Just seen your Utkala Brahmin on the DYK - suggestions page. You have merely stated what you have done but you need to have an interesting 'hook' stating some interesting fact from the article you have put up. Please study the other hooks and you will understand. With regards. - P.K.Niyogi 12:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC) reply

The addition of 4 Yugas sums up to Maha Yuga. The article at Yuga probably needs to be merged to Maha Yuga, kindly check and comment opinions about the Yuga Merger .. BalanceΩrestored ^Talk 12:21, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

There are lot of articles those are linking to Pages linking to Yugas, they should have been linking back to Maha Yuga. BalanceΩrestored ^Talk 12:28, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Mahayuga does not need a separate article, it is adequately discussed in Hindu Time Cycles, which has been created bu merging two ther articles of similar themes : Hindu units of measurement and Mahayuga ; all other articles linking to Hindu units of measurement and to Yuga are now automatically linked to Hindu Time Cycles . It is a technical subject and do not distort it. - Vinay Jha 16:15, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Your article Hindu Time Cycles has been removed. Since you know these technical subjects better than me, it is better you work on them, so I do not distort the same. Also, you can let me know a good book to follow if you want me to correct those on your behalf. BalanceΩrestored ^Talk 17:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC) reply

I will keep all my rough work at my soapbox (temp page for rough work), once you think the text is right we can change the same. BalanceΩrestored ^Talk 17:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Hindu Time Cycles has been renamed, not removed. All the matter exists. - Vinay_Jha 17:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Yes, it does remain, but the old article on units is now predominantly Hindu Time Cycles. If you need it corrected let me know. It's fine, I know you are aware of the same. I am working on something else today. Do let me know, if you need any help. BalanceΩrestored ^Talk 05:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC) reply

I've read the talk page Hindu units of measurement, I understand there's some confusion. BalanceΩrestored ^Talk 05:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Yes,there is confusion. Hindu Time Cycles is a branch of Indian astronomy which is related to two fields : Jyotisha and History of astronomy. But some persons, who have no interest in nor any knowledge of Indian astronomy insist on putting Hindu Time Cycles under units of measurements (which was intended for time, weights, measures, etc, and advised me to leave editing this tpoic. It happens everywhere in Wiki. Wiki needs secondary sources, which is being interpreted as total disregard of primary knowledge. Those who have never touched the Vedas or Indian astronomical texts decide what should be there. It cannot be cured, and Wiki will always face such problems, and we will have to work with such editors, often tolerating insults from ignorant persons who pose as experts. - Vinay_Jha 10:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC) reply

You committed three sins:

• You created Hindu Time Cylces and failed to mark it for deletion
• You created Hindu Time Cycles with totally unnecessary capitalisation in the title
• worst, you copy&pasted Hindu units of measurement instead of moving it.

I suggest that you leave Hindu units of measurement as it is for the moment and discuss in its talk page any possible move or split of the article. -- RHaworth 17:33, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

See my answer on your talk page. - Vinay_Jha 17:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Vinay, Please don't make cut-and-paste moves or page moves without discussion. You have been warned about this earlier and I had explained the reasons to you in detail in that instance. Please reread WP:MOVE and if you have any difficulty in understanding it, feel free to ask questions at wikipedia's help desk. Abecedare 18:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Move failed

DaGizza appended a merge tag to a new article Hindu Time Cycles created by me, after which I tried move command, but it did not work, then I read the merge procedures and acted accordingly, using the redirect function. But history was affected for reasons not clear to me. See the talk in Hindu units of measurement. I want to work on history of Indian astronomy but everywhere I find editors who regard it a part of mythology or of weights and measurements. I left Surya Siddhanta, then I left Indian astronomy, now I am leaving Hindu Time Cycles. See Utkala Brahmin and give comments, if you please. Thanks. - Vinay_Jha 18:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Vinay, If the "move" failed for some reason, the correct way to proceed would be to ask for help (you could have approached User:DaGizza who had placed the merge tag and is an experienced editor and admin). Making a cut-and-paste move is not an acceptable alternative since, as I had explained earlier, it is disruptive and even more importantly does not comply with the GFDL's legal requirements. Also as I had pointed out earlier you should discuss a page move before implementing it unilaterally. Abecedare 18:28, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

