User talk:Bladesmulti/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 7

Nomination of Death and funeral of Ariel Sharon for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Death and funeral of Ariel Sharon is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death and funeral of Ariel Sharon until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  Ohc ^¡digame! 03:54, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Types

Hafspajen is good at finding images, which tell a story. Hafspajen, please help me find some images, that tell Bladesmulti the story of teamwork, and playing a role. Some kinds of teams are sports-teams. Other kinds of teams are military units. Businesses in the publishing-industry have teams, separated out by job-title. Graphics artist, copywriter, journalist, fact checker, editor-in-chief, novelist, vice president of marketing, and so on. Wikipedia has roles, also; Bladesmulti needs help understanding the kinds of roles we have here. Can you illustrate? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 21:26, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

• Original picture removed; Image:The Electric Mayhem.jpgThe Electric Mayhem is like the Wikipedia - We are all in the same basket
  Original picture removed; Image:The Electric Mayhem.jpgThe Electric Mayhem is like the Wikipedia - We are all in the same basket
• There are the electricalgirls. Can be timid and shy or posessive of articles (That is Not good, you should let others edit your articles).
  There are the electricalgirls. Can be timid and shy or posessive of articles (That is Not good, you should let others edit your articles).
• 
  Original picture removed; Image:Fozzierowlf.jpg Those are buddies. Buddies work together.
• 
  Original picture removed; File:Animal (Muppet).jpg There is the frustrated type who shows his teeth
• 
  Original picture removed; File:Beaker (Muppet)-en.jpg There is the new begginer who does'n get a thing
• And there is the editor who doesn't Want to get it.
  And there is the editor who doesn't Want to get it.
• 
  There is the is the frustrated type who bites
• There is the editor who needs good faith
  There is the editor who needs good faith
• 
  Original picture removed; Dr. Bunsen Honeydew File:Dr. Bunsen Honeydew.jpg There is the Doctor with his PHDY, who knows everything and he will tell you all
• 
  Original picture removed; File:Fozzie Bear.jpg There is the nice guy who will do his best, like Jonathan
• 
  Then there are the Austalians who don't know how the rest of the world works
• Original picture removed; File:Gonzo 3C 200x300px.jpg There is the weird guy who will do weird things
  Original picture removed; File:Gonzo 3C 200x300px.jpg There is the weird guy who will do weird things
• 
  Original picture removed; File:MissPiggy.jpg And there is Mr Pig who tries to hit everybody in the head with most convincing arguments
• Original picture removed; File:Kermit the Frog.jpg There is Kermit the Frog who is doing his best, but others don't agree, like Bladesees
  Original picture removed; File:Kermit the Frog.jpg There is Kermit the Frog who is doing his best, but others don't agree, like Bladesees
• 
  Then there are the original editors they see everything upside down, and confuse everybody, like 74
• 
  And here is Doctor Dolittle.
• Original picture removed; Rowlf the Dog File:Rowlf the Dog.jpg There is the dog lover who edits mostly dog articles, ahem
  Original picture removed; Rowlf the Dog File:Rowlf the Dog.jpg There is the dog lover who edits mostly dog articles, ahem
• 
  Original picture removed; File:ScooterMuppet.jpg There is the young genius - as he thinks of himself, in reality a Nerd or a Geek (very hard to convince them about anything.)
• 
  There are the OLD wikipedians who knows best (and they usually do)
• 
  Original picture removed; File:Statler and Waldorf.jpg There is the OLD wikipedian who knows best (and they usually do)
• 
  The editor who has multiple a accounts
• 
  and there are the editors who allways get their way by printing WP:This and WP:That ( often not quite true but it sounds good.)
• 
  There are the editors who are draged to the ANI and spend a lot of time defending themselves somehow there.
• 
  There are the completely Angelic editors, polite and loving like Sagaciousphil‎ and Yngvadottir (if is not busy) - (Very rare)
• And there are the happy guys like Drmies who chat happily with everyone and loves everybody- also very rare.
  And there are the happy guys like Drmies who chat happily with everyone and loves everybody- also very rare.
• 
  And there are the picture cleaners who inconsiderately remove pictures and don't replace them with others, like XX
• And there are the editor who left or got banned by the banners
  And there are the editor who left or got banned by the banners
• 
  There is the orphan editor who is alone and nobody cares for him or her
• 
  Original picture removed; File:SamTheEagle.jpg And There Is The Eagle, who is ...a pompous as. They may know things or may not, but because they believe that they are better, smarter, or more important than other people, it really doesn't matter. They can be spotted at Christmas time. Although they have contact with a lot of editors, never get a Christmas greeting. Or a Happy New Year greating. One could mention probably names here but we leave this link Red.
• 
  Here we are

File:Marcel Duchamp Mona Lisa LHOOQ.jpg

L.H.O.O.Q. (1919), one of Marcel Duchamp's readymades.

Brilliant! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:48, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Right, Hafspajen is probably most intelligent one, on this page. Bladesmulti (talk) 18:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Hafspajen is an artist. I am the kangaroo, by the way, not the upside-down-cake.  :-)   Everybody at wikipedia is skilled in different ways. I hop like a kangaroo. Hafspajen makes pictures like a theater. Tryptofish is a wikiMonk. If we work together, we become a team. If not, we fall apart. But Hafspajen, these are the very special wikiTypes. Where is the traditional medieval fauna? We need the WikiGnome, and the WikiFairy, and the WikiDragon. See WP:WikiFauna for instance. What kind of wikiFauna is Bladesmulti? That is how they will learn about teams. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 04:24, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes. You hop like a kangaroo. That is why We see you as You were upside down, you see? It is our view. WikiFauna? But that is done already. I don't plagiate. No real artis does. What have you done with half of my fauna? This is not the way it looked like. I had Blade in it twice. here, check original gallery. Hafspajen (talk) 07:56, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

On Adima and Heva

You really should read Max Müller, and his scathing criticism of Jacolliot (in this case relating also to a spurious link to Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac):

As to the story of the son offered as a sacrifice by his father, and released at the command of the gods, M. Jacolliot might have found the original account of it from the Veda, both text and translation, in my History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature. He would soon have seen that the story of 6unaAyepa, being sold by his father in order to be sacrificed in the place of an Indian prince, has very little in common with the intended sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham. M. Jacolliot has, no doubt, found out by this time that he has been imposed upon; and if so, he ought to follow the example of Colonel Wilford, and publicly state what has happened. Even then, I doubt not that his statements will continue to be quoted for a long time, and that Adima and Heva, thus brought to life again, will make their appearance in many a book and many a lecture-room.

Max Müller, On False Analogies, pp.328-329

Though Muller recognizes "Adima" to be original term. Above is not criticism. Bladesmulti (talk) 02:13, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes it is, in conjunction by the six pages previously I already posted from Müller.Arildnordby (talk) 11:01, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

|}

I believe mentorship concerns and source judgment development should be your primary focus, Bladesmulti

There is nothing to be said against your honesty, dedication or ability to find potentially interesting new subjects for Wikipedia, Bladesmulti. Your enthusiasm to both imbibe, and transmit, knowledge is very charming.

But, I think, really, that some of the perfectly viable new projects you work on should, at the moment, take up less of your wikitime, than working together with mentors, particularly on the issues of language competency (such as grammar), and also develop critical judgment on what type of sources can be regarded as reliable.

These two issues are, as I see it, the principal ones that previously have made other editors infuriated, and it is not satisfactorily improved yet. I believe you are on course, in the right direction here, but you really should use more time with 74 and Corinne to get a swifter learning development on these issues.Arildnordby (talk) 22:53, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I was close to giving it up on you, Blades... I'm really glad you made a turn. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

File:Stuffed lion (rotating image).gif

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Shiva may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"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:

• maintainer or preserver, and Shiva as the transformer or destroyer see: Zimmer (1972) p. 124.</ref>}}These three deities have been called "the Hindu triad"<ref>For definition of trimurti as "the
• in Vanarasi and Triambakam at bank of Gautami River. (वाराणस्यां तु विश्वेशं त्र्यम्बकं गौतमीतटे));Kedar (Kedarnath) in Himalayas and Gushmesh (Gushmeshwar) in Shivalaya (Shiwar). (। हिमालये तु केदा

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:45, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

a question on edit-counts

18th UTC_day. 6 non-mentorship edits, 17 mentorship-edits, 3 grey-area-edits to Adimo hoax.

