User:Buddhipriya

☆ Save On Wikipedia ↗

Thought for the day:

When I see editors warring on Wikipedia I think of a story about the importance of working together and securing allies. The Pañcatantra, an Indian collection of folk wisdom, tells the story of the Doves and the Fowler.

“ A man hunting birds spread a net on the ground and sprinked it with grain. A group of doves, seeing the grain, flew down into the net and became entangled in it. The man was delighted and came toward the net brandishing his club. The leader of the doves saw that friends were fluttering this way and that, pulling the net in different directions, and only entangling themselves more completely. He said to them: "There is a way out of this tragedy that has befallen us. All of us, working as one, must fly upward into the sky together and far away from here. Once safe, we will work together to untangle ourselves." Eager to save their lives, the doves flew upward and carried away the net, and so were saved. The man seeing this wonder had this thought:

"Because they act in concord, these birds carry off my net; But when they are in discord, then they will become my prey."

 ”
--Adapted and abbreviated from The Pañcatantra: The Book of India's Folk Wisdom, Patrick Olivelle translation, Oxford World's Classics, ISBN 0-19-283988-8
The story teaches the benefits of working together and valuing diversity as a source of strength. The charming animated film Ek Anek Aur Ekta ("One, Many, and Unity") uses the story to teach these values to children (and Wikipedia editors). Don't worry if you don't understand the language, the animation speaks a universal language.
Wikipedia:Harmonious editing club This user is a member of the Harmonious Editing Club.
This user participates in WikiProject Hinduism.
This user has written or expanded 1 article featured in the Did You Know section on the Main Page.
This user is a recent changes patroller.
This user participates in WikiProject Spam.
This editor is a Veteran Editor III and is entitled to display this Silver Editor Star.

Words to live by

I pray that I may always practice vāda.

The tradition of debate is well-developed in India. In Bhagavad Gita 10.32, Krishna says that as an example of his excellence, "I am vāda of the debaters." (वादः प्रवदतामहम्). A commentary by Madhusudana Sarasvati (b. 1490? - d. 1580?) on this verse explains that in the tradition of Hindu debate there are three varieties of discussion: vāda, jalpa, and vitaṇḍā. Vāda is discussion with open-mindedness, with a view to determining true purport. Jalpa is pointless debate. Vitaṇḍā is wrangling discussion.

Madhusudana Sarasvati explains:

"Vāda is the discussion between two unbiased seekers of truth, or between two brahmacārins who are seekers of truth and are classmates, or between a teacher and the taught, with the help of valid means of reasoning, and (proceeds) in the form of proving or disproving (statements) by taking up positions for or against, culminating in the ascertainment of truth.... Jalpa and Vitaṇḍā are forms of discussion of one seeking to score a victory for protecting the conclusion about the truth -- which was arrived at through Vāda -- by defeating an illogical and obstinate opponent; and they end merely in victory or defeat. This has been said in 'Jalpa and Vitaṇḍā are meant for the protection of a conclusion arrived at (through Vāda), just as a fence made of thorny branches is necessary to protect the sprouting of a seed. (Gautama-Nyāyā Sūtras, 4.2.50)"

"The countering of an opponent's view through Chala (circumvention), Jāti (false generalization) and Nigraha-sthāna (fault in a syllogism) is common to Jalpa and Vitaṇḍā. Among them, in Vitaṇḍā one's own point of view is firmly adhered to by one, while it is merely refuted by the other (without stating his own conclusion). In Jalpa, however, their own points of view are advanced by both, and the opposite view is refuted by both. This is the distinction.... However it has already been stated that Vāda is superior because it culminates in the ascertainment of truth."

Quotations from: Bhagavad Gita: With the Annotation Gūḍhārtha Dīpikā. Translated by Swami Gambhirananda. Advaita Ashrama Publication Department: Calcutta, 1998. ISBN 81-7505-194-9. pp. 631-632.

I pray that I may always practice vāda.

My activity on Wikipedia

Articles I started

Updated DYK query On February 9, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ganesha Purana, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 22:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


Barnstars


These are links to some issues which I enjoy following:

Transliteration and Indic scripts

I am studying Wikipedia:Romanization standards and wish I could find a good model that I can live with. My notes are at

I prefer the IAST transliteration methods (See: Template:IAST) and have compiled some ideas about the use of IAST on Wikipedia that are not exactly the same as any current style guide:

I try to keep in mind this general point from Wikipedia:Citing sources:

"Because this is the English Wikipedia, English-language sources should be given whenever possible, and should always be used in preference to other language sources of equal calibre. However, do give references in other languages where appropriate. If quoting from a different language source, an English translation should be given with the original-language quote beside it."

For help with Indic scripts see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:INDIC

A LANG template for Sanskrit: ([[Sanskrit]]:{{lang|sa|गणेश पुराणम्}}; {{IAST|gaṇeśa purāṇam}}) which looks like this:

(Sanskrit:गणेश पुराणम्; gaṇeśa purāṇam)

Vandalism and SPAM

Warning templates
PageName is optional

See additional templates and examples of output

Special:Linksearch

  • {{subst:uw-unsourced1|Lingam}} ~~~~
  • {{subst:uw-spam1|Hinduism}} ~~~~
  • {{longterm4im}} ~~~~
  • {{IPvandal|68.216.187.23}} - continued vandalism after final warning ~~~~
  • {{vandal|Sparklybubbles}} — continued vandalism of after final warning ~~~~
  • {{Cleanup-spam}}
  • [[Category:Wikipedia spam cleanup]]
  • Tool for analysis of editorial activity:

For more spam fighting tips see WikiProjectSpam.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Trivia Cleanup

Wikipedia:Guide to layout

Wikipedia:Summary style

Wikipedia:Copyright_problems

Wikipedia:Notability (academics)

Citation methods

It is best to use a consistent citation method within the same article. Two options for book citations are:

Two useful resources:

  • Enable Reftools under Special:Preferences -> gadgets -> Editing gadgets. This will add a form for adding citation information in the edit windown.
  • This website quickens the process of filling in all the refernce information for (many) books that have an ISBN.