DaGizza's user page says "DaGizza is taking a long Wikibreak". I should have waited. - Vinay_Jha 18:33, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Two questions:

• I think Maithil Brāhamana moved to Maithil Brahmin to be consistent with all other pages in Category:Brahmins and as per WP:NAME. Are you ok with such a move ?
• The Maithil initially talked about Maithil people while now after your edits it talks only about Maithil brahmins. Is that correct, i.e. are all Maithil people brahmins ?

Abecedare 19:12, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

• Maithil brahmins is a good name.
• Maithil brahmins constitute a distint branch of Panch-Gaud which includes all the native brahmins of North India (esp. from Indus to Kosi, later Bengal, Assam and Orissa too). But Maithili is a modern language, hence Maithil means all the people of Mithila who are native speakers of Maithili language. - Vinay_Jha 19:22, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

• I have moved the page Maithil Brāhamana to Maithil Brahmin.
• Thanks for correcting the lead of Maithil to differentiate it from Maithil Brahmin. It would be good to wikify the page and add some references.

Cheers. Abecedare 20:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Excellent article! We need more such amazing contributions relating to Indian history and culture. Have a great day. Antorjal 13:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Vinay, your recent work on differents groups of Brahmins has been excellent! I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. One thing I have noticed is that in each article, you keep on mentioning the Panch-Gauda and Panch-Dravida classifications of Brahmins, which is fine. But then you write about these in more detail. I think it is better to create a separate Panch-Gauda article, which you can link, so you don't have to explain it every single time.

Also, sorry about the confusion created from my Wikibreak notice. At the moment, I should be on a Wikibreak because I have fairly important exams coming soon. Furthermore, if you my edits lately, they are quite minor. I don't currently have the time to write articles. Regards Gizza ^{Discuss ©} 10:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC) reply

You are making great progress now, Vinay. Thanks for your contributions to Brahmin communities.

May I suggest the following points for formatting Sanskrit: When giving Sanskrit in Devanagari, your preferred way of formatting is this:

:{{lang|sa|कर्णाटकाश्च तैलंगा द्राविडा महाराष्ट्रकाः ।}}
:{{lang|sa|गुर्जराश्चेति पञ्चैव द्राविडा विन्ध्यदक्षिणे ॥}}
:{{lang|sa|सारस्वताः कान्यकुब्जा गौडा उत्कलमैथिलाः ।}}
:{{lang|sa|पन्चगौडा इति ख्याता विन्ध्स्योत्तरवासिनः ॥}}

note usage of the {{ lang}} tag (also note the Devanagari danda signs, । and ॥). The preferred romanization is, as you know, IAST, formatted with the {{ IAST}} tag. It may be preferable to give shlokas in IAST entirely, since the romanization is lossless, and it is easier on people not familiar with Devanagari. These are just minor points: feel free to ignore them, formatting can always be fixed later (there is no hurry). regards, -- dab (𒁳) 06:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm not bullying you, and I'm sorry you read it that way. I'm just happy you seem to have got over what was bit of a turbulent start. Moreschi ^Talk 12:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC) reply

I'm no expert in this. A better source than the etymology dictionary would be a published paper referring to them. -- Sundar ^{\ talk \ contribs} 03:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Hello Vinay, just thought you would be interested in Havyaka article. Although there isn't much technical information in that article due to lack of sources, it makes an interesting read IMO. Gnanapiti 15:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC) reply

You have made a good start and the there is plenty of scope in Wikipedia to present India-related articles. The only thing you have to take care is to keep yourself in line with Wikipedia policies and style. Are you interested only in Sanskrit? There is hardly any information about Bihar and UP. Do you have any interest in that? Keep going. Regards, P.K.Niyogi 22:48, 30 August 2007 (UTC) reply

