User talk:Water Fish
Welcome[edit]
Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.
You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)
Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.
Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.
You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.
If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
- If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
- You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
- If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.
Again, welcome! - Rrjanbiah 11:59, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Aryan invasion theory[edit]
Please state clearly the origin of the theory and the other theories as well.
If you are too lazy to read books, "Aryan invasion theory" was first invented by a half-baked German "sanscritologist", Max Muller. His theory is clearly based on misinterpretation of a single (!) element.
Why this "theory" is false is explained in the works by Sri Aurobindo.
If yu don't care to read the books and think for yourself, please don't interfere with those people who are experts in the field.
JuliaJ 09:21, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Could you please add more info at Aryan invasion theory especially the one you have added to India page [1] --Rrjanbiah 11:59, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply and comments. This is Wikipedia and so everyone will write, delete and push their own views; so please be cool. I think, the India page needs only a brief note about the genetic study as we have separate article for AIT. You may contribute more about such study (which are corroborated with scientific data and bibliography) in AIT page which I think is the right place for such info. I'll try to add brief note about the study in India page.
- Keep contributing... let the world be benefitted more out of your work. Regards. --Rrjanbiah 05:08, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Vandalism POV on the India page[edit]
I am trying to make the India page a featured article. However, your recent actions forcing the study is a cause for concern. The history section is anyways is too large and by mentioning specific points to support the latest findings on the page is not advisable. Consider moving it to the apt location and reediting the text on the India page to a NPOV. [[User:Nichalp|¶ ɳȉčḩåḽṗ | ✉]] 20:36, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)
- Let me clarify what exactly I expect from you. I'm not judging which theory is right here (my personal opinion supports the Aryan theory). Neither have I mentioned childish or any political shibboleths here. You quote a pretty detailed sentence mentioning how the theory is disproved along with the research years. Now the article is a brief summary of India's history, I've sampled that para to get a sample rate of around 5,000 years per sentence. By unnecessary mentioning the years of studies, which ideally should be on the AIT page, you have unbalanced the sampling rate. I don't know what objection you have to the sentence However, recent theories held by a minority deny the claim of ingress and posit continuity. which clearly sides your story. Let us save everyone's energy by preventing unnecessary energy sapping reverts. [[User:Nichalp|¶ ɳȉčḩåḽṗ | ✉]] 18:49, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
?[edit]
"rv extreme vandalism by 207.180.207.254 to the version saved by Oop" Why didn't you revert to the version saved by Isdu (me)? I only wrote 2 sentences, which I think are important (and they weren't mentionned):
- astronomic data (of the Rig Veda and other scriptures)
- textual evidence (e.g. puranic royal lists)
If my English was wrong (I'm not a native English speaker), which I don't think it was, you could still have corrected it. Kind Regards. --Isdu 07:27, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Based on a quick Google search, and by seeing the number of inward links to that page, it looks like she might be notable enough. Honestly, I am not an expert on that area, but it should not be deleted until someone (maybe even the original author) has a chance to review it. A little patience is fine in this case. -- Netoholic @ 05:08, 2004 Nov 10 (UTC)
- No... we leave it on cleanup, and after quite a few days, if noone works on it, you may list it on WP:VFD. This will never be a speedy-deletion candidate. -- Netoholic @ 05:27, 2004 Nov 10 (UTC)
Based on the fact that Medha Hari (despite her young age!) is already listed in many major directories (Google, LookSmart) and many professional directories (Narthaki.com, etc), I do not understand Water Fish's wish to delete Medha Hari entry.
BTW, the classical dance section of the Hindu (the most authoritative newspaper in India) reviewed this young dancer 3 times. I think it is truly exceptional.
Geosammie 04:27, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I think all of the discussion of this subject should take place at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Medha Hari. RickK 23:23, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
Hi Water Fish, I understand the problem is with the bureaucracy and don't want to comment more on that as they may take it offense. Greetings. HAND. --Rrjanbiah 16:57, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Copyvios[edit]
Firstly, don't yell at me. Secondly, if you checked, you would see that two sources were posted as the copyvio'd material. And while yes, the first was from Wikipedia (as was stated rather nonchalantly right at the end of the article), the second was not, and as such, our article was at least a partial copyvio, and probably still is. As for being forced to rewrite the article, if you had checked Wikipedia:Copyright problems, you would have seen that just hours after I reported the copyvio, someone else pointed out that one of the articles sourced Wikipedia. You must have been in a hurry to write the article if you couldn't check its status at WP:CP first. As for being on a "rampage" or reporting copyvios, that's your opinion, and I'm glad you have it. Everyone has something they do on Wikipedia, the thing I do is report copyvios. - Vague | Rant 01:43, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)