User talk:The Rahul Jain

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User:Rahuljain2307)
Jump to: navigation, search

Simandhar Swami page[edit]

I have reinstated the matter you removed from the Simandhar Swami page because a lot of work had gone into that content, and I believe it to be valid and informative on the topic. That said, I am very interested to hear your objections and reasons as to why you removed it. I am open to making changes after receiving your constructive criticism points. Please advise. Vorajinesh (talk) 13:29, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

I've noticed your edits to the Simandhar Swami page and I appreciate your input. It's been quite a struggle to find reliable sources in English to back up the Jain scriptural information - especially in bridging such an esoteric topic for an Encyclopedic format such as Wikipedia. I just wanted to explain that, while searching for more solid sources, I've been posting Jain website references - but these are intended to be an interim step while searching for more credible documentation. If you can suggest more reliable sources, please do! And if there are any other points you'd make towards improving the page, kindly share your insights. Thanks, Kaushal Jasani (talk) 11:14, 26 November 2013 (UTC)


My advice (if you want it!) is to get the draft article User:The Rahul Jain/Jain-Hindu relations into as good shape as you can because some people will be going to find reasons for pouncing on it. Maybe the article ought to be deleted, I really do not know. In particular, if you have copied text from other articles it is important that you formally give notice that you have done so – normally by using the {{copied}} template on all the source and destination talk pages. You could then try again at AfC or you could move the draft to main space. Either way you will have to face objections. The only card you have up your sleeve (and correct me if I am wrong) is that the article has never been at AfD and you can effectively demand at least one AfD for an article (excluding copyright infringements, attack pages and other gross problems). Articles cannot legitimately be deleted for editorial reasons without going through at least one AfD. Thincat (talk) 12:39, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I'll create a fresh draft of article. But, I really think that the result of DRV should either be to list it at AFD or to overturn, since it really didn't meet any criteria for Speedy deletion. Rahul Jain (talk) 12:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, if you copied text from other articles to create the article without sufficient attribution then strictly it was speediable. Oh, and wait for the DRV to be closed before doing anything (except minor edits to the draft). Thincat (talk) 12:53, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
The first one might be, but I removed the copied parts when I recreated it. The copyright problem was removed in the second and the third creations, both of which were deleted for A10. Rahul Jain (talk) 12:58, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Jain-Hindu relations was created from scratch as far as I remember. Rahul Jain (talk) 12:58, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough if you did that then the G12 would have become irrelevant. Maybe the later speedies were wrong. I expect some sort of recreation will be allowed (possibly sending straight to AfD) because DRV regulars don't like the encyclopedic merits of an article being a deciding factor at DRV. Thincat (talk) 13:22, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Portal peer review[edit]


I have just closed a portal peer review that you had started because the review had went unedited for several months. As I'm sure you can tell, the portal peer review process is rather understaffed, and I apologize if you didn't get what you were looking for. If you are still interested in working with portals, either the one that you brought to PPR or another one, and are looking for advice, please don't hesitate to reach out to me personally by leaving a message on my talk page. I would be happy to help.

Sven Manguard Wha? 21:34, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Jainism and Hinduism[edit]

Hi RJ. Could you please delete one of the two articles? Having two versions is confusing and could be problematic down the road. I took a look at some texts on Jainism and am willing to support a Jainism and Hinduism article - I think it makes sense - but we need to get the discussion and article in one place. --regentspark (comment) 14:20, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

I would prefer the article to be in main namespace, that way, more people would join. If it is OK, you can move the article from my userspace to main article space (and delete all the userspace drafts) and have the discussion there, otherwise, if you are willing to help, we can delete the main article space and work in the userspace. Your call --Rahul Jain (talk) 16:02, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
After seeing WT:INDIA I went ahead and copied the contents to Hinduism and Jainism from the user-space drafts. Feel free to undo it if it is inappropriate. Rahul Jain (talk) 16:48, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013[edit]

Stop edit warring at Criticism of Jainism, if you have some suggestion, you can discuss it in the talk page, instead of enforcing the change on which no one has agreed yet, nor you have made any valid argument. Or else if you continued edit warring, you can be blocked from editing without further notice. Bladesmulti (talk) 18:44, 29 November 2013 (UTC)


Yes check.svg Done. JohnCD (talk) 10:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Jainism and Hinduism[edit]

First of all whoever you are suggesting is completely a no namer, he has no identification in Wikipedia, secondly he's not the scholar of Hinduism. Bladesmulti (talk) 09:20, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Discuss at talk page. --Rahul (talk) 09:22, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:DRN[edit]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard (Jainism and Hinduism)regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!-- KeithbobTalk 23:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

January 2014[edit]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Criticism of Jainism shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Ruby Murray 14:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

I am not sure that is an edit war. Can you look at the article and the talk page, if possible? --Rahul (talk) 14:06, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


Dear Rahul,

I have seen many of your edits in articles related to Jainism. I was curious about you. Where are you from? Are you from UK or USA?

Malaiya (talk) 23:53, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I am from India. --Rahul (talk) 12:48, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Arvind Kejriwal[edit]

Anarchism is a political ideology and he himself said he is an anarchist. Discuss in talk before reverting.--atnair (talk) 17:02, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Go through the existing references before removing any contents. kejrival Found any reference to your last edit on this page?--atnair (talk) 03:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Delhi assembly election[edit]

If you hadn't taken it to AfD I would have redirected it, want to withdraw and redirect? Dougweller (talk) 13:46, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

It would have been a better idea to redirect, I don't know why it didn't strike me to redirect. But now, since I have nominated it, should it be snow closed by an administrator? or should I close it myself and redirect it? --Rahul (talk) 04:47, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
If no one else has !voted, havn't check, close it yourself. Dougweller (talk) 06:19, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
People have voted. I think I'll let this one take its course. --Rahul (talk) 17:03, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Fine. Dougweller (talk) 15:54, 22 March 2014 (UTC)