I have reverted the massive changes that you made to Mahābhāṣya because you are sourcing them only by mentioning some works as references but are not giving any verifiable inline citations to support specific points. Please try again, but this time cite sources in a way that will enable compliance with WP:V. Your changes are quite interesting, and I look forward to seeing the material worked in a more systematic manner. According to WP:LAYOUT, works cited in Notes should be included in References. This has come up before, so perhaps you simply overlooked it here. Your extensive changes to Sanskrit compounds have the same problem with lack of sourcing. In that case I have not yet reverted them. Please, can we try to improve the quality of these articles by working more slowly to gradually add inline citations rather than simply by making extensive unsourced changes? In the long run, unsourced material will simply be removed by someone, so why not take the extra time to source things in a way that will cause the material to stick around longer? Buddhipriya 07:49, 3 September 2007 (UTC) reply

My answers to Buddhipriya

• Wikipedians start with a stub and then gradually expand it. Both Mahābhāṣya and Sanskrit compounds were stubs before I touched them. You reverted my unsourced edits in stubs but did not touch unsourced edits of others !
• Whatever I added can be found in school textbooks. But I am not going to add sources to Sanskrit compounds because all its matter is already elsewhere in Wikipedia. If you really want to convert it into a genuine article, fetch some grammar textbooks and find references, instead of wasting time in edit wars or asking me to do all the work myself. Do some positive work, you are quite capable of that.
• If I find there are serious readers of Mahābhāshya, I will devote more time to it. It is a difficult work and I fear we should not devote much time to it, at least now.
• I had hoped you will help me in sourcing a lot of articles, because sourcing requires time. Instead of reverting, add facts tag, otherwise I can respond only by gradually reducing my activity in Wiki, because I hate fighting.
• Even one's elders should not call a person by his/her first name, unless being closely related. In Wiki everyone calls me by my first name. It is disgusting, and I cannot prevent it. I should not have used my real name. I am changing my sign now. I had earlier imagined that Wikipedians are elderly people because youngsters should not edit an encyclopedia. - Mr Jha 18:19, 3 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi there, if you have some time, please contribute to Hindi wikipedia, Sanskrit wikipedia and Bhojpuri wikipedia as well. Also, I am interested in starting a Maithili edition of wikipedia but dont have enough people to volunteer for it. Could you be of any help on that? Thank you.-- Eukesh 18:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC) reply

btw, your work on articles pertaining to different aspects of Mithila is very commendable!-- Eukesh 18:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Thanks for replying. I am finding some of the people here in Nepal by myself. We dont need many people at the beginning and once the wikipedia grows, community forms by itself. You can contact me at eukeshranjit at yahoo dot com for correspondance. Once we have about 5 dedicated people, we can start working for Maithili edition. Thank you.-- Eukesh 19:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi.. I'm not exact;y sure as to the details of your situation, so it should be helpful if you could link me to the article or page diff in question so that I may assess this more appropriately and offer fair advice or an honest opinion. I have no reference point as of now to address your concerns since I couldn't find the edit you were referring to in your recent contributions. Taharqa 15:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC) reply

V Jha, I appreciate your comments on my talk page, which are reasonable. My apologies for a lengthy reply but I want to convey some things that may be helpful. The information available now in English in the West on Sri Ramana and what he actually taught today is far more extensive than back in the early 1970s when some misconceptions were presented as fact. At that time, criticism that westerners did not generally understand Sri Ramana was probably justified, and even today, many in the West claim to be in his lineage or his followers while clearly distorting his life and teachings. Of particular concern is the misconceptions around what Sri Ramana meant by self-enquiry, which was usually presented as a kind of mental or verbal exercise which is exactly what Sri Ramana did not consider anything but preliminary. Some of this is due to inherent difficulties in translating Tamil into English. Today, however, more westerners are experienced in subtle matters and less wedded to semitic POVs, and less inclined to consider Indians primitive, naive and superstitious. Despite many comments I see on Wikipedia from our Indian brothers about what "whites" do not understand about many of the Hindu practices, that is not always the case. And, today there is enough information out there now to present an accurate picture of Sri Ramana, which is my only goal for the Wikipedia article, not to turn it into a propaganda piece. Even the interesting discovery that Sri Ramana did not at age 16 intellectually understand what had happened at first, and considered at first that he might have been possessed in some way (possession by gods is not unknown in India), is worth pointing out because it illustrates that he taught from his own knowledge, not from religious studies, even if it offends someone's fantasies about Sri Ramana.

