User talk:Dosey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Hinduism Project editors There is a controversy on the Hinduism regarding Raja Yoga. Please read the debate on the Hinduism discussion page. Your comments are requested on the Hinduism discussion page to help resolve the controversy. Thank you. HeBhagawan 14:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, 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:
- How to edit a page
- Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
- Naming conventions
- Manual of Style
- Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
- If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! RJFJR 17:45, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Hey, Dosey!
It seems that you are new here. You are very welcome.
Hinduism was once a Featured Article; alas, it is far from its past glory. It seems that we need a Wikipedian version of Rajaraja Chola to bring it back.
Seriously, any throughout rewrite should be done at a side page, then submitted to approval and contributions by good people. Hinduism has already begun to be cleaned and rewritten at talk:hinduism/temp, to which you are invited to contribute, using the information from the main article, including useful updates. I also suggest the cleaness of the article on Buddhism as what whe should strive for.
Best, Subramanian talk 05:30, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Hello;
it´s difficult to tell just by your comment on my page, but it seemed that you were unhappy with my comment. Dosey, we are on the same side, you see?
I created that introduction on June 29 and left that on Talk:Hinduism/temp as Sundar taught me to do as the correct process for a complete rewrite - and we all agree that a complete rewrite is needed. Your contributions were made on July 18. So, absolutely nothing is wrong with the introduction you wrote, the problem was the previous one which you corrected, without being aware of mine.
As for your introduction, I think it is very nice. I also suggest that some of the information there could be trimmed. Also, I think that going from Introduction to Origins makes anyone who wants to know a little about the Sanatana Dharma uneasy, having to choose between the very superficial information an introduction can give or reading the lengthy article itself. That´s why I assume an Overview section to be useful and needed.
I´d like to hear from you, and Hinduism really needs help. So I hope we, Sundar, Sam Spade and everyone who cares can do a good job. Subramanian talk 01:00, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Aug 9
Hello friend; vanakkam. I see that you are intent on helping rebuild Hinduism - welcome aboard, then. I'm by no means any kind of authority here - Raj2004 provides the best content, Sam Spade does the best writing, Dangerous-Boy organizes it all and I, I´m just the middleman.
Here´s what we´re trying to do: It isn´t a problem to have a lot of text, but it becomes a problem when it´s in the wrong article or when the text becomes too truncated with too many information. [1] of Buddhism shows an example of a lot of actually flowing, readable text that is not a problem, as well as a good introduction.
As Hinduism is the richest religion by far in traditions and tolerance, we have to see when we are actually talking about something that belongs in the main article or should be properly summarized there and then expanded in another article. See, there at the right I´ve put good guideline from another religion
about topics whe can explain in the main article, using good, exact prose, and then greatly expand the topics in their proper articles, where lengthy quoting and in-depth analyses should take place - the Islam article is a good example. Hinduism has innumerable gods, let alone saints, let alone views, and if we list every path we will have as many views as there are souls on Earth. We could, sure, quote or cite just the most famous ones, but an undisputed leader for some is barely know by others, so whe should keep it to a minimum and make the main article a place of consensus and concordance as Hinduism itself.
We could then work on History of Hinduism, Geography of Hinduism, People of Hinduism, Timeline of Hinduism and so on. What do you think? I also suggest that you are more careful about your writing. You even typo-ed your user page, there´s a "porject" there. :) Reread your edits carefully, to build up good some phrases.
There has been a conversation going on about stability of good enough versions of articles, which perhaps you should check, and that´s one of the reasons why we are striving for an improvement of Hinduism.
Finally, let me tell you that I will post some of the text above in Talk:Hinduism, just for everyone to see and help, and let me suggest that you sign using ~~~~. It seems that you´ve been writing [[Dosey]] which, as you see here: Dosey, links to nowhere.
Aum namah Sivaya. - Shanti, Subramanian talk 20:45, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Kali Yuga
Hi Dosey, I think the changes are most excellent. The removal of the sexist, and somewhat strange, analysis of men and women is much appreciated. And the more general approach seems much more encyclopedic. When I have some time, I'll clean up some typos and grammar. Also, a reference for that section would add alot, when you can do that. Thank you! ॐ Priyanath 23:14, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hinduism
|
|
|||
|
|||
--D-Boy 07:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
