User talk:Indian Chronicles/Archive2010

On January 16, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Atma Siddhi, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

On January 19, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dravya (Jainism), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:00, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

On January 27, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dravyasamgraha, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 06:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I have nominated Category:Jain Theory of Karma (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Karma in Jainism (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I am planning a FAC for this article about a regional Hindu village god - shortly. As such, I request you to please give constructive criticism on article as you gave before my prev. FAC Vithoba. To point any issues (actually I request all issues you see) in consideration of FA criteria. Thanks. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:28, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Glad to help. Burpelson AFB (talk) 02:23, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

The case is currently open and as such nothing more should be added to the case page. I have reverted your addition, per the instructions in the large green box at the top of the case page.

If you wish to add evidence, please do so to the evidence page and/or comment on the workshop page. Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 09:05, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

No one is trying to hound Alastair out of Wikipedia. Please take a look at my proposed remedies on the workshop page, which are designed to specifically address the areas in which Alastair's editing is problematic and disruptive. The purpose of the Request for Arbitration isn't to force anyone from Wikipedia. Indeed, it is to prevent Alastair from driving other valuable contributors away from the project. Also, I have clarified the evidence regarding personal attacks per your post. Cheers. Kaldari (talk) 16:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

See the decision below. He has been hounded out successfully. Congrats.--Indian Chronicles (talk) 15:50, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

This arbitration case has been closed. The following remedies have been enacted:

• User:Alastair Haines is banned from editing Wikipedia for a period of one year, and thereafter pending further direction of the Arbitration Committee under remedy 2.
• Should Alastair Haines wish to return to editing Wikipedia after one year, he shall first communicate with the Arbitration Committee and provide a satisfactory assurance that he will refrain from making any further legal threats against other editors or against the Wikimedia Foundation. Should Alastair Haines, after being permitted to return, again make a legal threat or a statement that may reasonably be construed as a legal threat, he may be blocked for an appropriate period of time by any uninvolved administrator.
• To assist Alastair Haines in disengaging from Wikipedia, the case pages relating to this arbitration and all related pages have been courtesy blanked. As appropriate, other pages reflecting controversies to which Alastair Haines was a party may also be courtesy-blanked, particularly where the discussion is no longer relevant to ongoing editing issues. In addition, if Alastair Haines so requests, his username (and hence the username associated with his edits in page histories) may be changed to another appropriate username other than his real name. Editors who have been in conflict with Alastair Haines are strongly urged to make no further reference to him on-wiki following his departure.

For the Arbitration Committee, ---- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 11:54, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

One of the biggest farce enacted on Wikipedia. Since it was pre-decided, we could have been spared of all the trouble of going thru this circus.--Indian Chronicles (talk) 15:48, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Thanks for the appreciative note.

Actually I do not have any information on the statistics you were looking for. However, I found on the web, via search the site in bracket (http://www.jaindharmonline.com/more/jainstat.htm) that may point you in the right direction. It is a good start - however require some further validation, perhaps from the Indian official census bureau.

For your information, India is undertaking a major population count including issuing identification cards that will be completed by sometime in the early next year. That will become the most up-to-date statistics. However, still it will be much difficult exercise to get the numbers from around the world.

Hope this helps.

Suresh Elangovan (talk) 13:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. But do you have the statistics sect wise? --Indian Chronicles (talk) 16:45, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks for adding the material on Jain cosmology to the conservation of mass article. This is an area I'm currently looking at and I hadn't known about this position in Jain philosophy. I reverted your most recent edit there as I can't find any obvious reference (on or off Wikipedia) to support the 6th century BC date for this component of Jain cosmology. The example you added, for example, is quoted from a 2nd century AD text. Do you have any reference on the dating of these doctrines? Apart from helping support such a claim in this article, I would be very interested if you have any good references on the early history of this cosmology.
All the best. –Syncategoremata (talk) 12:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

As suggested by you I have provided references form secondary sources. I have also reworded certain items accordingly. --Indian Chronicles (talk) 06:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks for that. I've put those books on my (ever-growing) reading list.

All the best. –Syncategoremata (talk) 12:16, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bapu and Baa.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --—fetch·comms 16:15, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Indian Chronicles,

First of all, I would like to take the opportunity to thank you for your updates and contributions to the Jainism page. This response is in relation to the question you raised in the context of the Jain Universe and the cartography convention of directions.