21:05, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+325)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Mentorship ‎ (]→‎11-18 february 2014) unlimited 21:01, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-429)‎ . . The Hindus: An Alternative History ‎ (His version was better, her own views cannot be added on lead either.) EDIT#6 20:46, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+129)‎ . . Ezourvedam ‎ (forgot to add title) ‎ EDIT#2_d 20:41, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-24)‎ . . Ezourvedam ‎ (complete?) ‎ EDIT#2_c 20:29, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+3,413)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ EDIT#2_b 20:27, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+234)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Mentorship ‎ (→‎11-18 february 2014) unlimited 19:05, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+606)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Mentorship ‎ (→‎11-18 february 2014) unlimited 18:40, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+301)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Mentorship ‎ (→‎11-18 february 2014) unlimited 18:23, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+991)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Mentorship ‎ (→‎11-18 february 2014) unlimited 18:04, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+273)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Mentorship ‎ (→‎11-18 february 2014) unlimited 17:52, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+123)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Mentorship ‎ (→‎11-18 february 2014) unlimited 17:51, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+699)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Mentorship ‎ (→‎11-18 february 2014) unlimited 15:36, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-2)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎User boxes) unlimited 15:35, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+898)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ unlimited 15:35, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+27)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti ‎ (current) unlimited 15:31, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+174)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti ‎ (Update) unlimited 15:29, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+3,405)‎ . . N User:Bladesmulti/Hindu views on Pantheism ‎ (←Created page with 'Hinduism is often related to Pantheism for its known pantheistic elements. == Classification == It is notable that Hindu religious texts are the oldest...') (current) unlimited 15:19, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+659)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Grammar ‎ unlimited 15:15, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+133)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Grammar ‎ (→‎Grammar lesson 10) unlimited 09:05, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+374)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎Modern humans) unlimited 09:02, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-656)‎ . . India ‎ (source : "last update : February 2003", irrelevant, no consensus on talk, check society section.. And HDI is listed on infobox, don't repeat it.) EDIT#5 03:32, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-525)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ unlimited 03:30, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+242)‎ . . N Talk:ABDO Publishing Company ‎ (←Created page with '((WikiProjectBannerShell|1= ((WikiProject United States|class=Start|importance=Low)) ((WikiProject Minnesota|class=Start|importance=mid)) ((WikiProject Companies...') (current) EDIT#4 03:12, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-63)‎ . . Women in Hinduism ‎ (→‎Female gurus and saints: Lack description, and notability.) EDIT#3 03:10, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+88)‎ . . N Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (←Created page with '((WikiProject Hinduism|class=start)) ((WikiProject Religion|class=start|importance=mid))') EDIT#2_a 03:08, 18 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-3,455)‎ . . Women in Hinduism ‎ (If dowry is not endorsed, why you have to copy paste from blogs? Removed the repetition of names. And 1 link by agniveer) EDIT#1

19th UTC_day. 3 non-mentorship edits, 8 mentorship-edits, 16 grey-area-edits to Adimo hoax, 8 grey-area-dits to Vedas.

17:45, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+276)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎ (current) EDIT#4_h 17:36, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (0)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎EDIT#4_g 17:33, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+471)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) (current) EDIT#1_q 17:32, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-49)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎EDIT#4_f 17:26, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+3)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎EDIT#4_e 17:23, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+249)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎EDIT#4_d 17:09, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+54)‎ . . N User:Bladesmulti/Vedas ‎ (Bladesmulti moved page User:Bladesmulti/Vedas to User:Bladesmulti/Testing) (current) EDIT#4_c 17:09, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (0)‎ . . m User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎ (Bladesmulti moved page User:Bladesmulti/Vedas to User:Bladesmulti/Testing)EDIT#4_b 17:08, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+11,556)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎EDIT#4_a 15:02, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+130)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎requesting further reason for revok e of edit) (current) unlimited 14:32, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+390)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎requesting further reason for revok e of edit) unlimited 14:12, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+274)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎a question on edit-counts) unlimited 13:57, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+400)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎requesting further reason for revok e of edit) unlimited 13:35, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+197)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Grammar ‎ (→‎Grammar lesson 8) (current) unlimited 13:34, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+38)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) ‎ EDIT#1_p 12:39, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+1,408)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) (current) ‎ EDIT#1_o 10:48, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+19)‎ . . N Adima and Heva ‎ (RD) ‎ EDIT#1_n 10:46, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+19)‎ . . N Adima ‎ (←Redirected page to Adimo) ‎ EDIT#1_m 09:29, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+185)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ ‎ EDIT#1_l 09:27, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+698)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) ‎ EDIT#1_k 09:18, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+706)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) ‎ EDIT#1_j 09:07, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+392)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎requesting further reason for revok e of edit) (current) unlimited 09:05, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+636)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) ‎ EDIT#1_i 08:56, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+406)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Mentorship ‎ (current) unlimited 08:47, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+172)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti/Grammar ‎ (→‎Grammar lesson 8) (current) ‎ unlimited 08:44, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+424)‎ . . Wikipedia:Third opinion ‎ (→‎Active disagreements) (current) ‎ EDIT#3 08:30, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+124)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ ‎ EDIT#1_h 08:16, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+274)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) ‎ EDIT#1_g 08:14, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+8)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) ‎ EDIT#1_f 08:13, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+1,056)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) ‎ EDIT#1_e 07:48, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-2)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) ‎ EDIT#1_d 07:47, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+1,341)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) ‎ EDIT#1_c 07:40, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+993)‎ . . Hinduism and Judaism ‎ (add Constantine Samuel Rafinesque) (current) ‎ EDIT#2 07:38, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+259)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ ‎ EDIT#1_b 07:34, 19 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+329)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) ‎ EDIT#1_a

20th UTC_day. 7 non-mentorship edits, 49 other-edits, mostly fighting about Adimo or grey-market article-creation.

17:52, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+350)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Abel Bergaigne ‎ (→‎Legacy) 17:49, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-168)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Abel Bergaigne ‎ 17:43, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+3)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Abel Bergaigne ‎ 17:43, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+2)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎ 17:41, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+67)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Abel Bergaigne ‎ 17:36, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+259)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Abel Bergaigne ‎ 17:27, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+2)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (Philosophy portal) EDIT#7 17:26, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+21)‎ . . Ezourvedam ‎ (Not really a property of Hindus, but french literature, and enlightenment age.) EDIT#6 17:24, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+253)‎ . . User talk:Joshua Jonathan ‎ (→‎You deserve a thanks yourself!!) 17:21, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+3)‎ . . Ezourvedam ‎ (*to) EDIT#5 17:20, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+471)‎ . . Ezourvedam ‎ (better lead and source, changed ".nl" to ".com") EDIT#4 17:15, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+401)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Abel Bergaigne ‎ 17:10, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (0)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Abel Bergaigne ‎ 17:09, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+393)‎ . . User talk:Joshua Jonathan ‎ (→‎You deserve a thanks yourself!!: Ty to Arildnorby) 17:05, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+1,759)‎ . . N User:Bladesmulti/Abel Bergaigne ‎ (←Created page with 'Abel Bergaigne(1838-1898) was a French sanskrit scholar, who wrote a number of books related to religion, philosophy. He published the beginning o...') 16:14, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+408)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎ (add remark) 15:56, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+2,188)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎ (Replaced another one with the Gita's commentary) 15:44, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (0)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎ (progress..) 15:41, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+2,435)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎ (In progress.) 15:10, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+320)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (Good one here) 15:07, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+16,480)‎ . . Death and funeral of Ariel Sharon ‎ (Undid revision 595419127 by Ohconfucius (talk) No one agreed about redirect) EDIT#3 14:58, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+235)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (.......) 14:50, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+135)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (agreed) 14:45, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+177)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎You make a specific claim about RIg Veda provenance, so that MUST hold, or be stricken altogether!!) 14:44, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+403)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎You make a specific claim about RIg Veda provenance, so that MUST hold, or be stricken altogether!!) 14:40, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+200)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (..........) 14:39, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-146)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎You make a specific claim about RIg Veda provenance, so that MUST hold, or be stricken altogether!!) 14:38, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+542)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎You make a specific claim about RIg Veda provenance, so that MUST hold, or be stricken altogether!!) 14:32, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+559)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎Jacolliot is the source on Ramatsariar) 14:29, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+613)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎Jacolliot is the source on Ramatsariar) 14:21, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+204)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎Jacolliot is the source on Ramatsariar) 14:16, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+218)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ 14:14, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+907)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎Jacolliot is the source on Ramatsariar) 14:09, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+312)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎Jacolliot is the source on Ramatsariar) 14:07, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+137)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎Nonexistence of ramutsariar) 14:03, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+391)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎First MAJOR problem on adimo etc.) 14:02, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+33)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎On Rafinesque) 14:00, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+192)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎On Rafinesque: on rafinesque) 13:57, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+1,129)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎A constructive suggestion when you think a source is reliable, but not quite) 09:21, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+270)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎review of the mentorship so far: Jan 26th to Feb 19th) 09:19, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+252)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) EDIT#2 07:37, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+1,175)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ 07:33, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+424)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎review of the mentorship so far: Jan 26th to Feb 19th) 07:31, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+442)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy) 07:29, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-358)‎ . . Wikipedia:Third opinion ‎ (→‎Active disagreements: Almost got 3rd opinion, somwhere else) EDIT#1 04:22, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+216)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎review of the mentorship so far: Jan 26th to Feb 19th: clarity) 03:54, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+537)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎ (add source) 03:25, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+76)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎First MAJOR problem on adimo etc.: clarity) 02:56, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+24)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎ (wording para) 02:25, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+132)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (clarity) 01:44, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+501)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ 01:32, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+914)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎First MAJOR problem on adimo etc.: reply) 01:02, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+1,100)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎First MAJOR problem on adimo etc.: reply) 00:53, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+130)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎First MAJOR problem on adimo etc.: reply) 00:49, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+750)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎review of the mentorship so far: Jan 26th to Feb 19th: about sources) 00:41, 20 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+497)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎First MAJOR problem on adimo etc.)

