations of Hinduism, as described later, don't hold this belief strictly and more closely adhere to a Western perception of what a monotheistic faith is. Additionally, like Judaeo-Christian religions which believe in angels, Hindus also believe in less powerful entities, such as devas.

Contemporary Hinduism is now divided into four major divisions, Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaktism, and Smartism. Just as Jews, Christians, and Muslims all believe in one God but differ in their conceptions of him, Hindus all believe in one God but differ in their conceptions. The two primary form of differences are between the two monotheistic religions of Vaishnavism which conceives God as Vishnu and Shaivism, which conceives God as Shiva. Other aspects of God are in fact aspects of Vishnu or Shiva; see Smartism for more information. Only a Smartist would have no problem worshiping Shiva or Vishnu together as he views the different aspects of God as leading to the same One God. It is the Smarta view that dominates the view of Hinduism in the West. By contrast, a Vaishnavite considers Vishnu as the one true God, worthy of worship and other forms as subordinate. See for example, an illustration of the Vaishnavite view of Vishnu as the one true God, at this link. Accordingly, many Vaishnavites, for example, believe that only Vishnu can grant the ultimate aim for mankind, moksha. See for example, this link. Similarly, many Shaivites also hold similar beliefs, as illustrated at at this link and at this link.

However, even Vaisnavites, like other Hindus, have tolerance for other beliefs because Lord Krishna, avatar of Vishnu, said so in the Gita. Few views illustrate this view of tolerance: Krishna said: "Whatever deity or form a devotee worships, I make his faith steady. However, their wishes are only granted by Me." (Gita: 7:21-22) Another quote in the Gita states: "O Arjuna, even those devotees who worship other lesser deities (e.g., Devas, for example) with faith, they also worship Me, but in an improper way because I am the Supreme Being. I alone am the enjoyer of all sacrificial services (Seva, Yajna) and Lord of the universe." (Gita: 9:23) Even a Vedic verse illustrates this theme of tolerance. The Vedas are revered in Hinduism, regardless of denomination. For example, a well-known Rig Vedic hymn stemming from Hinduism states that "Truth is One, though the sages know it variously." This is in contrast with some beliefs of other religious traditions, where one must believe in God being one aspect and to totally reject or disdain other beliefs"

As you see, Vaishnavites and Saivites hold an exclusive monotheistic model versus an inclusive montheistic model as Smarta traditions do.

This is what I mean:

"Monotheism can be divided into different types on the basis of its attitude towards polytheism: inclusive monotheism claims that all polytheistic deities are just different names for the single monotheistic God; Smartism, a denomination of Hinduism, follows this belief and holds that God is one but has different aspects and can be called by different names (this belief dominate the view of Hinduism in the West); exclusive monotheism, on the other hand, claims that these deities are false and distinct from the one God, either invented, demonic, or simply incorrect, as Vaishnavism, a denomination of Hinduism, regards the worship of anyone other than Vishnu. Exclusive monotheism is a well-known tenet in the beliefs of the Abrahamic religions."

Please look at any Vaishnavie and Saivite site and you will see what I mean.

An adherent web site is not necessarily an authorative site. A book like "Dancing with Siva," which also describes the various denominations of Hinduism is. Please see, http://www.himalayanacademy.com/resources/books/dws/dws_mandala-02.html

Raj2004 18:51, 22 October 2005 (UTC)


Dangerous Boy, I thought you had asked the question about number of smartas.

sorry for the confusion.

Raj2004 19:10, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Can I get your vote?

I have been nominated for an adminship and I was wondering if I could get your vote. If you feel inclined, please go to Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Alabamaboy and cast your "yes" or "not in a million years." Many thanks.--Alabamaboy 02:27, 23 October 2005 (UTC)