Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — Moondyne 11:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 09:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Please do not use abusive language as you did on Talk:Siddha Yoga, (see here). Take a look at Wikipedia:Etiquette for guidelines about how to behave on this site. Lumos3 14:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Glad you found the Village Pump. If you have any concerns or ideas about the individual policies themselves, such as WP:ATT, WP:NOR or the like, you can comment on the talk pages for those policies. Glad you're interested in participating in policy and general wiki discussions. Be well! Vassyana 13:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikpedia is not a democracy, nor is it an anarchy. We have lots of policies but we are not a bureaucracy. While these policies may seem contradictory and overwhelming at first glance, the eight listed in the right hand side box of the list are the glue that makes the whole thing work. Before getting too involved in discussions, I strongly suggest having a read of those. And then, when you contribute to a discussion you can better appreciate other peoples points of view. — Moondyne 14:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{ GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{ cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{ PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.
If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.
If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. – riana_ dzasta 12:18, 17 March 2007 (UTC)... have also been speedily deleted, for the above reason. – riana_ dzasta 12:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in replying. Yes, I'm Perth based. — Moondyne 04:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
From article's talk page:
To the person who inserted the section that included the mantras: if the article makes a claim that the mantras are unique, it would be appropriate for you to add a sentence disputing the claim and then cite the book you noted. Your insertion of a long paragraph with a separate header in the midst of the research section wasn't appropriate. TimidGuy 12:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
What's your status at Wiki; are you an official or another contributor like me? Neilrobertpaton 07:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia copyright policy is harder than that (see also Wikipedia:No original research and WP:CITE). Steve Richards has copyright on the text of his book. His original source has copyright on the list. Find them, cite them, and you will satisfy Wikipedia policy. And I was not the one who deleted your additions, as you can check from the article history (although, formatted as they were, they did not fit in the article). An observation: there are some very feverent supporters of TM editing the article. Unless you follow Wikipedia policy to the letter, they will remove whatever you add. Michaelbusch 17:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that the pictures you put on the SY article have a copyright notice in their caption. Did you mean to write that? Wikipedia doesn't accept copyrighted material, for the appropriate guidelines please read WP:COPYVIO. Thanks. TheRingess ( talk) 13:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I have reported several TM associated editors on the Maharishi article for apparent COI editing at the COI noticeboard, and I see the same problems exist at the TM article, where I will likely have to do the same thing. I found out it is like beating your head against the wall to get any objective information in, with a predetermined result, however civilly presented, it all amounts to the same thing. -- Dseer 01:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Neil, unfortunately I have no academic interest in the topic. I edited the article to remove the images you put in it, as they were speedily deleted for being uploaded under a restricted license (see the note I placed on your page a few sections above, in the green box). Sorry about that. – Riana talk 14:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
I've replied to your question on my talkpage. Cheers, – Riana ऋ 12:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
See WP:NOT#DIR. IPSOS ( talk) 12:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
It would also make Wiki a better place for everyone if various "editors" stopped deleting other people's contributions (not mentioning any particular names).
You mean like not weeding the garden makes it stronger or not taking out the garbage makes the house smell better? Good to know your views, whoever you are. -- Calton | Talk 14:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
The reason I am deleting your messages is because you are putting them on my user page rather than my talk page. Please use my talk page in the future. IPSOS ( talk) 23:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
You appear to be an Indian living in Australia. You are not alone!. There are many prolific editors with a similar background including me, User:Riana, User:Nobleeagle, User:Venu62 and User:Yama. It is nice too see Indian Australians thriving at Wikipedia. Gizza Chat © 09:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, but I'm not an Indian. I certainly follow Indian philosophy, however, namely Siddha Yoga in terms of my personal path in life. Am currently leaning towards using some Kali mantras to speed things up, since it's all been taking too long (like 30-40 years).
Sardaka 10:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Please do not edit talk pages to delete the comments made by other editors, as you did here: [3]. The purpose of talk pages is to permit editors to exchange views about what needs to be done with articles. If you do not agree with an opinion given there, please state your own views without expunging those you do not care for. Removal of comments from talk pages may be construed as bad faith or vandalism. Buddhipriya 10:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm responding here about your comments on my talk page. As you can see I deleted them, not because I don't want anyone to see them (as you know, Wikipedia is database driven and everything tends to remain in the database), but because in general I don't respond to conversations of that nature without the involvement of a neutral 3rd party. My reason being that a neutral 3rd party helps me to remain objective about such material.
Here is a link to that diff, so that any interested party can read what was written [4].