The article was in sorry shape when I first developed the basic outline for making the biography and practice of self-enquiry accurate that other editors have adapted to complete it. One energetic editor from India in particular developed much of what you see now after my comments about the problems with the structure and accuracy of the article. I was thus frankly taken aback that Bharatveer repeatedly accused me of removing references to Sri Ramana being a Hindu when that was not the case, I was trying to resolve the conflict by clarifying the issue further. Hinduism is such a broad religion with many schools and dharmic interpretations that merely defining someone as a Hindu, even if true, does not tell us much, without further elaboration, even though Hindu dharma does include the possibility that Hinduism is ultimately self-transcending at Mukta. After his repeated reversions, I put my objections on the talk page so that when the time came, I could get support to make the necessary corrections. Bharatveer's latest edit is a good one, so I will try and implement your advice and boldly make the necessary changes. If you have suggestions, just put them on the talk page.

I have emailed David Godman in India a number of times over the years, and despite his many projects, he responds quickly and replies without arrogance and hostility. I think you probably have never emailed him and are thus judging him too harshly. None of us are claiming to be Jnanis, and the point he is making is somewhat minor and technical as I have said, one reason why I prefer clarification reflecting his comments to removing "Hindu". I think he is too busy working on his next book to pay much attention to this latest dispute, and would be dismayed to learn that his suggestions were being interpreted as anti-Hindu and were inflaming unseemly and anti-dharmic religious, ethnic and racial tensions. I urge you to try emailing him directly at david_godman@yahoo.co.uk, and express your concerns about how you and others interpret what he wrote.

I notice from your comments above and other experiences that in the East it is more common to consider use of someone's first name alone unless close friends or related disrespectful, one uses the last name and/or a title first. But here in the West, for example, after a preliminary introduction, it is common for adults of all ages in less formal settings to refer to one more casually by their first name. For example, we might often even simply refer to Ramana when among westerners, while in the East that would be seen as disrespectful and Sri Ramana or Ramana Maharshi would be used (since there are many non-western editors here I try and avoid Ramana). As you prefer, I have not and will not use your first name alone, and editors should honor your request. However, please understand that in most cases if someone did so no offense was met, it was more likely a cross-cultural misunderstanding. This kind of inadvertant discord seems to happen some on Wikipedia where we do not meet face to face but bring cultural assumptions into the dialogue. -- Dseer 21:57, 8 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Took your kind advice and made bold changes to introduction to stick with fact and resolve misunderstandings about Sri Ramana, his teachings, and relation to Hinduism. -- Dseer 01:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC) reply

If the first name is used during discussion, at least adding "ji" makes it more polite. So in Mr. Jha's case it would be Vinayji. Gizza ^{Discuss ©} 01:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Romila Thapar seems far more reasonable than Wendy Doniger and her "school". It is not clear from what I've seen whether Thapar is really a Marxist or merely finds value in some Marxist concepts as it seems she is saying, and so guilt by association should be avoided. Citing a sourced Marxist opinion of her work would seem reasonable, as well as sourced statements that she is a Marxist, as long as the phrasing makes clear that these are statements and this does not imply she is a Marxist, provided it is sufficiently important and the sources actually say that. I thought the issue was being put as more that the citations did not support the language. What is really needed is a "controversy" section in the article to clarify the sides of the issue. -- Dseer 23:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Prior to this, I have not paid attention to Romila Thapar but have read some of Frawley's material regarding AIT. I am not in a position to evaluate all the criticism of Thapur, while I can do that with Wendy Doniger, Kripal et al because their interpretations of religious texts are obviously biased. I agree AIT seems to be modeled after historical experiences more to the West (Europe, Middle East) where events more like that occurred, while I think the river civiliztions in India probably go back over 10,000 years and that basides the root linguistic relations between languages there was lots of migration and trade along the route that went through that area. It appears that Thapar has much academic support in the West, probably outweighing the criticism, so I think the most productive approach, which I would support, is to create a controvery section in the Thapar article where these issues like the points in the article you sent me can be mentioned to provide more balance to the article.-- Dseer 19:41, 15 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Hi Vinay. Sorry for replying after so much time (lack of net access and also because I am very busy nowadays). Besides, all your emails were going into my junk folder (don't have a clue why).