21st UTC_day. 6 non-mentorship edits, 46 other-edits, mostly fighting about Adimo or grey-market article-creation.

21:11, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+8)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Traditional African Religion and other religions ‎ (→‎Islam) 21:09, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+9)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Mormonism in India ‎ 21:09, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+196)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Traditional African Religion and other religions ‎ (→‎Buddhism) 21:07, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-14)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 21:05, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+284)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 21:02, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+46)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 21:01, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+329)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 20:49, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+523)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 20:17, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+804)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 20:11, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+584)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Traditional African Religion and other religions ‎ 20:07, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+125)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 20:04, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+108)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 19:53, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+55)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 19:51, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+480)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 19:32, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+278)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 19:07, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-91)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ (→‎behavior question) 19:05, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+1,147)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 18:57, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+172)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 18:48, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+552)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 18:33, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+187)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎Wiki Types) 18:31, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-112)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Traditional African Religion and other religions ‎ 18:29, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+4)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Traditional African Religion and other religions ‎ 18:28, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-27)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Traditional African Religion and other religions ‎ (Undid revision 596523703 by Bladesmulti (talk)) 18:27, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+27)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Traditional African Religion and other religions ‎ 18:26, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+19)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Traditional African Religion and other religions ‎ (igbo) 18:25, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+751)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ (Update, current) 18:16, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+596)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 18:11, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+356)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ (→‎behavior question) 18:02, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+184)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ (→‎sources only please) 17:51, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+371)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Traditional African Religion and other religions ‎ 17:45, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+3,848)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Traditional African Religion and other religions ‎ 17:38, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+604)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Mormonism in India ‎ 17:36, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+772)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Mormonism in India ‎ 17:35, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-17)‎ . . Shiva ‎ (set italics for "Kalantaka") (current) EDIT#6 12:02, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+3,112)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎ 04:31, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-12)‎ . . Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death and funeral of Ariel Sharon ‎ (less pov) EDIT#5 04:30, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+375)‎ . . Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death and funeral of Ariel Sharon ‎ (Vote keep) EDIT#4 03:59, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+333)‎ . . User:Bladesmulti/Testing ‎ 03:23, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (0)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ 03:21, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+2,602)‎ . . User talk:74.192.84.101 ‎ (script links) 02:54, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-14)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy: '}') EDIT#3 02:49, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+1,642)‎ . . Talk:Ezourvedam ‎ (→‎Factual accuracy: about scripts) EDIT#2 02:23, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (-51,165)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (Tooo many sections, remove/archive irrelevant ones.) 02:19, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+498)‎ . . User talk:Dougweller ‎ (→‎On Fitz-Stephen: new section) EDIT#1 02:16, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+206)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎ (→‎You make a specific claim about RIg Veda provenance, so that MUST hold, or be stricken altogether!!) 02:13, 21 February 2014 (diff | hist) . . (+1,330)‎ . . User talk:Bladesmulti ‎

Bladesmulti has been fighting for the last few days about Adimo. However, instead of understanding what happened, and deeply understanding all the sources, Bladesmulti has misunderstood how others were feeling, and Bladesmulti has misunderstood what others were saying. Therefore, at this point I am asking that the mentorship be turned to a laser-focus on Adimo. We will understand the sources, one by one. We will understand the sentences, line by line. We will practice rewriting sentences, with better grammar each time, not stopping until we get there. I have collapsed the subpages on Africa Religion, on Worldwide Creation Stories, on Abbie Normal, and on the other things that Bladesmulti has been busy creating. I would ask the co-mentors if they are comfortable collapsing the mentorship-subpages, on general grammar lessons where Corinne has been working, and on general edit-lessons where JJ has been working. Bladesmulti does not seem to be learning, with all these distractions. I suggest we join forces on the User_talk:74.192.84.101#Adimo section, and do our best to get Bladesmulti through one thing properly. Joshua Jonathan, CorinneSD, does this sound like a plan?

extended review of the mentorship so far: Jan 26th to Feb 19th 22nd

Bladesmulti has been in several fights the past few days, with JJ then Arildnordby among other problems. I will see what the other co-mentors say, CorinneSD / Hafspajen / Joshua Jonathan, but I think we need to stop the five-edits-per-day and try something else. My suggestion is that we downshift hard, and focus like a laser.

1. Current scheme. 5 edits/day to mainspace/etc. Unlimited edits to 74-talk, Blades-talk, Blades-user, grammar-page, mentorship-page, issues-page, adimo-subpage, vedas-subpage, abbie-subpage, african-religion-subpage, et cetera.
2. Proposed scheme. 1 edit/day to mainspace/etc. Unlimited edits to 74-talk, Blades-talk. One topic only: Adimo aka Ezourvedam, to include grammar & sourcing.

Co-mentors, please add your own proposals if you wish. Bladesmulti, you may also give us your thoughts. Corinne liked the idea of setting a specific day-of-the-week for grammar-only, another for sourcing-only, another for policy-only, and so on. I think this is a good plan. Corinne, please pick a day-of-the-week (or more than one) you want to use; wikipedia runs on UTC, is that okay to use UTC-days-of-the-week aka London-timezone? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 04:12, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Blades, you started a page on "Hindu Creation Myths", didn't you? That might be a good page to continue. I've said enough about Adimo and the Ezourvedam for the moment. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:39, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Ah, [User:Bladesmulti/Testing here] it is. 74 suggested to collapse it for the moment, and concentrate on Adimo. Okay.... (zucht). It's all about WP:RS, and skepticism. Blades, you ought to read some stuff by Foucault and the Frankfurter Schule, and a book on the philosophy of science. Your enthusiasm is your advantage, and your hindrance. With all the similarities you notice, you should ask yourself: is that really so? Are there reliable sources which say the same? Reliable means: multiple recent sources from acknowledged scholars, published by reliable publishers. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:44, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, there is no such frequency in this regard, If it is told about recognizing reliable sources, probably that's why I thought of merging major/known stories to one page. And my page is still in sandbox, obviously it is still underconstruction, incomplete. Bladesmulti (talk) 11:23, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

non-arbitrary section break

  Unless you concentrate on the mentorship, Bladesmulti, I believe the mentorship cannot make progress quickly enough. But as always, it depends on interest. You are not WP:REQUIRED to have mentors. You have been sticking to 5-edits-per-day, which is good. It shows you are taking the mentorship-program seriously. But progress is slow. You are in a hurry. That is trouble. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 04:12, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I had discussed a lot about it, but I haven't reverted or edit war about it. And I have no conflict with Joshua Jonathan, neither I had before, it was just observation, neither he seems to be opposing me/complaining at all! "Adimo", like i said, is not really notable subject. It has been almost 2 days now, That I am not into that subject, manually. Joshua Jonathan told that the subject can be ditched, and I agree that topic is not really notable for having its own page, since it was just another term for the story that is much popular. And the page Ezourvedam is completed after the intervention of multiple users. Since our final motive is to 'collaborate', we can select different topic, I recommend User:Bladesmulti/Traditional_African_Religion_and_other_religions, highly notable. Bladesmulti (talk) 04:25, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

• ((e/c)) You have been fighting about it. JJ became angry. Arildnordby became angry. Do you need diffs to see the proof? They are angry because of the fighting. Adimo aka Ezourvedam is the topic that you have been fighting about. That is why I picked it, as the subject to practice on. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 04:48, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

• As for your suggestion, that we work on African Religion instead of on Adimo, that may happen. We will ask the other co-mentors. However, JJ has already studied Adimo. Arilbnordby has already studied Adimo. I have already done some work with Adimo. We are interested in practicing re-writing. That is what you must learn. Notability is a secondary concern. We could practice re-writing about a wikt:pebble. That would still be good practice, on grammar. But we will pick something with real sources. Adimo is fine. African is probably fine. But one thing only. After that thing is finished, after you understand how to rewrite, then we pick a new thing. Make sense? Adimo was rewritten, that is true. But you Bladesmulti, need to learn how to do such re-writing. That takes practice. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 04:48, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

It was re-written, after recognizing the same as above. Re-writing is obviously very important part, I have took this point seriously. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:13, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I know. You are taking it seriously. You have been working with Corinne, that is good. You allowed the page to be rewritten, that was good. But I want you to be able to do rewriting. That takes practice, where you practice doing the re-writing. Do you understand? For example. Let us practice right now. Here is a sentence you wrote: "And about mentorship." We should fix the grammar there. Try to rewrite that sentence. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 05:36, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

And about mentorship. Just like you have pointed out, I am still limited to 5 edits, it is because I don't really care about massive amount of editing, until it has been approved here. Though I feel that I am not really same editor like I was before, might have indulged in some edit war with JJ first, if it was same time as before. Bladesmulti (talk) 04:31, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

• Bladesmulti, you are better than before. That is true. You are improving. I thank you for that. But you are only staying out of trouble, because your co-mentors are here. We cannot stay forever. You need to learn to work as a team, with all wikipedians. Even AndyTheGrump, who is very serious, and I hope Andy does not mind my saying this, just a wee bit Grumpy.  :-)   Bladesmulti, you cannot fight with AndyTheGrump like you fought with JJ, over at Talk:Adimo.

