User talk:VedicScience

Welcome!

Hi VedicScience! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! --Redtigerxyz (talk) 11:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How to upload an image

Please read Wikipedia:Image use policy before adding a new image.

Instructions to upload image

Click on "Upload file" in "toolbox" on the left
You get "Wikipedia:Upload". Select "What kind of image is it?"
You get "Upload file" page
Browse and select the image in "Source filename"
"Destination filename" is the image name you wish to give
Fill up "Summary" and select an appropriate license. Read Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for information on licenses.

--Redtigerxyz (talk) 09:58, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Monotheism

Welcome to Wikipedia! I saw some really good information that you were putting in the Monotheism article. I'd like to keep a lot of it in there, but I wasn't expert enough in Eastern religion to get it right by NPOV Wikipedia standards. Any chance we could work on some pieces of this and get as much in as we can? Thanks for your patience, and I do want to get as much of this into the article as possible by Wikipedia editing standards. Thanks. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 12:56, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VedicScience (talk) 19:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you reverted tons of changes I made last night in good faith as there were not only a lot of grammatical errors but also had the same information copy-pasted from another page. I will have to undo your revert and send me a talk if there's anything in particular that you have issues with. Hope this works for you!

Hi, the issues were the fact that they weren't by the NPOV standards articles are written in. We don't establish fact here, we merely report sources in an NPOV manner. I want a lot of the information you have in there, but in it's current format people will just edit over it. Reverting it and starting over was the only way to go. Right now very little of what you have will survive the scrutiny of experienced editors. It's unlikely to last the week. SkyWriter (Tim) (talk) 19:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear VedicScience, I also reverted your edits as they incorporated elements of bad style. It is expected that articles are written in an encyclopaedic style from a neutral point of view (e.g. 'dry monotheism'). There are also issues with original research. Perhaps you should use the article talk page to outline your thoughts to get a consensus with other editors, so that good points can be included in neutral language. Just reverting again won't get anywhere; I'll just lock the page or ask you to take a look at the three-revert rule. Articles are written here by consensus, and there is an emerging consensus against your edits. This means that you should try to work with others to develop the article rather than going at it alone. I hope this helps. — Gareth Hughes (talk) 20:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Things you need to know:

There is a Wikipedia:Three-revert rule policy on wikipedia: "A contributor who reverts the same page, in whole or in part, more than three times in 24 hours, except in certain circumstances, may be blocked from editing." Please do not revert on Monotheism, you may be blocked for 24 hours.
Please do not attack personally any user, as you did on my talk "some freak goes and reverts back my changes overnight..". Attack the content posted, not the user.
I think that the content in Hinduism section is so good earlier, but text you added also violate some wikipedia policies:
- "For lack of understanding of monism or the depth of Brahmanism, there is a general tendency among Western scholars to proclaim that Hinduism is polytheistic, which is quite erroneous" who says so? I just can not generalize things, or state my opinion. My opinions do not count on wikipedia articles, give a scholar's view or a notable religious leader' view, backed by references - it definitely counts. Wikipedia does not publish original thought: all material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source. SEE Wikipedia:No original research.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Things to do now:

Read Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
Go to Talk:Monotheism, and create a section on Hinduism where you cite the reasons why the older version was not proper.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Approach me if you need any other help.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two things

"Ganapatya is at least justifiable with Ganesh Purana. Sun-god worship is precisely what is ridiculed here!" We are not writing wikipedia exclusively for westerners, so "if sun-worship is ridiculed there, then we do not include it" attitude is wrong. Ganapatya and Saura are mentioned by Adi Shankara as the five main sects of Hinduism along with shaiva, shakta and vaishnava.
Please sign whenever you leave a message by --~~~~. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]