I prefer to discuss specific edits I have made on article talk pages.
For instance, I found the Gurudev Siddha Peeth article on Sunday because I periodically check what links to Siddha Yoga and it's related articles.
I made a series of edits to the article and summarized those edits in the edit summary.
I added the {{reflist}} template in reference sections. This template creates a dynamic list that guarantees that any time a new reference is added it is automatically sorted appropriately. It also has the added advantage of linking the references in the body to the entries in the list.
I also added the {{cite book}} template to the book citations. This template helps ensure that citations remain standardized across articles and is commonly used.
I deleted email info for the ashram for several reasons. I thought that it was only of interest to SY students. It's available on the website.
I also added a stub classification and added the article to the India Project.
Basically, I wish to ensure that all articles related to SY conform to Wikipedia's standards.
Please don't take my edits personally, I provided the above summary to help establish that they aren't.
Thanks for the info about AFD's, I will certainly keep that info in mind for the future.
I am more than willing to discuss specific edits on article talk pages but will not discuss generalities and vague allegations without reviewing them with a neutral 3rd party. I feel that I cannot remain objective without the help of a 3rd party. That's just me. You might wish to read WP:DR if you wish to involve a 3rd party in order to discuss your concerns that aren't related to specific edits.
Om shanti, shanti, shanti.
TheRingess ( talk) 18:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
It seems that when TheRingess doesn't like someone or when she takes an interest in someone, she puts them and their topics on her watch list and deletes their additions or topics. I agree that she destroys many people's good works by deleting all links in a topic except one to the often lame, outdated, and not-often usefull DMOZ link. I would suggest Sardaka, that you change your name before adding any material to Wikipedia so TheRingess can't find and delete your works. That's what I've had to do.
Ganesham
17:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know:) Have a nice week and God bless:)-- James, La gloria è a dio 10:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your conflict that is under discussion at: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#I.27m_Being_Stalked, please consider using the standard mediation and conflict resolution methods that have previously been explained to you. Continuing to raise the issue of your conflict in multiple places when you have declined to make use of offered mediation could be construed as disruptive behavior on your part. I encourage you to communicate directly with User:TheRingess so that you may come to agreement on use of a mediation process that will resolve the conflict between the two of you, rather than escalate it as you are currently doing. Buddhipriya 18:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your concerns about being stalked, I would suggest you carefully read WP:HARASS, which explains harassment "does not include checking up on an editor to fix errors". So far you haven't provided any proof of disruptive conduct by any other editors. Also, I would suggest you have a look at WP:OWN, because I have concerns that you are being too possessive about the article content you have contributed. The nature of this project involves allowing other users to edit your work, sometimes drastically. Finally, could I suggest that you ensure your comments are civil. Thanks, Addhoc 13:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
"The term "wiki-stalking" has been coined to describe following a contributor around the wiki, editing the same articles as the target, with the intent of causing annoyance or distress to another contributor. This does not include checking up on an editor to fix errors or violations of Wikipedia policy, nor does it mean reading a user's contribution log; those logs are public for good reason. The important part is the disruption - disruption is considered harmful."
Sardaka, I urge you to consider both AddHoc's and Buddhipriya's statements and read the links that they both provided. Those will help you to gain greater understanding of Wiki's policies. Given that you sought out AddHoc's advice I am confident that you will accept it. Personally, I am frustrated by the fact that you will not discuss specific edits with me. One of the guiding principles of Wikipedia, that is expressed in many places, is to discuss material rather than personalities. For instance, you left message on my talk page, after asking me several questions to which I gave brief specific answers (see here). Both messages seem to indicate that you either ignored my answers, or believed that I was not honest and forthright with you. I do not understand why you would ignore my answers, and continue to ask the same questions in further posts. Your comments also seemed uncivil to me. And you have been asked by at least one other editor to remain civil (see here. I also posted a reply here on this talk page, and you ignored it and seemed unwilling to discuss specific edits. I too agree that you might be engaging in ownership. I am writing this message because, to outside observers, your behavior and your messages might eventually be interpreted as disruptive. I also strongly suggest that you respond to comments made on the incident thread that you created, to not do so, dishonors the good will efforts of fellow editors to address your concerns. I cannot understand why you haven't responded there. I feel that you have a sincere desire to contribute to this project, and believe yourself to be acting in good faith, so don't let this go on too much longer without addressing mine and other fellow editors's concerns. Believe me, if another editor, familiar with our core principles, tells me that I am acting in bad faith, or that I inadvertently violated Wikipedia's core policies, I will be more than willing to make amends. TheRingess ( talk) 19:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — Moondyne 11:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 09:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Please do not use abusive language as you did on Talk:Siddha Yoga, (see here). Take a look at Wikipedia:Etiquette for guidelines about how to behave on this site. Lumos3 14:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Glad you found the Village Pump. If you have any concerns or ideas about the individual policies themselves, such as WP:ATT, WP:NOR or the like, you can comment on the talk pages for those policies. Glad you're interested in participating in policy and general wiki discussions. Be well! Vassyana 13:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikpedia is not a democracy, nor is it an anarchy. We have lots of policies but we are not a bureaucracy. While these policies may seem contradictory and overwhelming at first glance, the eight listed in the right hand side box of the list are the glue that makes the whole thing work. Before getting too involved in discussions, I strongly suggest having a read of those. And then, when you contribute to a discussion you can better appreciate other peoples points of view. — Moondyne 14:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{ GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{ cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{ PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.