  We can ask them. Andy, if you have two minutes, please skim over the first day or two of Talk:Adimo, where Joshua Jonathan and Bladesmulti were 'discussing' whether Adimo-was-in-the-Rigveda-2000-years-before-the-Bible was the truth or a forgery. You have long experience on wikipedia. Did Bladesmulti behave properly, according to WP:NICE, pillar four? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 04:48, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

This is true. Though I have read that there are no deadlines on wikipedia. So I have found that there is nothing wrong with discussing. Got nothing against AndytheGrump either, he made fixes to the page. Previously, he had collaborated with me, on List of Pantheists and E. C. George Sudarshan.Bladesmulti (talk) 04:57, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit war on Kalapani, territory

Hi, I reverted some of your changes as you also deleted cited contents in Kalapani, territory page. We need additional discussion to stop the potential edit war going on there. Please do not remove the cited content without discussion. We can find more credible citations also to support your contention. However, wiki articles should still remain unbiased. Please review wiki guidelines and edit policy. Have a great day! BikashDai (talk) 22:03, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

BikashDai, Links were dead, so they were removed. But I had discovered number of sources, like 2 months ago. :-

1. "Nepal-India agree to find missing border pillars, enhance security". The Hindu. June 3, 2013. Retrieved 2013-12-22.
2. "Transnational Issues: Nepal". CIA World Factbook. Retrieved 2013-12-22. (Click on "Transnational Issues:: NEPAL".)
3. "Kalapani: A Bone of Contention Between India and Nepal, Nepal Articles #422". Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS). New Delhi. 2000-10-17. Retrieved 2013-12-22.
4. "India's Boundary Disputes with China, Nepal, and Pakistan". International Boundary Consultants website. Retrieved 2013-12-22.
5. "Kalapani's New "Line of Control". Nepali Times. Kathmandu. 10 Sept. 2004. Retrieved 2013-12-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
6. Kyodo News International (Jan. 3, 2000). "Defining Himalayan borders an uphill battle". Retrieved 2013-12-22. {{cite newsgroup}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
7. Mangal Siddhi Manandhar, Koirala Hriday Lal (June 2001). "Nepal-India Boundary Issue: River Kali as International Boundary". Tribhuvan University Journal. 23 (1): 1–21. Retrieved 2013-12-22.
8. Anna Orton (2000). India's Borderland Disputes: China, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal. New Delhi: Epitome Books. ISBN 978-93-80297-15-6. Retrieved 2013-12-22.
9. Prem Kumari pant (2009). "Long and Unsolved Indo-Nepal Border Dispute". The Weekly Mirror. Kathmandu. Retrieved 2013-12-22.
10. "Pranab says new Indo-Nepal border soon". The Times of India. Nov. 25, 2008. Retrieved 2013-12-22. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
11. "Nepal Revives Border Feud with India". The Times of India. March 17, 2010. Retrieved 2013-12-22. Bladesmulti (talk) 08:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Topics

• WP:GOOG , books , scholar , news , keywords , notes
• 7k , 0 , 0 , 1 , "duromac" malaysia       , example: borderline wikiNotable

1. 0.4k , 0.6k , 14 , 0 , Padamji "Ginwala"       , ideal ;-)
2. 69k , 2k , 94 , 1 , ("Dashavatara" OR "Daśāvatāra") vishnu       , seems likely to be manageable, for sources-in-English anyways
3. 42k , 2k , 300 , 2 , "kalapani" nepal india       , maybe not that famous of a territorial dispute?
4. 31k , 12k , 327 , 0 , (ezourvedam OR (ezour (veda OR vedam)))       , already "done"
5. 143k , 15k , 513 , 1 , abel "Bergaigne" (book OR religion OR publisher OR philosophy)       , probably too broad
6. 1050k , 2k , 1610 , 316 , "funeral" "Ariel Sharon"       , way too broad
7. 1190k , 26k , 3510 , 1 , "Kshatriya" varna       , way too broad
8. 1770k , 45k , 8460 , 3 , ("hindu" OR "hindi" OR "hinduism") ("creation narrative" OR "creation story" OR "creation myth" OR "creation tale" OR "creation veda" OR "creation gospel" OR "narrative of creation" OR "story of creation" OR "myth of creation" OR "tale of creation")  , WAY too broad
9. 20000k , 10k , 19200 , 267 , "caste" ("sri lanka" OR "ceylon") (christian OR christianity)       , incredibly too broad
10. 40000k , 14500k , 1150000 , 84400 , traditional african religion       , "five is right out"

Bladesmulti, what are the names of the publishing-companies you are interested in? HTH. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 19:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

"Wisdom Publications Inc", 20,000,000+ results. No wikipage, but there should be one. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:26, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Tayatha om bekanze; Bekanze maha bekanze; Randze samu gade soha:

Tayatha om bekanze; Bekanze maha bekanze; Randze samu gade sohaHafspajen (talk) 20:58, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

• Maybe this is the same thing?
• तयता ॐ बेकंज़े; बेकंज़े महा बेकंडजे; रैंडजे समु गड़े सोहा
• Tayatā'om bēkan̄zē; bēkan̄zē mahā bēkaṇḍajē; raiṇḍajē samu gaṛē sōhā
• bing says "digging out" ... goog says "buried" ...
• My machine-translation skills are failing me!  :-)   Who can translate, please? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 00:28, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Medicine Buddha, you're the King, the final word therapist. Kindly take away unhealthiness, and also the huge unhealthiness. I offer this prayer. Note:- "bekhajye bekhajye" means that do away with the pain of unhealthiness. Not truly in physical type, however typically thought-about in spiritual type. Bladesmulti (talk) 06:26, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Padamji Ginwala sources

Hearing no objections, I suggest we work on Ginwala first, since it is 1) a very constrained topic, and 2) already has an article. If we get done with Ginwala, we can move on to one of the other topics, like the disputed territory or the religious concept. Bladesmulti, please begin adding a list of sources about Ginwala to this section, and tell me which ones you think are WP:RS. Please include a full |quote= of a couple paragraphs, in cite web form, so that everybody here can see what the sources say easily. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

References

Caste_system_among_Indian_Christians

Hi,

The first thing we need to establish is that consensus is not determined by voting. The key is to analyze the context of the comments and determine whether or not agreement about a course of action exists. I hope you'll understand that, as the initiator of the discussion, you are not in a position to read and analyze the arguments impartially. It is true that there was some support for "Caste system among Christians in South Asia"; however, that support did not rise to the level of consensus. Even those who supported the move to "Christians in South Asia" opposed, the most part, the original request that you made. Thus, the only consensus that existed was that your original idea was unworkable, and it was on that basis alone that I closed the request. You may make another move request for "Christians in South Asia" at another time. If I were you, I'd wait several weeks before doing so, mostly as a matter of ettiquette. You might also consider whether simply writing another article entirely on that topic is the appropriate course of action. Wikipedia has room for articles on both "Caste_system_among_Indian_Christians" and "Caste system among Sri Lankan Christians" and perhaps other nations as well. You might even begin working on such an article in your sandbox, to give others an idea of the content you have in mind. Best wishes, Xoloz (talk) 18:49, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Co-mentors and talkstalks, Xoloz's reply was in response to Bladesmulti's message over here.[1] Bladesmulti, the reply from Xoloz has a lot of difficult words. Did you understand it? Can you please summarize the main points? If there was a part you did not understand, tell us, and we can help. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:45, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Just for a second I thought if "ettiquette" is the new word, but it was mis-spell. Anyways, I can write it down.

1. Consensus cannot be remarked by the number of votes.
2. Consensus was not yet fully established.
3. Request was closed because there was no consensus about the original request.
4. Wait for some weeks, and open a new request.
5. A new page can be created from existing template.
6. Page can be created on sandbox, so others can have idea of what's being added. Bladesmulti (talk) 14:06, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Very good. Only one major point was missed. What about this sentence: " I hope you'll understand that, as the initiator of the discussion, you are not in a position to read and analyze the arguments impartially." Do you know what that sentence was talking about? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Here, he is saying, that because I started the discussion, I am not really in awe of analyzing the debate without being biased. In other words, user is saying that "because you started the discussion... you may be so involved with what you're saying that you wont take what other people are commenting into proper consideration". Bladesmulti (talk) 14:51, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

The last bit makes sense, I don't know what you mean by "I am not really in awe" - which I don't think means what you are trying to say. I've seen you use this phrase before. Dougweller (talk) 15:40, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Dougweller, I thought "awe" also means "stimulation", "interest", "concern", so I used. Bladesmulti (talk) 15:46, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

This is probably a job for Corinne, but I will start the ball rolling. Bladesmulti, please read all the following definitions at wiktionary.

