User talk:Holy Ganga/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello Holy Ganga/Archive 1, 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Fawcett5 18:00, 19 October 2005 (UTC)


I noticed that u changed the image on Swastika in the Hinduism article by one which is red in color. Though most of the swastikas Ive seen in the past were red in color, is it neccessary for a Hindu swastika to be red? --Deepak|वार्ता 23:24, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

The saffron colour is considered auspicious by Hindus. Sometimes Red is also used instead of Saffron. You will find Swastika only in Saffron or Red colours in temples and Holy places but never in Black colour. Black shouldn't be used as per religious beliefs.Holy Ganga 10:33, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh ok, thanks for the info. Cheers and happy editing :) --Deepak|वार्ता 15:06, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Renaming pages[edit]

I see you have moved Krishna and Shiva by adding Lord to them. It would be advisable to discuss such moves of such well established names and subjects in a suitable forum first. Imc 18:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Hindu-Arabic numerals[edit]

Hi! User:RN moved the article to Arabic numerals despite 28 votes favoring the title "Hindu-Arabic numerals" and only 17 favoring "Arabic numerals." He argues that if we don't count voters with less that 150 (or sth like that) edits, only 56% voters "support changing the title to Hindu-Arabic numerals", while at least 60% support votes are required. However, it was agreed between all parties in the beginning of the vote that the proposal is to move the article to "Arabic numerals" from "Hindu-Arabic numerals." It was also agreed (though I thought it was very unfair) that:

  • Those opposing the move have the advantage that it won't be moved unless there's a 60% majority
  • Those supporting the move have the advantage that the person proposing the move can do the *short* opening statement.
  • For all the rest of the voting procedure both parties are equal. (quoting Francis Schonken from 21:04, 18 December 2005 (UTC))

I would definitely have preferred it the other way round, since I think an opening statement makes a HUGE difference, since many people just read the opening statement and understandably don't bother with the discussion below the votes. The present situation was accepted with the agreement that the article will be moved to "Arabic numerals" only if more than 60% voters favored that title. Thus, only 40% oppose votes were sufficient to retain the title "Hindu-Arabic numerals." In the present situation (with over 60% voters opposing the change), I find the move to "Arabic numerals" ridiculous, besides being completely unjust and unfair. Your comments will be appreciated. deeptrivia (talk) 05:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Ganges River[edit]

Hi. Why have you left some blank lines the Ganges page. Is it for alignment? --Raghu 17:34, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

yes--Holy Ganga 18:24, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
It affects the continuity of the the article while reading.--Raghu 18:30, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Earlier it was more difficult because of very large number of blank lines. Because of picture that is best alignment --Holy Ganga 19:27, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

biblical science[edit]

Can you direct me to the biblical science article you mentioned? I can't find it. — goethean 22:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Hinduism, Christianity, and Science[edit]

"Because of its emphasis on verification of Truth and exploration of Truth, Hinduism does not have to force the theories of Darwin or Mendel out of school rooms in order to survive, nor suffer from the compulsions of freezing human thought in a medieval time frame in order to justify itself."

Hi, I removed the above comparison between Hinduism and Christianity, since it's highly based on opinion (POV). --Leinad ¬ Flag of Brazil.svg pois não? 18:20, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
How is this comparision with Christianity? Darwin and Mendel theories are for all...not just Christianity. -Holy Ganga 20:02, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I found your name at wikiproject:hinduism, and was hoping you might join us at talk:human, where things have become rather unbalanced and unrepresentitive of humanity as a whole. After reading the above I suspect your just the voice we need! Cheers, Sam Spade 16:22, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Dear Holy Ganga you are HIndu & iam also Hindu.You know what happens now in india.Day by day Hindus percentage decrysing.This movement you must think about some ones help.At this time Christans will help for us.Therefore please donot feight againest them. (User name:Unknown Man) 27/3/06

Sure they will, and I suppose they are doing their best at it. 21st century for Christ. Has this being written by Ambhi or Jayachandra? Aupmanyav 18:00, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Similarities to other website...[edit]

Hi Holy Ganga: Did you know that this website

appears to have almost exactly copied your work?


The face towards the East is Sri Hanuman Mukha in its original form. This face removes all blemishes of sin and confers Chitta Suddhi.

Sri Karala Ugravira Narasimha Swami, facing the South, removes fear of enemies and confers victory.

The face facing the west is that of Lord Sri Mahavira Garuda and this face drives away evil spells, black magic influences etc., and removes all poisonous effects in one's body.

Sri Lakshmi Varahamurthy facing the North wards off the troubles caused by bad influences of the planets and confers all prosperity-Ashta Aishwarya.

The Urdhva Mukha Facing upwards of Sri Hayagriva Swami confers knowledge, victory, gnana, good wife and progeny. So, there is nothing in the world which doesnot come under any the influence of any of the five faces.


The origin of Sri Panchamukha Anjaneya Swami can be traced to a story in the Ramayana.During the war between Lord Rama and Ravana , Ravana took the help of Mahiravana who was the king of pathala.

Sri Panchamukha Hanuman was the main deity of Sri Ragavendra Tirtha, the saint of Mantralaya.The place where he meditated on Panchamukha Hanuman is now known as Panchamukhi, wherein a temple for Panchamukha Hanuman has been built.

Really the resemblance is quite extraordinary! Almost like they copied and pasted, changing a word here and there...

Of course the pages above have existed since 2003. So perhaps they were copied from some earlier original work you did someplace, but never published??