If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.
If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. – riana_ dzasta 12:18, 17 March 2007 (UTC)... have also been speedily deleted, for the above reason. – riana_ dzasta 12:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in replying. Yes, I'm Perth based. — Moondyne 04:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
From article's talk page:
To the person who inserted the section that included the mantras: if the article makes a claim that the mantras are unique, it would be appropriate for you to add a sentence disputing the claim and then cite the book you noted. Your insertion of a long paragraph with a separate header in the midst of the research section wasn't appropriate. TimidGuy 12:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
What's your status at Wiki; are you an official or another contributor like me? Neilrobertpaton 07:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia copyright policy is harder than that (see also Wikipedia:No original research and WP:CITE). Steve Richards has copyright on the text of his book. His original source has copyright on the list. Find them, cite them, and you will satisfy Wikipedia policy. And I was not the one who deleted your additions, as you can check from the article history (although, formatted as they were, they did not fit in the article). An observation: there are some very feverent supporters of TM editing the article. Unless you follow Wikipedia policy to the letter, they will remove whatever you add. Michaelbusch 17:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that the pictures you put on the SY article have a copyright notice in their caption. Did you mean to write that? Wikipedia doesn't accept copyrighted material, for the appropriate guidelines please read WP:COPYVIO. Thanks. TheRingess ( talk) 13:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I have reported several TM associated editors on the Maharishi article for apparent COI editing at the COI noticeboard, and I see the same problems exist at the TM article, where I will likely have to do the same thing. I found out it is like beating your head against the wall to get any objective information in, with a predetermined result, however civilly presented, it all amounts to the same thing. -- Dseer 01:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Neil, unfortunately I have no academic interest in the topic. I edited the article to remove the images you put in it, as they were speedily deleted for being uploaded under a restricted license (see the note I placed on your page a few sections above, in the green box). Sorry about that. – Riana talk 14:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
I've replied to your question on my talkpage. Cheers, – Riana ऋ 12:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
See WP:NOT#DIR. IPSOS ( talk) 12:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
It would also make Wiki a better place for everyone if various "editors" stopped deleting other people's contributions (not mentioning any particular names).
You mean like not weeding the garden makes it stronger or not taking out the garbage makes the house smell better? Good to know your views, whoever you are. -- Calton | Talk 14:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
The reason I am deleting your messages is because you are putting them on my user page rather than my talk page. Please use my talk page in the future. IPSOS ( talk) 23:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
You appear to be an Indian living in Australia. You are not alone!. There are many prolific editors with a similar background including me, User:Riana, User:Nobleeagle, User:Venu62 and User:Yama. It is nice too see Indian Australians thriving at Wikipedia. Gizza Chat © 09:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, but I'm not an Indian. I certainly follow Indian philosophy, however, namely Siddha Yoga in terms of my personal path in life. Am currently leaning towards using some Kali mantras to speed things up, since it's all been taking too long (like 30-40 years).
Sardaka 10:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Please do not edit talk pages to delete the comments made by other editors, as you did here: [3]. The purpose of talk pages is to permit editors to exchange views about what needs to be done with articles. If you do not agree with an opinion given there, please state your own views without expunging those you do not care for. Removal of comments from talk pages may be construed as bad faith or vandalism. Buddhipriya 10:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm responding here about your comments on my talk page. As you can see I deleted them, not because I don't want anyone to see them (as you know, Wikipedia is database driven and everything tends to remain in the database), but because in general I don't respond to conversations of that nature without the involvement of a neutral 3rd party. My reason being that a neutral 3rd party helps me to remain objective about such material.
Here is a link to that diff, so that any interested party can read what was written [4].
I prefer to discuss specific edits I have made on article talk pages.
