User talk:O Govinda

Hello, and Welcome!

Hello, O Govinda, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! .

You are right, I did misunderstand. I have removed the duplicate link. Thanks very much for letting me know. Best wishes, Tom Harrison ^Talk 20:01, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bhakti

Dear O Govinda, I have seen that you have a made a number of edits recently to the Bhakti page. Would you be interested in helping in a major re-write on the article alongside a number of other editors? I have a copy of the page in my sandbox which anyone can make edits or suggestions on. See User:GourangaUK/sandbox. Best wishes, ys, GourangaUK 09:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduism

Welcome to WikiProject Hinduism

WikiProject Hinduism — a collaborative effort to improve articles about Hinduism

Discussion board — a page for centralised Hinduism-related discussion

Notice board — contains the latest Hinduism-related announcements

Hindu Wikipedians — Wikipedians who have identified themselves as Hindus

Portal — a portal linking to key Hinduism-related articles, images, and categories

Workgroups — projects with a more specific scopes

For more links, go to the project's navigation template.

--D-Boy 02:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Prabhupada

O Govinda, I have seen that you made some major changes to the prabhupada article. I suggest that you adhere to your own cordial suggestion and discuss changes in the Talk page. PietjePrecies 20:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, PietjePrecies. I'm happy to discuss that page with you.

When you explained your reasoning on the Talk page, you had good points. The academic respect was undocumented. The "impact on Indians" was presented without backing. And the status of the BBT as "largest publisher" was claimed but not supported.

My changes aimed to remedy the defects you pointed out.

My suggestion, by the way, was not that all major changes need discussion. My point, rather, was that after one's major changes have twice been reverted, discussion would be more fruitful than an edit war.

Your criticisms have resulted in an article that is now better documented and more rigorous about verifiability. So I think the discussion has been fruitful. Thank you for your interest and participation.

Respectfully, O Govinda 05:39, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch

The deletion of the "generally Accepted 13%", I mean. We're discussing loads of aspects of this article on the talk page. As I a sure you know, comments and consensus building where appropriate are welcome from all interested editors. Please feel wholly welcome. Fiddle Faddle 07:52, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Fiddle Faddle. Grateful for the hospitality. --Cordially, O Govinda 13:27, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CD hypothesis & style

Hi G, thanks for the note. I'm not going to get it right every time, I suppose.

Your guess about "proposition" is right on. I think "is the controversial proposition" reads much better than "controversially proposes" (one of the rare cases where a more passive voice actually works better).

I'm open minded about the extended cover-up point. At the time I felt it needed to be there to motivate the some say/others say clunkiness. (A bit problem in many of the articles.) I'll have a look at it again.

I don't mind the text going back and forth a bit on points of style. Maybe we should resolve to make and revert such edits one sentence at a time. Also pleased to meet someone who cares about such things full time. Best,--Thomas Basboll 13:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Bhagavad Gita

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, O Govinda! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. You've received this warning 1 times. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, and try to reinsert the link again. If your link was genuine spam, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 03:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Bot! Wasn't my link. I just saw it added at the top of the list of links and moved it to the bottom. Anyway, glad you killed it. Keep up the good work, Bot! O Govinda 07:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good job

Well done to your edits to Persecution of Hindus. If you have any knowledge on such matters, I also ask that you participate in the long-brewing arguments regarding allegations of necrophilia and bestiality among Hindus made by User:Dbachmann and User:Paul Barlow on Ashwamedha. Rumpelstiltskin223 12:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hare Krishna Kazakh Mother.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hare Krishna Kazakh Mother.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Kazakh Home Demolished.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Kazakh Home Demolished.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vaishnavism wikiproject

Hello O Goinda. I wanted to let you know that there is now a Vaishnava project located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism/Vaishnavism, a project for edifying Vaishnava related articles. Also, there is now a talk page for Vaishnava related discussions located at, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hinduism/Vaishnavism. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pirate Site?

in http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Bhaktivedanta_Narayana&diff=207813732&oldid=206190288 you describe BVML as a pirate site please prove your accusation.Syama (talk) 17:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Easy. Go to www.bvml.org/books/index.html and see the list of books. Then go to the records of the US Copyright Office-- http://www.copyright.gov/records/ --and search for "Bhaktivedanta Book Trust." You'll find that the list of works for which the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust is the registered copyright owner includes most of the books published at www.bvml.org/books/index.html.

Best wishes.

