User talk:O Govinda

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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)

Contents

[edit] 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)

[edit] Hinduism

Links for Wikipedians interested in Hindu content

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

[edit] 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)

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)

[edit] 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)

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

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)


[edit] 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)

[edit] Vaishnavism wikiproject

[edit] Pirate Site?

in http://en.wikipedia.org/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)

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)


[edit] Invitation to be an editor on a new project

Invitation to create a Krishna centered Hinduism project
Proposed project - Krishna worshipers WikiProject Invitation - lets create unity in diversity!
Proposal for discussion - May 2008

Please, say what you think about it:

Just a few words... what may interest you and attract other editors across a wider spectrum of Krishna-centered or connected traditions in Hinduism?
From ancient to modern
You can join and make a difference!

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)

[edit] 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)