I'm afraid I can't agree that Ganesha was worshipped duing Vedic times, because the Vedas donot have mention of him. Gods like Ganesha, Shiva Parvathi etc. arose during the Puranic preriod whcih roughly coincided with the late Vedantic period and ealy Shramana period (around the same time that Buddha and Jainism arose).

Besides, the biggest nutcrackers are not the Europeans but Indians like AnishShah. For example, look at [4] edit of his, which Bakaman keeps correcting. Indian_Air_Force (IAF) 08:47, 12 September 2007 (UTC) reply

These are from Vedas

Sri Rudram contains

• Namakam,
• Chamakam,
• Manyu Suktam,
• Purusha Suktam,
• Sri Suktam and
• Mantra Pushpam along with
• Laghunyasam

BalanceΩrestored ^Talk 07:25, 14 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Verses on Ganapati

• gaNAnAn.h tvA gaNapatiM havAmahe kavim kavInAm- upamashravastamaM | jyeshhTharAjaM brahmaNAn.h brahmaNaspata A naH shR^iNvannUtibhiH sIda sAdanaM || (Rg Veda 2.23.1)
• ni shhu sIda gaNapate gaNeshhu tvAmAhurvipratamaM kavInAM | na R^ite tvat.h kriyate kinchanAre mahAmarkaM maghavan.h chitramarcha || (Rg Veda 10.112.9)

Panchayatana puja

• Rg Veda Mandala 8, sukta 81, R^ik's 1-9,
• Mandala 10 sukta 112 R^ik's 9-10,
• and Mandala 2, sukta 23, R^ik 1. BalanceΩrestored ^Talk 07:35, 14 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Obstacles are getting removed. I've got some nice resources that's got a lot of information.

Loving Ganesa: Hinduism's Endearing Elephant Faced God By Sadguru Sivaya Subramaniyaswami | Loving Ganesa (Online book)

VJha, I apologies for using your first name in my last post on Talk:Ganesha after you had informed me that you found it insulting. I can only assure you that the use was inadvertent, and no disrespect was intended on my part. I may differ with you on content and editorial style from time to time, but would not intentionally use such juvenile tactics to try to belittle or tweak you - since that would be more of a reflection on me than you. I hope you'll take my word on this issue. Regards. Abecedare 20:30, 15 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Please don't get upset. If I took the discussion to a wider audience, would you please participate in it? Samuel Grant 20:44, 15 September 2007 (UTC) reply

Dear Mr. Jha, If you have the time, I would be grateful if you could look in at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Brahmin and dozens of related articles. Thank you, Relata refero ( talk) 18:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC) reply

Look at [ [5]] for my answer.Thanks - VJha ( talk) 07:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC) reply

Dear Mr Jha,

This article which was earlier enlarged by me but has been substantially mutilated by Sangam Mulmi and others and the revised version does not even accept the contribution of the earlier authors in the history column. External references have been missed (numbers are very much there but there are no refereces or are not shown). There is no continuity of references. Also, one of the pictures which I uploaded on Kosi's shifting courses does not open eventhough the title of the photo is displayed in red colour.The shifting course picture shows exactly what has happaned to the river over centuries of shifting river course. What has happened? Can some one tell me what is happening? And where is the disambaguated article enlarged by me? There is not even mention of my contribution eventhoguh substantial part of my artcle (90% of it) has been utilised.Since you habe been a serious contributor on wikipages can you clarify please. -- Nvvchar ( talk) 18:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 2002 Gujarat violence may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• of 29 muslim dargahs, 20 mosques, and 17 Hindu temples and churches 9real numbers may be more). The tomb of Malik Asin was bulldozed, the [[Muhafiz Khan Mosque]] was also destroyed. The tomb of