O Govinda (talk) 09:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to be an editor on a new project

Since its just at the begging stage, please voice your opinion or put yourself on the list of editors here. Thanks, Wikidās ॐ 18:31, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada call

OGovinda, you were one of the editors who contributed to the above article. Since the article has stabilised and I have added proper references as well as provided a NPOVs references, I suggest final edits by the editors who were contributing to the article. Following the general proofing and copyedit, I would suggest nominating it towards GA (Good Article). Wikidās -ॐ 14:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

isha upanishad

Your attention is drawn to the talk page of the above article, dealing with issues following your edits. Please note that you have referred to your edits as "nixing", which seems to imply an assumption of a power of final decision. This is not the case. Redheylin (talk) 17:52, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Nix" was just intended as a way to say "delete" in half the space. But you're probably right about its implications. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. O Govinda (talk) 18:33, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Del" serves many people fine and is generally understood. ;-) --Jayen 466 20:06, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems good. But what's the past tense of that? :-) Thanks again. 21:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

"Del" as well. :-) Seriously, "Del OR" etc. is understood. Jayen 466 21:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then. "Del" it is! Thanks again. O Govinda (talk) 21:42, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Osho lede

About the sentence in the Osho lede, here are some references I could add. Scholarly literature (for titles and publication info see Osho#References):

Fox 2002, p. 42: "... an influential newspaper identified Osho, alongside such figures as Gandhi and the Buddha, as one of the ten men who have most changed the destiniy of India, in Osho's case by "liberating the minds of future generations from the shackles of religiosity and conformism"
Bhawuk 2003 cites Khushwant Singh, former Editor-in-Chief of the Times of India, describing Osho as "the most original thinker that India has produced: the most erudite, the most clearheaded and the most innovative".
Urban 2004 says,
Rajneesh made the journey from India to America and back to India again, finally achieving even more success in his homeland, perhaps in large part because of his status as a figure who had a massive U. S. and European following. [...] Rather remarkably, however, Osho seems to have become only more popular since his death. Indeed, he has published perhaps more books and received more acclaim as a disembodied photograph or video image than he ever did while still incarnate. [...] In sum, the character of Rajneesh has undergone an incredible transmutation, particularly since his death: from a shocking, scandalous Tantric sex guru into an international icon for a high-tech global movement and business enterprise.
— Urban, University of California Press, 2003, p. 242-243
Süss 1996, p. 36: "Many Indians today see him as a significant personality"

From a tax judgment:

From [1]:
"12. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as two of the three members of the Appellate Tribunal have rightly observed that the perception of the people towards the preaching of the philosophy of Acharya Rajneesh has undergone sea change during the last few years. While earlier, he was supposed to be controversial personality and most of the people of this country were averse to his thinking and preaching, during last few years his teachings and philosophy have become more acceptable to the society. About 650 books written by Acharya Rajneesh have been widely studied and translated in many European and Asian and Indian languages. He wrote on diverse subjects like Vedanta, Geeta (Geeta Darshan), Sant Kabeer (Kahe Kabeer Diwana), Guru Nanak (Ek Omkar Satnam) which is commentary on the Sikh scripture known as ‘Japuji’, hailed as best commentary by Gyani Zail Singh, former President of India. The complete Osho literature was accepted in the Parliament library and Mr. Shivraj Patil, the then Speaker of Lok Sabha, who received the literature from the trust, termed the literature as ‘original creation’. He observed that essence contained in all the volumes is that one should find peace in one self, only then can peace be attained in the society and in the entire universe. 13. Not only Acharya Rajneesh is being studied by number of universities abroad but several students have also prosecuted higher studies in the philosophy of Acharya Rajneesh in the Jawaharlal University, Patna University, North Gujarat University, Banaras Hindu University for Ph.D. Rani Durgawati University, Jabalpur has established an Osho Chair with the financial support of the Government of Madhya Pradesh for the study of his philosophy.
— Bombay High Court tax judgment

Some press sources:

I am sure more in a similar vein could be found, but I don't want to have a string of ten references attached to one sentence in the lede. Can you suggest another way of summarizing his present-day perception in India? One theme that comes up a few times is "original thinker" (Singh and Narayanan). Might that be a way to go? Am open to suggestions. Cheers, --Jayen 466 20:06, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Jayen.

It's clear that many such references are available. Problem: At least for the lede, they're more suitable for a hagiography than for a balanced, objective account.