• wikt:initiate. You started the discussion, therefore, you were the initiator of the discussion. Y
• wikt:position. The phrase, "you are not in a position to" ... means that it would be wikt:out of place (inappropriate) for you to take action. The idea is that somebody else should take the action, instead.
• wikt:impartially. Without bias. Without wikt:favoritism. wikt:Neutrally. Y
• wikt:awe. To be in awe of something, is to be wikt:astounded. I am in awe of Hafspajen's artistry. I am in awe of Corinne's grammatical knowledge. I am in awe of how JJ stays so friendly. When you say, "I am not really in awe of 74's skill with the Swedish language" then you are being wikt:sarcastic. It means, you think my Swedish sucks. That is not WP:NICE, of course, but it is okay for me to say it about myself: I don't know any Swedish at all, more or less! I need help from Hafspajen, Arildnordby, Bishonen, ThomasW, Yngvadottir, and others that are very good at Swedish.
• wikt:able. Having the ability to do something. As the initiator, I am not really able to analyze the DISCUSSION (not debate) without being biased.
• wikt:capable. Having the capability to do something. As the initiator, I am not really capable of analyzing the DISCUSSION (not debate) without being biased.
• wikt:stimulate. (Not related to awe, methinks.) A small change that causes action or progress. Sometimes, a bold edit will stimulate a stalled discussion in a positive direction. However, an unwise edit will stimulate a stalled discussion into a fight.
• wikt:interested. (Not related to awe, methinks.) There are MANY meanings for this term, fortunately or unfortunately. It is a fuzzy term, not a precise term. Bladesmulti, you should probably avoid this term, until you have a bit more experience. But go ahead and look it up at wiktionary anyways, it is something you will often need to read. Note that 'uninterested in something' is close to the same as 'not really in awe of something' ... but the former phrase is less precise.
• wikt:concerned. (Not related to awe, methinks.) This one is tricky. It sometimes means the same as worried. "I am concerned that Bladesmulti will not fix the attitude-problem that is hindering the mentorship." That is the same as being worried, right? But look at this sentence: "Corinne is concerned with teaching grammar, JJ is concerned with teaching sourcing, and 74 is concerned with teaching attitude." The meaning is very different now. Corinne is not really worried about teaching grammar. She is perfectly capable of teaching grammar. Why should she be worried? She is just *involved* with the grammar-aspect of the mentorship. So the lesson is, watch out: "concerned that" means "worried that" ... but "concerned with" means "concentrating on" and doesn't have much to do with worrying at all. Note that 'unconcerned with something' is close to the same as 'not really emotionally involved with something' ... but the former phrase is less precise.

The moral of the story is, that English is not very logical. If you are in awe of something, you will definitely find it stimulating and interesting, you will likely be concerned with and involved in the idea. But if you are unconcerned about the idea, if you have no vested interest, that doesn't mean you are "not really in awe" of the idea. Sometimes, the surrounding words will change the meaning of the central term, in unexpected ways.

  The best advice for writing English, is to stick to the most common, most simple words, that have straightforward meanings. Although "awe" is a very short word, only three letters, it has a complex usage-pattern. It is uncommon! (Stick with wikt:unable / not really able / mostly able / perfectly able; those are pretty plain... but watch out for wikt:disabled and wikt:disability which have special meanings.) Probably when you saw "awe" before, people were being wikt:sarcastic, and did not really mean what they plainly said. Wikipedia is not for sarcasm, since usually that is not very WP:NICE.

p.s. You were not being sarcastic, Bladesmulti, I understand that; but you were using the words ungrammatically, in your first sentence. That makes it hard for me and Doug to understand what you meant. But you did good, when you responded: you re-wrote your message. You said "he is saying ((sentence#1))... in other words ((sentence#2))..." and that second sentence was very helpful. Doug understood the last bit, even if he didn't understand the first bit. So, because you took the time for re-writing, Doug understood what you meant, overall.  :-)   Also, you learned a bit more grammar, Bladesmulti, as a bonus. Practice on re-writing clearly, it is one of the key skills for success on wikipedia. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I am impressed by the care and detail with which you are advising Bladesmulti. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 20:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

practice the new words

74. Thanks a lot for your kind words. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Sure, no problem, you are welcome. But I am mostly interested in your practice-sentences. Please write ten new sentences for me, using the words above. Then, we will rewrite them together, with improvements. If you cannot think of any sentences to write, you can summarize articles. Here is a snippet from the Foldaskóli.

Foldaskóli is a compulsory school in Reykjavík, Iceland, educating students in years 1 through 10. It was built to serve the then new suburban neighbourhood of Grafarvogur. The school opened in an unfinished building in 1985. The national curriculum in Innovation Education was developed at the school by two of its teachers. Construction of the school building was completed in 1991. It consists of three separate units or houses. In 2001–03 the facilities were enlarged with additional classroom space, a new gymnasium and a new cafeteria kitchen. The school was designated a green flag school for environmental awareness and action in 2006 and 2008. Enrollment grew rapidly at first, peaking at approximately 1,200 in 1990. It has since declined as the local population aged and as other schools were built nearby, and in 2010–11 was approximately 360. The current head teacher is Kristinn Breiðfjörð Guðmundsson. Previous head teachers were Arnfinnur Jónsson (1985–1992) and Ragnar Gíslason (1992–2002). The curriculum for Innovation Education (Icelandic: Nýsköpunarmennt), which is now required in all compulsory schools in Iceland in grades 4 through 7, was developed at Foldaskóli by two teachers, Gísli Þorsteinsson and Rósa Gunnarsdóttir, in 1998–2005. The school is the traditional host for an annual competition in the subject which began in the early 1990s.

  Can you summarize that into three sentences? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 00:35, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Foldaskóli is a compulsory school in Reykjavik, Iceland, educating students in years 1 through 10. The national curriculum in Innovation Education was prepared at the school by two of its instructors. The curriculum for Innovation Education (Icelandic: Nyskopunarmennt), which is now involved in all compulsory schools in Iceland in grades 4 through 7, was developed at Foldaskoli by two teachers, Gisli Torsteinsson and Rosa Gunnarsdottir, in 1998 - 2005.

Something like "Foldaskóli is a compulsory school based in Reykjavik, Iceland, educating students in years 1 through 10." May sound more professional. But above one will work. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:49, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

That is one important idea, from the paragraph, Bladesmulti, correct. But a key idea (aka main idea) and a summary are not the same. To summarize something, we try to get most of the essentials, but into a compact form. Here is my summary:

Foldaskóli is a compulsory 1st-to-10th-grade school in Reykjavik, Iceland. From 1998-2005, Torsteinsson and Gunnarsdottir (two Foldaskóli teachers) developed a 4th-to-7th-grade curriculum which became part of the national compulsory-school curriculum (Nyskopunarmennt).

This covers all the same ideas, and omits very few. I got rid of the official title of the national curriculum ("Innovative Education") because the official name in Icelandic is more correct, and because the English name sounds a bit promotional. I also got rid of the first names of the two teachers. But mostly, I just changed the wording to be more compact. My summary has 38 words, the original paragraph had 68 words. To summarize something, you have to rewrite it. You cannot just copy a sentence here and there: that is not a summary, usually. Also, if you copy a sentence from a WP:RS in google books, you have to put what you copied in a quote, otherwise you are plagiarizing (and possibly infringing with WP:COPYVIO). 74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:50, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Here is another paragraph. This is about a mythological zombie. Try to summarize it. Make a list of the ideas, major and minor. Then write your own sentences.

Techniques for Zombie-Prevention. Traditionally, a pair of open iron scissors were placed on the chest of the recently deceased, and straws or twigs might be hidden among their clothes. The big toes were tied together or needles were driven through the soles of the feet in order to keep the dead from being able to walk. Tradition also held that the coffin should be lifted and lowered in three different directions as it was carried from the house to confuse a possible zombie's sense of direction. The most effective means of preventing the return of the dead was believed to be the corpse door. A special door was built, through which the corpse was carried feet-first with people surrounding it so the corpse couldn't see where it was going. The door was then bricked up to prevent a return. It is speculated that this belief began in Denmark and spread throughout the Norse culture. The belief was founded on the idea that the dead could only leave through the way they entered. In one story, the zombies infesting the home of the Kiartan were driven off by holding a "door-doom". One by one the zombies were summoned to the door-doom and given judgment, and they were forced out of the home by this legal method. The home was then purified with holy water to ensure they never came back.

That is 235 words. To give you an idea what I'm looking for, my own summary of the zombie stuff (not shown! yet) has either 92 or 112 words, but still covers the same ideas. What are the ideas here? Show me the list, and then write a summary.

  Here is what not to do, this is way too short, only 22 words: "To prevent zombies, use scissors, twigs, needles, coffin-rotations, or Danish corpse-doors. Drive away zombies with door-dooms & holy water." Also, that too-short version is not properly encyclopedic. Wikipedia needs to descibe things accurately; we need to use a proper tone; we tell the whole story, just abridged.

  When you write your own summary about the zombie-paragraph, please use one of the new words you from above, for practice: 1) able / unable , 2) capable / incapable , 3) concerned / unconcerned , 4) interested / uninterested , 5) stimulate , 6) astounded. You don't have to use them all, but you can if you want to: *I* would be astounded, if you managed to summarize all the ideas, and use three of the vocabulary-words, at the same time.  :-)   74.192.84.101 (talk) 15:50, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

• Quite unbalanced. Main points are:-

1. a traditional command that the coffin ought to be raised and down in 3 completely different directions
2. it had been carried from the house to confuse a potential zombie's sense of direction.
3. A special door was engineered, through that the dead body was carried feet-first with folks close it therefore the dead body could not see wherever it had been going.
4. In one story, the zombies infesting the house of the Kiartan were driven off by holding a "door-doom".

• My summary was pretty huge, but I have tried to lower it. Lets see:-

• • Tradition additionally held that the coffin ought to be lifted and lowered in 3 totally different directions because it was carried from the house to confuse a doable zombie's sense of direction.