For the example you give, the formatting can be (see in edit mode):

Jones (2003, p. 345) harvtxt error: no target: CITEREFJones2003 (help) claims that Wikipedia is the greatest source of human knowledge, but this is refuted decisively by Vyasa (2010, pp. 23–49, cf. 88) harvtxt error: no target: CITEREFVyasa2010 (help) who proves it is filled with errors.

Incidentally, Vyasa 2010 is just a reprint of much older work, and is considered outdated nowadays. Abecedare (talk) 01:23, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
How about a work with two authors: Jones and Abecedare (2003, p. 14) claim to have discovered a novel method of editing Wikipedia articles through direct thought-transference, but Vyasa and Bachmann (2010) have proven it unfeasible. My problem is to work in the text by Arya & Joshi, for a real example, with that of Wilson. I thought Vyasa was at University of Chicago, by the way. Buddhipriya (talk) 01:35, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Jones & Abecedare (2003, p. 14) harvtxt error: no target: CITEREFJonesAbecedare2003 (help) and Vyasa & Bachmann (2010) harvtxt error: no target: CITEREFVyasaBachmann2010 (help) works.
Vyasa was at U of C, but had to move to Gainesville to prevent a public scandal over him taking credit for work actually done by his assistants. It was all hushed up, of course. Abecedare (talk) 01:40, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

The characterization of Agni as "priest" in RV 10.52 is from Macdonell (1898, p. 171) harvtxt error: no target: CITEREFMacdonell1898 (help). Arya & Joshi (2001, p. 319 (volume 4)) harvtxt error: no target: CITEREFAryaJoshi2001 (help) note Wilson's version "(the servant) of Yama" referring to Agni as the burner of the dead.

Arya & Joshi (2001, vol. 4, p. 319) harvtxt error: no target: CITEREFAryaJoshi2001 (help)



Various links related to citation:

More Citation Templates


Web Template:cite web
<ref name=""> {{cite web |author= |title= |url= |work= |publisher= |page= |language= |doi= |date= |accessdate= |quote= }} </ref>
Journal Template:Cite journal
<ref name=""> {{cite journal |last= |first= |coauthors= |date= |title= |journal= |volume= |series= |issue= |pages= |publisher= |location= |issn= |doi= |url= |accessdate= |laysummary= |laysource= |laydate= |quote=}} </ref>
Gazette Template:London Gazette
<ref> {{LondonGazette |issue= |supp= |startpage= |date= |accessdate= }} </ref>
News Template:Cite news
<ref> {{cite news |first= |last= |author= |title= |url= |agency= |work= |publisher= |page= |date= |accessdate= |quote= }} </ref>
Newspaper Template:Cite news
<ref> {{cite news | last = | first = | title = | newspaper = | pages = | date = | url = }} </ref>


  • {{tl|unreferenced}}
  • {{verify source}}
  • {{page number}}
  • {{citation style}}
  • {{citation needed|reason=need proper, complete, direct inline citation|date=April 2009}}
  • [[WP:RS]] appears as WP:RS
  • [[WP:ATT]] appears as WP:ATT
  • [[WP:EL]] appears as WP:EL
  • [[WP:EQ]] appears as WP:EQ
  • [[WP:NOT]] appears as WP:NOT

Mediation processes

Concerns about Wikipedia

My current opinion is that there are serious problems with the Wikipedia paradigm. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_failing

More specifically:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Expert_retention

A delightful collection of absurd situations is cataloged here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Expert_Retention/Conflicts_involving_expert_editors

One very good article: http://courseware.hbs.edu/public/cases/wikipedia/

A second very good article from New Yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060731fa_fact

If all else fails, consider editing at Unencyclopedia.

A new low for astonishing nonsense

Citing "Ripley's Believe It Or Not" television show as a reliable source of information on sadhus. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sadhu&diff=110762472&oldid=110762328

Previous thoughts for the day

“ There are no emergencies on Wikipedia.. ”
“ Unfettered prolixity may give rise to charges of obfuscation.. ”
“ Better to shun the bait than struggle in the snare. -- John Dryden ”
“ The past is but the beginning of a beginning. -- H. G. Wells ”
“ Ask and it shall be given to you; seek and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you; for everyone that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth, and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. -- Gospel of Matthew 7:7,8 ”
“ The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is an attribute of the strong.. -- Mahatma Gandhi ”
“ Man is a political animal.. -- Aristotle ”
“ The critical habit of thought, if usual in society, will pervade all its mores, because it is a way of taking up the problems of life. Men educated in it cannot be stampeded by stump orators... They are slow to believe. They can hold things as possible or probable in all degrees, without certainty and without pain. They can wait for evidence and weigh evidence, uninfluenced by the emphasis or confidence with which assertions are made on one side or the other. They can resist appeals to their dearest prejudices and all kinds of cajolery. Education in the critical faculty is the only education of which it can be truly said that it makes good citizens. -- William Graham Sumner ”
“ In general, I find the {{fact}} tagging to be overdone in Wikipedia. A better option is to nuke the unsourced material. Sometimes {{fact}} is warranted, I don't mean that it is always a bad idea. But it is overdone.

I very often see completely preposterous claims tagged with {{fact}}, usually because an editor is being excessively cautious. Be bold. :)

 ”
--Jimbo