Abundant references can be cited to support the idea that Osho was a progressive, innovative philosopher, perhaps one of the greatest the modern world has seen.

On the other side, references equally abundant could be gathered for the view that he was a disgraceful reprobate, an opportunist who misused his God-given skills and learning to tell self-centered, self-indulgent Westerners just the sort of decadent message they wanted to hear.

I spend about half of every year in India, a portion of it in Pune, and my anecdotal account is that I've never met anyone who regards Osho as "one of the most significant philosophers and mystics of the 20th century." But I've met dozens and dozens who regard him as a national embarrassment, a purveyor of degradation, a "sex guru," and so on. And I'm not talking about what I hear from a sectarian circle but rather from ordinary middle-class people, the kind I meet in homes and on trains. I'm sure his admirers exist--your references prove it. But "widely regarded as one of the most significant philosophers and mystics of the 20th century" most definitely strikes me as promo, not objective reporting.

One man's "original thinker" is another man's disgrace to Indian philosophy and culture.

Now, what would constitute an objective, balanced conclusion for the lede?

Cordially,

O Govinda (talk) 21:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno. But people like Khushwant Singh or the Bombay tax court are as establishment as you can get, and Urban, commenting about his reception in India in more recent days, doesn't even like him. Jayen 466 21:52, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a go. I think that should be alright, but let me know what you think. Thanks, Jayen 466 23:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think that flies. In general the article strikes me as considerably skewed, underplaying the negatives, but I won't quarrel about it. Thanks. Cordially, O Govinda (talk) 16:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Kazakh Home Demolished.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kazakh Home Demolished.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 06:49, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hare Krishna Kazakh Mother.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hare Krishna Kazakh Mother.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 06:52, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I hope you don't mind me asking, but are you affiliated with ISKON? I can't help but notice that all your edits of the last 2 years are about Richard L. Thompson and Michael Cremo, IRWolfie- (talk) 10:35, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't mind. Any special reason you ask? Best wishes, O Govinda (talk) 15:37, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it may be useful to familiarise yourself with WP:COIU. Good luck, IRWolfie- (talk) 21:11, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. When time allows, I may respond on an article Talk page. Now and the next two months are a busy time for me. Best wishes, O Govinda (talk) 10:06, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, O Govinda. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, O Govinda. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in COVID-19, broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Alexbrn (talk) 18:33, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Fringe Theories Noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. jps (talk) 01:10, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @ජපස. I noticed the discussion on the 26th. But I appreciate your courtesy.

Would it be fitting, do you think, to put a similar notice on the Stevenson "Talk" page, for the benefit of other editors?

I'm not pushing for it, just asking.

Thank you again.

Cordially, O Govinda (talk) 17:01, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And, by the way, @ජපස, well done on removing the "Further Reading" section. It was over the top.

Best, O Govinda (talk) 17:29, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is fine to put the notice of a discussion at relevant locations. There is never a problem doing so. jps (talk) 12:12, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Inviting your review of A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami has just been expanded and updated with new reliable sources, images, and media. As one of its most involved editors, your contribution would be very much appreciated. Many thanks. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 15:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Fringe Theories Noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Psychologist Guy (talk) 10:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

JoJo Anthrax (talk) 17:58, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Stevenson

Your repeated editing of this article to be more favourable to WP:FRINGE ideas over the course of a nearly a decade, biding your time to re-edit the article once the immediate objection has subsided, is disruptive. If you do this again, I will take you to ANI. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Hemiauchenia, that's a rather icy introduction, but nonetheless I am pleased to meet you. I see that you have made many substantial contributions to WP, especially on scientific subjects, and that you're admirably learned and articulate. I also see that you know your way around WP's administrative noticeboards (to which I'm pretty much a stranger).

I understand that you see patterns in the timings of my edits. I wonder whether you would be open to the thought that those patterns might be due to causes quite distinct from the stealth, cunning, craftiness, and bad faith of which I've lately been accused

I like to think that over the past decade I have improved this article, making it more accurate, better balanced, and better sourced, and that I have strived to work with my fellow editors in a collegial and respectful manner.

That said, I am open to correction and improvement. If you think that raising an issue on ANI would be helpful and appropriate--well, at the least it would afford me an opportunity to learn more about WP's methods of dispute resolution. And if we find faults in my behavior that I can work on, so much the better.

I wish you well in your editing on Wikipedia and in what I assume must be the very worthy contributions you make in your professional life.

Cordially, O Govinda (talk) 17:18, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]