The big toes were tied along or needles were driven through the soles of the feet in order to keep the dead frombeing able to walk. the foremost effective suggests that of preventing the come of the dead was believed to be the cadaver door. One by one the zombies were summoned to the door-doom and given judgment, and that they were forced out of the house by this legal technique. historically, a pair of open iron scissors were placed on the chest of the recently deceased, and straws or twigs may be hidden among their garments. Bladesmulti (talk) 11:17, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

procedures

  My own computer-problems are mostly over, though not entirely.  :-)   I see you have answered more questions, that is good. Thanks. I will start responding, and organizing them. If you get to the end of your mentorship-questions for the day, and still have more time to work on wikipedia, you can work on these things:

• Answering older questions, that were skipped in the past. For example, some of the grammar-questions, and some of the policy-questions.
• Asking new questions. If there is a content-dispute that you are worried about, and want the co-mentors to explain, ask away. We may not spend much time on such questions now, while we are trying to concentrate on Ginwala. Still, it is a good idea to get such questions written down so that they are not forgotten later.
• Work on the Ginwala-topic. Follow the normal procedures.

Procedure: evaluate which sources are WP:RS, summarize what the WP:RS say, structure that information, and distill the essence

phase one, wikt:evaluate the sources. Search for a source, and skim it to make sure it is about the topic (Padamji Ginwala 1875-1962 ... not Pesi Ginwala 1918-2008 ... but in fact, they are in the same article and therefore 'count' as the same topic for our purposes ... use the "what links here" feature) add the URL to your talkpage-section (above) evaluate if the URL is WP:RS, or if it is not either way, leave it in the list of URLs (so others can know you looked at that URL already) if the source is RS, create a full {{cite web}} for it include page= with the exact page-number, quote= with two paragraphs, and archiveurl= DO NOT pretend you found the source offline; always give the deeplink URL phase two, wikt:summarize what the RS actually say. For each of the WP:RS that you found in phase one: read the source think about what the source actually says overall write a summary of this information stay neutral (even if the RS is not!) just the facts omit nothing add nothing use proper grammar DO NOT wikt:plagiarize, write your own sentences phase three, wikt:structure the encyclopedic article, to properly cover the topic organize the material into sections background early history of the topic main ideas recent history of the topic legacy of the topic analysis and reception by independent RS should be found throughout each section look at what you have done, and adjust the size of coverage for each sub-topic per WP:UNDUE and WP:DUE, give each sub-topic the weight that the WP:RS give to that sub-topic phase four, boil it down to the wikt:essentials (summarize the summarizing you have already done). finally, AT THE VERY END, after you have already sourced and written the body write the lead-paragraph. This summarizes what all the rest of the article (phase three) already says write an overview-section below lead-paragraph (if necessary... only very long articles will need this) consider carefully whether you need an infobox (not every article does!) clean up the writing, and tidy up the article compare your work to existing encyclopedia articles: britannica 2014, britannica 1911, and whatever hardcopy your local library has.

Now, of course, most articles that you work on will already be written. These procedures cover the entire process. In practice, you might just be dropping in for a short while, to add one sentence backed up by one source: this is what you did at Hindi Art, for instance. Or you might only be interested in one aspect of the larger topic: this is what you did at Voltaire#Islam for instance.

  However, even if you are only working on a narrow portion of an article, you should follow these procedures anyways. Even if you are only interested in a particular subset. Because the goal of working on articles is to improve the encyclopedia: if you skip phases, that is unlikely to happen. The phases are circular: after phase four, every article goes back to phase one, which is to say, more sources can always turn up. After we practice applying the procedures to Ginwala, we can apply the same procedures to other topics. HTH. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 13:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Padamji Ginwala can be expanded a bit. There should be a page for talk. I will make one, later. Following information can be added to the page.

1. Padamji_Ginwala#Lawyer, first sentence should be "Padamji Ginwala completed his study of Law from Trinity Hall University of Cambridge.
2. Padamji_Ginwala#In_Burma_and_British_India, his speech in the Indian Legislative Assembly on 5th March 1923 can be provided, it is about system of taxation, it goes like:-

What takes place in the office of the Honourable the Finance Member every year when he prepares the revenue side of the Budget I can well imagine. He sits in his chair. He has got three men generally with him. On his right is perhaps Mr. Cook, on his left is Mr. Ayyar, and in front of him Mr. Sim. Then he asks, ' How much do these people require ? ' They say, * Oh, this year they want 80 crores 1 of rupees only from taxation'. 'Is that so ? What did they have last year ?' '64 crores.' ' Very well. Give me a copy of the Tariff Act, a copy of the Income Tax Act, and a copy of the Opium and the Salt Acts and a blue pencil.' He takes the blue pencil in his hands and says, ' Here, 11 per cent on this. No. I will put 15 per cent. That will give us 2 crores. Is that not so, Mr. Cook ?' * Yes, approximately that.' Mr. Sim then says, (Income Tax has been rather sterile these last few years. We will try a little super tax on something,' and he adds on something to the super tax. Then he goes through the Opium and Salt Acts, and the same process goes on until he thinks he has secured the additional sixteen crores. I submit that this is not the way in which, any longer, the Indian Budget ought to be prepared. Every country in the world has, at definite periods, undertaken an examination of the taxation of the country with reference to the taxable capacity of the people. They have got figures and they study all the conditions with reference to the requirements of the country. I maintain that though the Finance Department claims to know everything, they have got no data upon which they can determine the taxation with reference to the taxable capacity of the people. There, I submit, is the orthodoxy of the Budget."

References

Bladesmulti (talk) 11:17, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

mentorship schedule

Welcome back, Bladesmulti.  :-)   CorinneSD and Joshua_Jonathan, do you both still have time to continue working on the mentorship? Bladesmulti has not been through intensive training yet, but appears to still want to edit. Bladesmulti, are you interested in spending some time on the mentorship pages? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm happy to continue mentoring Bladesmulti. I'm sorry that I haven't been helping much lately; I've been busy. Please tell me the best places to look to find material that Blades has written from which I can create a lesson. CorinneSD (talk) 14:34, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Danke.  :-)   Bladesmulti has been out of town since the 2nd of March, so there is little "new" stuff. Grammar#10 thru #15 still need work, if memory serves. I suggest we work on Bladesmulti making 500 mentorship-related edits (to User_talk:Bladesmulti and the Grammar-subpage and the Mentorship-subpage). That way, we can set a "numeric target" for progress, rather than a number of days. Does this sound good? Currently, I've started Bladesmulti working on a very small and constrained topic, Gaijani Sr and Gaijani Jr. The article already exists, so achieving WP:N is complete. However, we can flesh it out with additional sources, and Bladesmulti can get practice reading sources, understanding what they say, summarizing them, and re-writing to fix problems. See section above. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks 74, I was busy with travelling. I may be online everyday, but not as frequently as before I could. I am not in hurry at all, so obviously my answer is yes.

Okay, great. In that case, since you aren't sure how much mentorship you'll be able to do per day, I suggest we aim for 500 mentorship-edits. After you have made 500 edits to the mentorship pages, working on one article at a time (no Christian Terrorism!  :-)   then we can see what sort of progress has been achieved. Does that work for you?

  Your grammar is getting better all the time, I will say. Traveling might have only one 'L' ... but in UK-spelling, I believe it can have 'LL' as you wrote, maybe Corinne can correct me here.  :-)   The grammar in the second clause of your second sentence needs a little work ("but not as frequently as before I could"). It is perfectly understandable though: I got what you meant, with no problem. Still, for mainspace that portion would be a little rough around the edges. Can you rewrite that bit, please? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Tryptofish, How are you? I wanted to thank you for looking after Christian terrorism, hope everything is fine with you. Bladesmulti (talk) 15:04, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I'm doing very well, albeit rather busy. Thanks for asking! --Tryptofish (talk) 17:24, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Christian POV pusher

A Christian POV pusher keeps on inserting a large section of Christian nonsense at the Bart Ehrman page in clear violation of WP:BLP. Similarly on the Richard Carrier page, he makes all sorts of unfounded assertions in violation of WP:BLP. Please help at both of these pages. RosylynGrock (talk) 03:47, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Seems surprising to me. But I must appreciate that you have answered him well enough and I can kind of see why he is not that mannerly in dealing with these subjects. Don't worry, I will have a watch. Bladesmulti (talk) 11:17, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

See also comments by Tryptofish, here. WP:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#86.181.139.204 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:46, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, she is the one who has been answered. The Carrier page has been tagged by somebody - not me and against my wishes - for notifiability, because she has now caused people to think he is an ordinary historian - a low-ranked one at that - and doesn't meet the criteria. I would further add that I do not personally see how random abuse totally disengaged from the subject at hand, including a pointless and swiftly dismissed referral for administrator input, based on Rosylyn Grock's personal prejudices and inability to see Carrier's exact status with a clear eye constitutes an 'answer'.86.181.139.204 (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Hey again 86, my take is that there are some mistakes on both sides (failure to stick religiously to the sources and/or relying on personal interpretation of the facts), but I'm confident that we will get it sorted out shortly, and all concerned will learn a bit. The article on Carrier has been tagged for wikiNotability (not notifiability :-)   ...see WP:N for the gory details, and WP:42 for the short version. To have a dedicated article, Carrier (or any topic!) needs to be covered, specifically and in some depth, in wikiReliable sources... such as the L.A.Times piece, for instance. That piece was about the movie, mostly, but Carrier got a couple paragraphs. Even if Carrier doesn't have a dedicated page at this time (he is only in his 30s after all), he would still be WP:NOTEWORTHY and would merit a subsection of some larger/broader article. The tag for wikiNotability is therefore just a "potential move request" in other words. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:48, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Bangladesh