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 16:39, 15 March 2014 (UTC) reply

I presented bothe sides of the story with neutral sources, but it seems you have no time to check these sources and carried out a wholesale reverting of my edits. Here is one example : this article gave a wrong reference to Krishna Iyer which is a playback singer, I corrected it and linked it to Justice V R Krishna Iyer (click this link to read that Wikipedia article, which I never edited, it states Mr Iyer was a minister in communist government in Kerala). But you reverted my edit, alleging my edit was unsourced. Is my linking to already existing Wikipedia article "unsourced"? Wikipedia is not for pushing communist POVs, neutrality and sourcing is my concern as well as Wikipedia's. I hope you will understand that I am not "pushing" any POV but presenting both sides of the coin as well as presenting court verdict which was missing from the article. Nevertheless, if someone insists on pushing the communist POV by hiding the communist link of Krishna Iyer, I will not take the matter to Wikipedia Tribunal, because I have no time for useless fights. VJha ( talk) 18:46, 15 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Don't make assumptions; I checked every one of your sources. If you want a detailed list of reasons, here you go:

1) The point about the Banerjee commission (the one begun by Lalu Yadav) was already covered above, and therefore unnecessary.

2) The point about the Nanavati-Shah commission was also already covered. You need to read the section before making additions.

3) The point about 31 people being convicted is necessary, and I have no objections to your adding it; just don't link it to the unnecessary stuff above, and please make it grammatical.

4) The point about the "Kar Seva" programs is not sourced. Also, even if you find a source for that, please don't mess with existing content in order to add it.

5) The content you are adding about the army and curfew is alright, but you need to watch for repetition; there are many cases where you are basically duplicating sentences. I can help you with this, if you so wish.

6) The point about Iyer needs a source. Also, it is not very necessary; the CCT has its own POV, and that is made explicit; how does the fact that he is a communist change that? We already know the CCT is very anti-Modi.

7) The random insertion of "31 convicted Muslims" is very unnecessary.

I have reverted you once more. If you take these issues into account, I will be happy to make your insertions work. Thank you. Vanamonde93 ( talk)

20:24, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

I read your comments to me. Why you say I did not give a source for Krishna Iyer's communist past ? I gave the link to pre-existing Wikipedia article on him : V R Krishna Iyer. Please read the first few pages of his report and the list of 8-members (find it through Google Search, there are three PDF files): CCT was a private body comprising some leftists only. As for my "repetitions", I briefly brought three different standpoints at one place so that readers could compare all standpoints. There is no bias in my edits, my sole purpose was to present a holistic view. As for Kar Seva, entire Ayodhya issue (Babri Masjid) since 1992 is a result of VHP's Kar Seva and there are thousands of links to it, on Wikipedia too. The reason why I introduced it is because due to VHP's link to Kar Sevaks killed in the train, a planned reprisal took place. Without VHP's involvement, there would not have been a great backlash. And due to VHP. Gujarat govt had no courage to act firmly. You will see I have no bias for anyone, I simply tried to make the article better, neutral and factual with proper sources. You displayed the decency of discussing. But I find another editor is reverting without discussing. I request you to improve this article with the help of sources I have provided (they are all leftist or neutral sources, none of them are pro-Modi). I have little time for editing Wikipedia due to my preoccupations, and I have no interest in fighting with editors. Please help. VJha ( talk) 20:50, 15 March 2014 (UTC) reply

You are correct in saying that Iyer's own page lists him as a communist. So, it should be easy to copy a source. I was saying it was not necessary, though, because (like you said) the CCT was composed of leftists; and we have not claimed at any point that it was neatral; so there is no need to mention this. It would be like saying "Modi is an RSS" member," which is true but unnecessary. Can you see my point?