In Tamil Jain literature, it is very well known that siddha sila is situated on the southern end of the Universe. In Thirukural, couplet poem 43, refer to siddhas as southern dwellers (then-pulathar; then - meaning southern, pulathar - resident). Please also refer to website "http://www.acns.com/~mm9n/articles/angels/Angelology1.htm" of Prof. M.M.Ninan's Biblical & Apologestic Studies site for additional verification.

Ancient Indian and Chinese cartographers follow South as the top of the map as convention - rather than North at the top. Having North on the top of map drawing is a western convention that the world has now adopted as norm.

Please investigate with learned Jain scholars further to confirm my understaning is right.

Suresh Elangovan (talk) 23:45, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Dear Suresh, Thanks for your compliments. You are also doing an excellent job on the Jainism page and other articles related to Jainism. I have created and uploaded a new image of Siddha shila, hope you like it. Also let me wish you Micchami Dukkadam/ Uttam Kshama on recently concluded Paryushana/ Dasa Lakshana.

As far as Thirukural is concerned, it shows Jain influence and the author is probably a Jain…………..however, it is strictly not a Jain text, but more of a secular in nature. The other link that you have provided is copied from Wikipedia itself.

I am not sure of this. For eg. when you say that "Having North on the top of map drawing is a western convention" may not be entirely correct. Actually the upper direction is depicted as north and it is not the other way round. Secondly, it is said that Simandhara Swami is in Ishan direction of Jambudwipa. Ishan direction is translated as north-east. Whenever we do Pratikramana we take permission from Simandhara swami facing north-east. Now had the directions been inverted as per Jainism, we would be facing South-west. But this is not the case. Even if we follow Ancient Indian and Chinese cartographers as showing south at the top then we will have to invert the map of universe and still Siddha-shila will be shown at north but it will be below.

This is my understanding but I will be asking some knowledgeable persons or saints and will be informing you.--Indian Chronicles (talk) 06:38, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Dear Indian Chronicles, The uploaded new image of Siddha Shila is great. Thanks and wish you Michhami Dukkadam / Uttam Kshama as well. I agree with your comments on Thirukural - it is more secular in nature. I think seeking clarification from Jain scholars will be the right thing to do.

Meanwhile I will explore through my resources as well to find some credible information on this subject - as I am sure I read it somewhere. Meanwhile, I will put back the old picture in place for the time being until this question is resolved.

Suresh Elangovan (talk) 11:36, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

For restoring what had no business being deleted. I am also watchful of attempts to invalidate him.Buster7 (talk) 20:10, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. Any chance of getting his ban revoked? Maybe we can do something. --Indian Chronicles (talk) 04:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution, Kindly see that ethnicity be Garg.RegardsHARRYMAGIC (talk) 09:37, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution, Kindly see that ethnicity be Garg.RegardsHARRYMAGIC (talk) 09:38, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey Chronicles, thanks for your help in cleaning house. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Astrologist praveen. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 15:53, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm out of reverts today and reporting Michele for WP:3RR is very confusing with all the IP addresses they use... Perhaps you'd take a look at their latest changes? Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 23:51, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

The user Flobot222 has added some new pieces of information, I however find that information to be inaccurate and highly dubious. Not only that, but the text does not suit well within the paragraph where it has been inserted; grammatically, the sentence structure also seems to be wrong. Now, I have tried contacting that user about my concerns, but he/she has chosen to ignore me and has deleted the messages that I have left. It has become a situation, where I am having to restore the article to its original form (again and again), while Flobot222 insists on reverting my edits.

I have created a section in the discussions page pertaining to this dispute, but I don't believe Flobot222 wants to discuss. This issue can use a third, neutral point of view and that is why I am requesting that you review it. If you find the information to be authentic, then I will not remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregjackson112 (talk • contribs) 23:45, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your input.. Gregjackson112 (talk) 03:04, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Flobot222 (talk · contribs) has been raised twice at AN/I (follow links on their talk), is now indef blocked and is editing again as Uwo222 (talk · contribs) Andy Dingley (talk) 11:28, 13 December 2010 (UTC)