I don't know if Bladesmulti is permitted to edit articles or not. I haven't been keeping up-to-date on the status of the mentorship and number of permitted edits. But I thought you, Bladesmulti, and JJ and 74 also, might help moderate a discussion regarding two items: 1) whether no cities at all, Dhaka only, or Dhaka and Chittagong ought to be mentioned in the lead/lede of Bangladesh, and 2) which photo is more appropriate for the education section. Over the past few days, there have been edits, reverts, and more reverts. The discussions on the Talk page (under more than one section heading) and on the Talk page of User talk:Aditya Kabir (also under more than one section heading), have been approaching acrimony and don't seem to be leading toward resolution. CorinneSD (talk) 18:27, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Corinne, you are the co-mentor in charge of whether Bladesmulti can do, or cannot do, anything. This is a fully WP:NOTCOMPULSORY mentorship: Bladesmulti can do as they see fit. Of course, if Bladesmulti goes on in mainspace like usual, I suspect that ES&L or Dougweller would become unhappy, and use their admin-bits to protect wikipedia. So as one of the co-mentors, I have suggested that Bladesmulti focus here exclusively on the talkpage, for his next ~500 edits, and that we pick one subject at a time, starting with Ginwala.

  But please, Corinne, any time you want to do something, as a co-mentor, don't ask whether it is okay, be BOLD.  :-)   This is also very much a WP:IAR mentorship-system. If you think that Bladesmulti can help with an article, ask his help. If you think that helping on an article will help Bladesmulti's mentorship, then make is so. Our goal here is to get Bladesmulti into habits that will make them a productive wikipedian, and keep him away from AN/I, to the extent that is possible, given the topic-matter he is primarily interested in. I would make one suggestion: if there is any question, in the Bangladesh article, about the current head-count of hindus, make that off-limits for now. Hope this helps. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 01:59, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

I think you have better idea than this. I have checked few pages that I used to edit, they've got better indeed, while hardly 1-2 or maybe more require some improvement. I never had any conflict there. For now, if I am asked, that what I should do, I would want to submit my completed drafts. I also want to create some new articles. Hope you are fine. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I haven't seen any edits by Bladesmulti in a while. Blades, are you still editing on Wikipedia? Are you just busy, or have you become discouraged by all this mentoring? I am ready to help you with any edits you have made or would like to make. CorinneSD (talk) 16:39, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I am not really going to edit Bangladesh' related articles. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Stop deleting the content.

Will you stop undoing the changes which I have been doing? I am a Buddhist myself and I have been quoting from the sourced material that there is no Origin of Buddhism in Vedic Philosophy. And you are deleting the content and adding your own. Show me where Buddha said that he is teaching the Vedas.

And stop reporting me unneccessarily. I will report you if you make unneccessarily edits and adding on your own on tha page Buddhism and Hinduism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astronautabhinavstar (talk • contribs) 08:03, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Astronautabhinavstar, I am not removing sourced material, only you are fighting over your original research. Buddhism's originated in vedic age, during 6th - 5th century BCE. It cannot be denied at all. Bladesmulti (talk) 08:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I am not fighting at all and is your friend. You yourself is concerning the views on Vedas. Gautama never taught Vedas . He went to teachers like Alara Kalama and Udaka Ramaputta but he was not satisfied. Now below is an Article written by Ven.S. Dhammika a Popular International monk...so kindly don't make your own ideas.

Read[2], [3]. Buddhism emerged in Vedic age, and its tradition share similarities with the vedic religion. Bladesmulti (talk) 08:24, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

The Vedic age ended with the rise of the shramanic movements. They all share commonalities,but there are also differences. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Joshua Jonathan True. Please have a look at -> [4]. I think that is original research, and too much dependability upon a single source. Remember, we have discarded Vivekananda, in terms of WP:RS, I don't think Thanissaro Bhikkhu can be used for these claims either. Bladesmulti (talk) 08:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Please cool down, both of you. You're both creating a huge amount of work to check. and Blades, you're still being watched, remember? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:34, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's why I haven't checked whole watchlist yet. Bladesmulti (talk) 08:39, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring notice

Blades, the fact that you reported another user for edit warring is a bad omen; you shouldn't be involved in these issues. Canvassing [5] [6] [7] isn't really helpful either. Take care, and take this as a warning. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:03, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Warning for? It is already fundamental that you can report any user who is rapidly blanking or continuing disruptive editing. Firstly I was going to report this user on Intervention against Vandalism. But I found that this user is as old in wikipedia as I am. However, his ultimate source for his information is "I am buddhist". [8] is not canvassing. Breach of canvassing is only if you are calling those editors who have never edited the related wikiproject, or if it is extensive in amount. I agree it is not very helpful though. Bladesmulti (talk) 13:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

My apologies, "canvassing" was not the right word. The Sitush-message was unrelated indeed. I realised that later, when I thought it over. And AstroX was indeed not very constructive. Yet, the way he's editing may also be a reason to approach him with care: it's clear that these topics are dear to him, and that he doesn't know how Wikipedia works. So, what could have been done to cool him down, and give him the feeling that he's being heard? Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Source Verification

Dear fellow, you recently left a message on my talk page saying that my edits are original search. Are you sure? I have not added any material to articles based on my original search. I have just removed unsourced material. And what really surprised me is that you added a lot of book sources which no one can verify in order to support the unsourced content. What proof do you have that the source which you have added to folk religion is really about Hinduism? It is impossible that you have got these books suddenly and read them in few hours and got proof that unsourced information is correct. Adding sources which no one can verify does not make any sense. You have clearly broken the wikipedia's pillar of mutual trust and reliability. Just give a link of some website which is talking about so called "folk Hinduism". Similarly Vedas is a holy book of jains too and they are vegetarians also. Vedism is the source of all dharmic religions. I doubt weather Voltaire explicitly mentioned Hinduism (unknown to most westerners at that time) or the statement is it self fake. Now you are threatening me with threats of being blocked!Septate (talk) 11:22, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Changing "Hinduism" to "Vedism", and "Hindus" to "Indians" is certainly WP:OR, no matter what are the basis of your thinking. But we go by the reliable source that has been added on the section. We don't make any claims or sentences that are against the source that has been provided, it is essentially considered as Wikipedia:OR and Wikipedia:SYNTH when you do. Furthermore it is also considered as bad faith, and dishonesty.

You are removing "Hinduism" from Folk religion, even though a source has been provided. If you look, there are thousands of more, you can actually expand the article. If you don't want to, it is fine, but stop removing the sourced content. If Jainism can be called as Folk Religion, you can write about it.

Entering Heaven alive has been sourced with reliable sources. Every source can be confirmed, all you have to do is copy those book titles and search them on http://books.google.com . I think I can find some for you, The History of Medieval Vaishnavism in Orissa, Nature of Indian Culture, The Radical Humanist, Volume 65. If you lack access, you can ask me for quotation or screenshot.

Same with Nontrinitarianism.

Bottom line would be, that these all contents have been added to the page, months or years ago. You should read Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary, there wouldn't be a need to apply Wikipedia:OR in any of the pages, or involve into Wikipedia:SYNTH, Wikipedia:DONTLIKEIT. Bladesmulti (talk) 11:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Greetings and hugs to you.

I have reverted your changes what you did on Ambedkar page. As you reverted to Academic and Lawyer. For the word Lawyer. Ambedkar was the first law minister of your country India. So Using the word lawyer is quite low.

For the word academic.

If you go to college then it does mean that you are studying science and arts both.

Specific things should be mentioned.

Don't be in an edit war with me.

Go to Brentrand Russell page here....http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Bertrand_Russell Here also specific things are mentioned.

With regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.241.214.37 (talk) 17:09, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Other pages cannot be excuse, you can change them if you want to. Bladesmulti (talk) 03:47, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Oh Bladesmulti that shows that you are only concerned with Ambedkar page..How lovely? Can't you edit Brentrand Russell page? I think you are going to seek help from "theredpenofdoon". Oh come on !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.59.165.176 (talk) 13:32, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

You want help with that page? I can, but you should raise issue on it's talk page first. Bladesmulti (talk) 13:36, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Good comments Blades; I like this cool and subtle sarcasm (seriously!). Much better than straightforward offense. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:03, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Happy celebrations!!!

• 
  Belly Dancers
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Hafspajen (talk) 15:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Hafspajen. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:41, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

LOng time, no se.. Where were you? Hafspajen (talk) 09:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I was travelling, and took break from wiki. Bladesmulti (talk) 20:47, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome back, Blades! CorinneSD (talk) 15:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks ! Bladesmulti (talk) 20:47, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

• Hafspajen, before 74. would leave wiki he said something before that? Bladesmulti (talk) 20:55, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

CorinneSD, if you have time, you should carry out copy editing on Hinduism_and_Judaism and the new article "Traditional African Religion and other religions". Bladesmulti (talk) 15:38, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

• 74 said nothing of leaving. Hafspajen (talk) 08:05, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

I had checked his last contributions. Correct. Bladesmulti (talk) 08:17, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Was Voltaire wrong about William Penn's 1683 treaty with the Lenape Indians?