As for the rest of it; I can see why you are repeating those points, but it goes contrary to wikipedia style, so I will not be replacing that. I can attempt to introduce some of the other content. Your point about the kar sevaks having VHP links, I think may be important, but most people consider it obvious. I will look into it. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 21:00, 15 March 2014 (UTC) reply

As you have probably noticed, I reverted you once more, for the reasons I gave. I will work on some of the points you raised (I am busy too, so give me a couple of days, but I will do it).

Also, you are currently on three reverts, so I would not recommend reverting again, as some editor will likely drag you to ANEW and get you blocked. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 21:06, 15 March 2014 (UTC) reply

you are reverting wholesale, without taking into account your aforementioned views. Secomdly, what you view as "obvious" is not so obvious for all readers. Wikipedia articles should be for everyone and not only for those who are familiar with India. I think you will devote some time to improve this article. If you revert it again, I will not interfere. What you call repetitions is due to improper placements of sentences, and you you may improve it instead of wholesale reverting. VJha ( talk) 21:13, 15 March 2014 (UTC) reply

'sigh' As I explained, the "wholesale" revert was because you majorly messed up standard WP formatting. As you might have noticed, I have now added the court verdict. I will work on the rest soon. Cheers. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 19:20, 16 March 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration 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 impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC) reply

The file File:Darbhanga1.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned file with no obvious value in transferring to Commons

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Salavat ( talk) 07:22, 13 June 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi Vinay,

I found your name on the history of Surya Siddhanta page. I realised that much of your work was removed by Dbachmann and his team, who are extremely prejudice against the ancient Indian antiquity.

I have recently added the dating of Surya Siddhanta on the basis of publications by Anil Narayanan (former ISRO scientist), Rupa Bhaty, Nilesh Oak and Sudarshan Bhardwaj. My sections were highly referenced but yet removed by this teams of vandalizers, who are contacting each other to come remove my sections of BC era dating of Surya Siddhanta and are as it seems like ganging up to do so which is not just unethical but against wikipedia policy and is vandalism. I hope you get this message and provide support to the additon of scientific and empirically proved results onto the wiki page of Surya Siddhanta.

regards Rahul

All my contributions to Wikipedia are deliberately deleted or distorted by a handful of persons. The most astonishing vandalization was deletion of well-referencerd factual information about Maithil Brahmnins by a user having fake name on the false plea that such details are unwanted on Wikipedia, although the deleted information was of one page approximately. I think they want to delete all brahmins from Earth but can delete only information about brahmins. All India-related articles are controlled by an anti_Hindu team. They wasted months on useless debated merely to harass me so that I leave Wikipedia. Finding no one interested in facts, I left editing Wikipedia years ago. Now I open Wikipedia only when someone quotes its false articles on my forum. Todat, I am editing Wikipedia article on Adhik Maas because its FALSE definition of Adhik Maas as "Purushottam Maas" was cited on my forum. The person who added this lie in Wikipedia falsely cited Vasishtha Siddhanta. Such persons deliberately degrade Wikipedia. VJha ( talk) 07:26, 31 December 2020 (UTC) reply

Hi there,

Could you elaborate more on the page Gauda Brahmins? I tried to find a historical account on them and their ideology, but can't find anything on the internet.

Much appreciated! Rolly212724 ( talk) 03:08, 4 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia is infested with vandals who relish in deleting valuable information. I stopped contributing to such articles after my edits in Maithil Brahmins were vandalised ( https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Maithil_Brahmin&type=revision&diff=560587461&oldid=560587307). The article on Gauda Brahmins was also vandalised. For instance, one can see the following : https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Gauda_Brahmins&type=revision&diff=770895494&oldid=770895422 VJha ( talk) 05:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC) reply

The file File:Mithila Central.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Likely COPYVIO, very clearly not own work and no source listed. No description.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ---  C& C ( Coffeeandcrumbs) 23:53, 30 December 2022 (UTC) reply

Thank you for uploading File:DarbhangaTown.gif.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F4 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:29, 30 July 2023 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. matt br 07:29, 30 July 2023 (UTC) reply