For instance, I found the Gurudev Siddha Peeth article on Sunday because I periodically check what links to Siddha Yoga and it's related articles.
I made a series of edits to the article and summarized those edits in the edit summary.
I added the {{reflist}} template in reference sections. This template creates a dynamic list that guarantees that any time a new reference is added it is automatically sorted appropriately. It also has the added advantage of linking the references in the body to the entries in the list.
I also added the {{cite book}} template to the book citations. This template helps ensure that citations remain standardized across articles and is commonly used.
I deleted email info for the ashram for several reasons. I thought that it was only of interest to SY students. It's available on the website.
I also added a stub classification and added the article to the India Project.
Basically, I wish to ensure that all articles related to SY conform to Wikipedia's standards.
Please don't take my edits personally, I provided the above summary to help establish that they aren't.
Thanks for the info about AFD's, I will certainly keep that info in mind for the future.
I am more than willing to discuss specific edits on article talk pages but will not discuss generalities and vague allegations without reviewing them with a neutral 3rd party. I feel that I cannot remain objective without the help of a 3rd party. That's just me. You might wish to read WP:DR if you wish to involve a 3rd party in order to discuss your concerns that aren't related to specific edits.
Om shanti, shanti, shanti.
TheRingess ( talk) 18:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
It seems that when TheRingess doesn't like someone or when she takes an interest in someone, she puts them and their topics on her watch list and deletes their additions or topics. I agree that she destroys many people's good works by deleting all links in a topic except one to the often lame, outdated, and not-often usefull DMOZ link. I would suggest Sardaka, that you change your name before adding any material to Wikipedia so TheRingess can't find and delete your works. That's what I've had to do.
Ganesham
17:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know:) Have a nice week and God bless:)-- James, La gloria è a dio 10:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your conflict that is under discussion at: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#I.27m_Being_Stalked, please consider using the standard mediation and conflict resolution methods that have previously been explained to you. Continuing to raise the issue of your conflict in multiple places when you have declined to make use of offered mediation could be construed as disruptive behavior on your part. I encourage you to communicate directly with User:TheRingess so that you may come to agreement on use of a mediation process that will resolve the conflict between the two of you, rather than escalate it as you are currently doing. Buddhipriya 18:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your concerns about being stalked, I would suggest you carefully read WP:HARASS, which explains harassment "does not include checking up on an editor to fix errors". So far you haven't provided any proof of disruptive conduct by any other editors. Also, I would suggest you have a look at WP:OWN, because I have concerns that you are being too possessive about the article content you have contributed. The nature of this project involves allowing other users to edit your work, sometimes drastically. Finally, could I suggest that you ensure your comments are civil. Thanks, Addhoc 13:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
"The term "wiki-stalking" has been coined to describe following a contributor around the wiki, editing the same articles as the target, with the intent of causing annoyance or distress to another contributor. This does not include checking up on an editor to fix errors or violations of Wikipedia policy, nor does it mean reading a user's contribution log; those logs are public for good reason. The important part is the disruption - disruption is considered harmful."
Sardaka, I urge you to consider both AddHoc's and Buddhipriya's statements and read the links that they both provided. Those will help you to gain greater understanding of Wiki's policies. Given that you sought out AddHoc's advice I am confident that you will accept it. Personally, I am frustrated by the fact that you will not discuss specific edits with me. One of the guiding principles of Wikipedia, that is expressed in many places, is to discuss material rather than personalities. For instance, you left message on my talk page, after asking me several questions to which I gave brief specific answers (see here). Both messages seem to indicate that you either ignored my answers, or believed that I was not honest and forthright with you. I do not understand why you would ignore my answers, and continue to ask the same questions in further posts. Your comments also seemed uncivil to me. And you have been asked by at least one other editor to remain civil (see here. I also posted a reply here on this talk page, and you ignored it and seemed unwilling to discuss specific edits. I too agree that you might be engaging in ownership. I am writing this message because, to outside observers, your behavior and your messages might eventually be interpreted as disruptive. I also strongly suggest that you respond to comments made on the incident thread that you created, to not do so, dishonors the good will efforts of fellow editors to address your concerns. I cannot understand why you haven't responded there. I feel that you have a sincere desire to contribute to this project, and believe yourself to be acting in good faith, so don't let this go on too much longer without addressing mine and other fellow editors's concerns. Believe me, if another editor, familiar with our core principles, tells me that I am acting in bad faith, or that I inadvertently violated Wikipedia's core policies, I will be more than willing to make amends. TheRingess ( talk) 19:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)