Hello, Shakespeare143, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.
Hello, Shakespeare143, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.
There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers:
Deleting a previous caution implies that you have seen it. My suggestion is to discuss contentious edits on the article talk page first. Vikram Vincent08:26, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You'd do well to take the advice above, to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. It answers most of the questions you're asking. Cabayi (talk) 11:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Have you seen this The_Great_Big_Book_of_Horrible_Things page? I think the statistics you want to quote are already summarised there so no need to make redundant copies. Also, blog and other sources that do not conform to WP:RS would be reverted. Posting here since it is tedious to respond on the multiple articles talk pages you had edited. VV10:36, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You can simply add the wikilink to White's page in the "See also" section. My suggestion is to not go changing multiple pages which will again get challenged. The discussion has just begun on some article talk pages and in others it hasn't. Plus, religious books are not considered WP:RS. VV11:22, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please check the citation formating as you did on "History of Hinduism". It is broken. Also use named refs when quoting from the same source multiple times. VV11:28, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to the other articles where you are using data from scriptures. Ive added a few more observations. Will look at others a little later. VV00:09, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Vincentvikram Ok, for the Astronomy article, the info I'm proposing to add actually comes from non-religious sources. I am just using the non-religious sources as my sources, and the non-religious sources are talking about religious scriptures.
Vincentvikram. All I did was post on the talk page. I posted a proposition to add to the article. The reason I posted it there was because I wanted to see what other people thought about it and to get consensus. Therefore, can you explain to me why you think I was aggressive? Every person has their own opinion of NPOV, therefore to avoid conflicts I posted the proposition in the Talk page because I thought it might be controversial. I am open to discussions, and that is what is happening. Anyway, there is the Be Bold policy on Wikipedia, but because I thought that proposition might be controversial, I posted it on the Talk forum. Additionally, I originally posted that proposition into the page 8 days ago, and then it got removed. I posted the exact same phrasing on the Talk page because I was confused on exactly how it was POV pushing, and therefore you explained to me why you thought it was POV in the Talk page, so I appreciate the discussion. Therefore, can you remove the warning about how I could be blocked from editing without warning next time someone thinks I violated Wikipedia' NPOV?
When an article is covered under Discretionary Sanctions, the requirements even on talk pages are tight. The use of phrases like "Christian(replace with any religion) terrorism" is POV pushing.
Hi Shakespeare143! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
I don't think that the Veda's, at least not the ritual hymns, are about "the experiencing Self," as Kak claims here, but it very nicely highlights the essence: what is this "experiencing Self"? Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk!10:08, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Joshua Jonathan I think when Kak mentions the "Experiencing self" I think he is referring to the sense of I-ness that people have, like their own conscious individuality. I'm really not sure what he means.
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.
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.
Kautilya3 I will try to make it shorter, but I think that most of the things I wrote are relevant. And they address many points that benefit the discussion, including things that people have not brought up before as well as new analysis. I did not know there was a sandbox, so I'll look into it.Shakespeare143 (talk) 20:23, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Shakespeare143, I can sense that your intentions are good, but I read the text that Kautilya3 removed, and really, it is useless. You sum-up the usual Indigenist writers, none of which have any relevance in normal scholarship on this topic. Lal's latest book, The R̥igvedic People:'invaders'?/'immigrants'? Or Indigenous?, for instance, has 14 (fourteen) citations at Google Scholar, including 4 (four) from Danino. Danino himself only tentatively suggests that the Vedas may be much older. Incompatible with the dating of the Sintashta-culture. Borsboom, arguing that the IVC-people were seafaring at 7,500 BCE: far, far out. The predecessors of the IVC were living in pits at that time.
Your knowledge of the topic seems to be based on their writings, not normal publications. You really should read some of the standard works, that is, Anthony's The Horse, or Mallory's encyclopedia. And Narasimhan (2019). Or, as a bare minimum, the Wiki-adticles on Indo-European migrations and Indo-Aryan migrations.
Indigenism is simply totally incompatable with the accepted facts. The fact that it has some support in India (some; we've plenty of Indian editors who conside Indigenism to be crackpottery), and is mindlessly parotted by Indian newsmedia, does not mean that it has any relevance in normal scholarship. It hasn't. It's a parallel universum, inhabited by people living in a politico-religious bubble.
Thank you for recommending those sources. I'll go check them out. I have read much of the Wiki articles on Indo-Europeans migrations and Indo-Aryan migrations and much written by Migrationist and AIT scholar proponents. Some of the ones that consider it to be "crackpottery" just parrot what Doniger say because that is the view they have been conditioned to support for various political-religious-ideological-ethnic-nationalistic reasons. What's interesting to note is that I have not read about AIT/AMT proponents trying to bring attention to the nearly 40 million Ancient Indian (more than the entire corpus of all Latin and Greek texts combined) untranslated and unanalyzed manuscripts in India, while I have read about OIT proponents talk about them. It seems that the AIT/AMT proponents may not be comfortable with analyses of these texts for some reason. I Shakespeare143 (talk) 21:08, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Shakespeare143! Your additions to History of Hinduism have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 13:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You did add synthesis; the content you added can only be sourced to a press release, and you presented that content in Wikipedia's voice. Vanamonde (Talk)17:50, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Vanamonde93 Ok, I understand what you mean now. Sorry, I was confused by what you meant and I originally thought you meant using a press release is good, hence why I said "I used a press release".Shakespeare143 (talk) 03:46, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion
I'm a bit confused. Who decides if an editor is not following NPOV and other rules? Can only administrators decide that? Also I'm a bit confused by the Arbitration Enforcement page. What is the page for and what happens? Sorry for asking so many questions, it is just that I have not been posted on the page before. Thank you for answering my questions.Shakespeare143 (talk) 18:09, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In certain areas where the arbitration committee has authorized discretionary sanctions, yes, administrators may take action when they decide that editors are not following policy. The arbitration enforcement noticeboard is a place where one may ask for uninvolved admins to examine the conduct of other editors, as I have done. We now wait for other admins to examine the report. Vanamonde (Talk)18:20, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction
The following sanction now applies to you:
You have been indefinitely topic banned from all pages and discussions concerning India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, broadly construed. Please read WP:TBAN to see what "topic banned" means.
You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Johnuniq (talk) 23:46, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]