Hi! In case you are interested, there is a discussion here about William Penn's 1683 treaty with the Lenape Indians, and specifically whether Voltaire's famous quote ("...a treaty never written, never broken") from his 1764 Dictionnaire philosophique was incorrect. If you have time, your input would be appreciated. Thanks! --Guy Macon (talk) 11:37, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Only 1 result, or 6. Voltaire really never said it. Bladesmulti (talk) 08:50, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

misinformed

my edit diff is not vandalizing. it's backed up by multiple sources. NBAkid (talk) 11:07, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

NBAkid is right, Blades. Calling his edits "disruptive" is wrong. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:38, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

By the way, the Netherlands are not overpopulated, unless you look at a worldwide scale and ecological footprint; we can sustain ourselves, but if the whole world was to have our living-standards, World War III had already started. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:40, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

When we refer to "overpopulated" we talk about population by density. NBAkid makes no sense. Bladesmulti (talk) 17:47, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

No. When we refer 'population density' we talk about population density. NBAkid (talk) 08:39, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

It describes that how much populated a country is. However, population density is not very accurate for deciding the population issue of the country. Nederlands has higher population density than both Israel and India. But when you go to Nederlands you don't even find as many people. I have the real and original photos of Nederlands so I can tell. It is same with many areas of South Korea. Bladesmulti (talk) 08:49, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

South Korean and Holland can manage their population. That's why they don't have overpopulation issues. Meanwhile India has the highest number of people living in poverty in such a densely populated area. NBAkid (talk) 08:55, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

With the trillions of debt anyone can pretend that they manage their population. But a large percentage of population lacks employment, and economical growth in decline. List goes on, not going to end anytime soon. Bladesmulti (talk) 09:00, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Obviously you're not objective on the issue. NBAkid (talk) 09:58, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Maybe, there is no big issue. Bladesmulti (talk) 10:03, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Then why so protective? and of what? NBAkid (talk) 11:38, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Sidetrack: the average population density in the Netherlands is high. But there are huge differences within the Netherlands. The big (according to our standards) are crowded. But go just outside of them, and it can be quite empty. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:50, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's why I mentioned the photos that I have got of Nederlands. Bladesmulti (talk) 12:18, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

More importantly the Netherlands can manage their population. India can't, that's why it has issues with overpopulation. NBAkid (talk) 15:27, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Still makes no sense. Can't even see if there is any issue. When we use strong words like "manage", or explain the handling of a nation, we go by the series of examination. Such as, GDP, military power, debt, economic growth, HDI growth, political system, resources, etc. Repeating same opinion is no help. Bladesmulti (talk) 02:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

• Dutch admin here. NBAkid is correct, and so is Joshua: this warning was totally unjustified and you should apologize for it--engaging in bickering afterward to try and prove a content point doesn't help you. Drmies (talk) 15:48, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

I usually agree with such assumptions, apologies indeed. No need of any more explanation. Bladesmulti (talk) 02:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Alright then, let's move on. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 04:47, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Take a break

Baldes, I suggest you take a break. Couple of days. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:22, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Busy all day, yesterday. Just came today for 5 mins. Bladesmulti (talk) 03:15, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Consent

Quote: "Amrishnp, You are sure? I don't think that one of the scholar, Anthony, who has written that Vedas were recited in Syria(during 1500 BCE) had any consent from the Syrian government." Brilliant! I'm still laughing! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I know, he's making no sense. It is not even the right page to discuss aryan-migration theory. Bladesmulti (talk) 09:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Bladesmulti

Dear, I am not a sock. I hope we can be good friends. Please stop wasting your time reporting me or someone else. I don't want to be in a conflict with you. I apologize if I made any mistake. I rarely come to wikipedia. My account was created long back. I watched the history of caste system of India in which you yourself reverted some of the changes and removed the image of Dr.Ambedkar and somewhat before you also placed his image just below the Gandhi Ji's Image. And when I placed it back you called it POV pushing. It isn't a POV pushing dear. Dr.Ambedkar is known as the Messiah of Dalits because he was born in untouchable caste and raised their voice. PM Narendra Modi saluted him on his birthday. I hope you already know that on 14th of April. I hope we both can contribute something good to wikipedia rather then being involved in a meaningless conflict with each other. I hope we can be good friends.Take care. :) With hugs to you. Siddheart (talk) 23:54, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

I am not against Ambedkar, I never denied any of his recognition. Bladesmulti (talk) 03:04, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Will you do me a favour?

Hello Bladesmulti . Will you do me a favour? can you stop reporting me as a sock? Why do you think so? waiting for your early reply, Siddhartha Chabuskhar. Siddheart (talk) 04:21, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I want to e-mail you

I want to e-mail you privately, so please activate your e-mail. To create/activate it, you have to log in, click on the 'preferences' link on the top right and add your e-mail. Thanks!

New section.

Hello will you please make a new section about which you are talking? I would be grateful. Thanks.Siddheart (talk) 09:59, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

You were talking about New Section to be added. If you want to undo the changes I made then do it. But please don't remove the content . You may add the quotation of H.H Dalai Lama on Dr. Ambedkar somewhere but don't remove it at least. With hugs, Siddheart (talk) 10:59, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Influence and legacy of Dayanand Saraswati

Hello Bladesmulti. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Influence and legacy of Dayanand Saraswati".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Influence and legacy of Dayanand Saraswati}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Rankersbo (talk) 05:58, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Rankersbo That draft can be deleted. I moved to User:Bladesmulti/Influence and legacy of Dayanand Saraswati, and merged some content to Dayanand Saraswati. Bladesmulti (talk) 07:08, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

OK that's great. Rankersbo (talk) 07:19, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Precious

titles and names of Shiva
Thank you, editor quoting "Not the wind, not the flag; mind is moving", for quality articles on religious topics such as Zoroastrianism in India, for criticism of bias, for sourcing, for a project of influence and legacy, for picturing us editors in an enlightening way, for missing, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:44, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you!! Bladesmulti (talk) 11:59, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Remember

Do you remember Septate? JimRenge (talk) 14:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Just talked about him with NeilN. Bladesmulti (talk) 11:59, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I read your comment. You should realize that his edits on islam/religion in country xy, his corrections (?) of statistical data and addition of inappropiate images of mosques create even more serious problems. Besides of WP:UNDUE, OR, NPOV there is WP:ICANTHEARYOU. I wonder when this will come to an end. JimRenge (talk) 14:30, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

He has special hatred for Hinduism, Shia Islam. He had been blocked for removing images of Muhammad on Islam. This will end only after a topic ban, maybe not for whole religion subject but at least for the pages about Hinduism. I have seen his horrible swapping of religious population stats, NeilN, User:DeCausa and 1 more have had watch over Septate for that, I wouldn't care much, but like you've said that his amount of disruptive editing seems to be endless, true! Bladesmulti (talk) 17:12, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

"Wikihounded". What do you mean? I reported him to AN3 for edit warring with deceptive edit summaries once and he was blocked for it. He has been caught several times deliberately making dishonest edit summaries to covertly make an edit he wanted. And he has admitted and apologized to dping that and then he's repeated it. I have warned him on his talk page as a result. I suggest you strike "wikihounded". DeCausa (talk) 20:57, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

User:DeCausa I know that the term usually reflects the bad side, but Wikihounding is the term when you go by contributions of the user, for both good or bad. Other para, Wikipedia:HA#NOT can be read and it support the meaning that I was using. Like every other policy, this has 2 sid es as well. One admin told me before that wikihounding or going through contribs is recommended if you are reverting horrible edits. Bladesmulti (talk) 01:39, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

No, that's not correct. It's always "bad", see WP:WIKIHOUND: "Wikihounding is the singling out of one or more editors, and joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work. This is with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance or distress to the other editor...The important component of wikihounding is disruption to another user's own enjoyment of editing, or to the project generally, for no overriding reason." What you linked was defining what is not "wikihounding". DeCausa (talk) 05:49, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Watch over is correct term, thanks decausa! Bladesmulti (talk) 10:58, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

@JimRenge,DeCausa, Look at talk:Religion and homosexuality,talk:Ayurveda and tell me is this my hatred for Hinduism? No explanation for my hatred for Shia Islam.Septate (talk) 08:17, 5 July 2014 (UTC) When it comes wikihounding, Bladesmulti's wikihounding played an important part in developing my interest in Hinduism and religion in particular. I was much interested in editing biology and physics articles (As evident from my edit history) before. And now JimRenge is doing the same thing.Septate (talk) 08:22, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

On ayurveda you are giving useless sources and want hindu traditional medicine to be changed to indian traditional. On religion and homosexuality you are trying to fabricate that hinduism forbids homosexualiy, then say that it says nothing, that is hatred. But they know that you are always into Ididnthearthat. Bladesmulti (talk) 10:58, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Irfan Habib 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:

• *[

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:51, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ayurveda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charak. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 31 August 2014 (UTC)