User talk:Kasyapa

Niko Lossky

Hey thanks for the edits on Lossky's page. LoveMonkey 13:41, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

framing merge proposal

Please see Talk:Framing (sociology). - Grumpyyoungman01 14:12, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Have any info on this subject

Since you added a lot of good infomation to the William Bowers Bourn II, have a look at the article on the Sunol Water Temple and see if there is anything you can add. Thanks, ike9898 00:31, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Usernmae

I'm afraid that your username is a violation of hte username policy WP:U. Please see Wikipedia:Changing username and have your account renamed. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Please explain this assertion. It's useless to make such a statement without evidence/reasons. Thanks, Kasyapa (talk) 18:27, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Kasyapa

Naming oneself after a 'god' as this username does — Kasyapa — is inappropriate. Please request a change of your username at the link provided above. Daniel 06:53, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Do wikipedia admins usually throw around assertions without argument or explanation? In this case, you and the initial admin are factually incorrect. My username is not made after a "god" but after a layman who, according to legend, had an encounter with the Buddha during the Flower Sermon. See the wikipedia article Mahakasyapa - "Mahākāśyapa or Kāśyapa was a brahman of Magadha, who became one of the principal disciples of Śākyamuni Buddha and who convened and directed the first council." This is not to be mistaken with Kashyapa, although the Sanskrit transliterations happen to be the same. A little research - and discussion, instead of unilateral assertion - goes a long way. Kasyapa (talk) 17:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)Kasyapa

Street light

I thought that you may want to check this out Talk:Street light#Grim light. Bidgee (talk) 23:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Inez Haynes Irwin

I have nominated Inez Haynes Irwin, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inez Haynes Irwin. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. TheAE talk/sign 05:50, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jeff Riggenbach

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Jeff Riggenbach, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Doesn't establish notability.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Bob A (talk) 21:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jeff Riggenbach

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Jeff Riggenbach. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Riggenbach. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:29, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

States' rights

Will you please tweak your edit to this before someone reverts it for violating WP:NPOV? They will likely point at two things: 1) characterizing the Progressive Era's reforms as an attempt to concentrate power, when most people and academic cites will see it as a reform to empower voters by establishing direct elections; and 2) saying the 17th Amd radically altered the constitutional structure, when just saying it was altered will suffice.

Unless you can provide verifiable citations to sources making these characterizations, and those sources are acceptable under WP:Source, I ask you, please, to tweak these so as to avoid problems with other editors. Thanks. -- Foofighter20x (talk) 05:22, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

October 2009

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Bethune's Gully. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 02:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Feh. Eeekster's right, but I don't see those edits as being "potentially controversial". I've extended the article and referenced it. FWIW, I was thinking of going for a walk in Bethune's Gully today, but the weather's lousy. Grutness...wha? 05:51, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Dollar hegemony

I wonder if you have understood the meaning of "minor edit". Your addition of the Triffin dilemma to Dollar hegemony, although valid, could not be described as minor, becuase you have added a significant new item - it is irrelevant how few words you used. 'Minor' means that you have corrected a spelling error or restructured an awkward sentence without changing its meaning, or wlinking an existing word uncontroversially. I hope you find this tip useful!--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Lady Clementina Hawarden

Hi I noticed you added a redlink to Lady CH at Dundrum, County Tipperary. Are you planning an article? Regards Sarah777 (talk) 20:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Tone of Antony Garrett Lisi

Hi Kasyapa, you mentioned a year ago in the Talk:Antony Garrett Lisi page that the tone of the article on Garrett Lisi needed to be changed. I agree. But an editor, User:76.200.188.75, is using your comment to justify some major changes and injection of their own POV. Could you come have a look and see if you think the new edits I'm making look OK? --SherryNugil (talk) 18:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Logical Leap: Induction in Physics

A tag has been placed on The Logical Leap: Induction in Physics, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 09:34, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Association of Libertarian Feminists

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Association of Libertarian Feminists, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/alf.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:00, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Association of Libertarian Feminists

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Association of Libertarian Feminists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Nolelover ^{It's almost football season!} 21:36, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but there are a number of problems. There's a statement that permission has been granted to use information on the website, but there are prescribed procedures for obtaining permission (Donating copyrighted materials) and I do not believe they have been followed. Even if permission were received, the site does not qualify as a reliable source, nor do any of the other external links qualify as reliable sources. Receiving an electoral vote is an interesting anecdote, but is not sufficient to qualify as notable.--SPhilbrickT 22:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)