--Nemonoman 00:51, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

This topic handles some FACTS like direction of icon and origin of Panchamukha Hanuman . Noone can do original research on Basic facts. Facts are universal truths like names and direction of 7 continents of the world. They will remain same, no matter how many times and where you post them. Also, external link is present there. --Holy Ganga 07:44, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

But that word-for-word thing. Aren't you the teensiest bit disturbed that they simply COPIED your work -- Word for word? And then had the audacity that THEIR page WAS COPYRIGHTED!?? And that it was written BEFORE yours was!?? I mean really! The NERVE of Some People! It's not like you COPIED IT FROM THEM! They had ought to be ashamed!--Nemonoman 06:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

As i said this article deals with Direction and basic universal FACTS about icon and Hanuman. So, they will always remain universal for all. THE EXTERNAL SOURCE IS ALREADY THERE.-Holy Ganga 10:03, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Yuga Dharma[edit]

I was pleased to see that you have elevated one of my favorite human beings Swami Vivekananda to the exalted rank of Wikipedia editor. Surely it would be in good taste to offer that Grand Fellow a teensy bit of credit, however, for his contribution to Yuga Dharma. Why, he wrote most of the article! You can see the earlier version here (from 1897!)

Perhaps you can also tell your many interested readers exactly how Yuga dharma differs from Dharma. As an unpleasant person with a "Christian/Western agenda", I'm stumped to figure out the difference. Except that the Dharma article has fewer direct, unattributed quotes. In fact, Dharma is a pretty good article, don't you think?? --Nemonoman 05:21, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I am not surprised that you are stumped to figure out difference. Yuga dharma is connected with smritis whose laws are limited. Yuga Dharma is also a part of Dharma. Sanatana dharma which are connected with shruti is another part of Dharma. Yuga Dharma is like a sub-part of Dharma in Hinduism section of Dharma article. -Holy Ganga 07:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I think you said that nearly as well as Swami V did, 109 years ago. --Nemonoman 05:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
And don't you think that Vivekananda would be happy that you had copied HIS work without citing his authorship in any way? It would give him a chance to prove his humility, don't you agree? --Nemonoman 06:03, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Swami Vivekanand's work are not copyrrited. See Link to original site on main article. Don't argue for the sake of argument without any base.-Holy Ganga 10:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

India related links[edit]

Flag of India.svg
Links for Wikipedians interested in India content
Flag of India.svg

Newcomers: Welcome kit | Register: Indian Wikipedians | Network: Noticeboard (WP:INWNB) Browse: India | Open tasks | Deletions
Contribute content: Wikiportal India - Indian current events (WP:INCE) India collaboration of the week (WP:INCOTW) - Category adoptions

Please use edit summaries. --Gurubrahma 05:34, 14 February 2006 (UTC)


Your recent mods to Maya (Hinduism) are direct lifts from the Ronald C. Pine book "Science and the Human Prospect". --Nemonoman 01:40, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Policy on use of Copyright Materials[edit]

See the policy here... Emphasis added by me--Nemonoman 01:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Using copyrighted work from others[edit]

If you use part of a copyrighted work under "fair use", or if you obtain special permission to use a copyrighted work from the copyright holder under the terms of our license, you must make a note of that fact (along with names and dates). It is our goal to be able to freely redistribute as much of Wikipedia's material as possible, so original images and sound files licensed under the GFDL or in the public domain are greatly preferred to copyrighted media files used under fair use. See Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission for a form letter asking a copyright holder to grant us a license to use their work under terms of the GFDL.

Never use materials that infringe the copyrights of others. This could create legal liabilities and seriously hurt the project. If in doubt, write it yourself.'

Note that copyright law governs the creative expression of ideas, not the ideas or information themselves. Therefore, it is perfectly legal to read an encyclopedia article or other work, reformulate it in your own words, and submit it to Wikipedia.(See plagiarism and fair use for discussions of how much reformulation is necessary in a general context.)

Linking to copyrighted works[edit]

Linking to copyrighted works is usually not a problem, as long as you have made a reasonable effort to determine that the page in question is not violating someone else's copyright. If it is, please do not link to the page. Whether such a link is contributory infringement is currently being debated in the courts, but in any case, linking to a site that illegally distributes someone else's work sheds a bad light on us. from Wikipedia:Copyrights

If you find a copyright infringement[edit]

It is not the job of rank-and-file Wikipedians to police content for possible copyright infringement, but if you suspect one, you should at the very least bring up the issue on that page's talk page. Others can then examine the situation and take action if needed. The most helpful piece of information you can provide is a URL or other reference to what you believe may be the source of the text.

Some cases will be false alarms. For example, if the contributor was in fact the author of the text that is published elsewhere under different terms, that does not affect their right to post it here under the GFDL. Also, sometimes you will find text elsewhere on the Web that was copied from Wikipedia. In both of these cases, it is a good idea to make a note in the talk page to discourage such false alarms in the future.

If some of the content of a page really is an infringement, then the infringing content should be removed, and a note to that effect should be made on the talk page, along with the original source. If the author's permission is obtained later, the text can be restored.

If all of the content of a page is a suspected copyright infringement, then the page should be listed on Wikipedia:Copyright problems and the content of the page replaced by the standard notice which you can find there. If, after a week, the page still appears to be a copyright infringement, then it may be deleted following the procedures on the votes page.

In extreme cases of contributors continuing to post copyrighted material after appropriate warnings, such users may be blocked from editing to protect the project.

I sincerely suggest that you review some of your edits in light of the above. --Nemonoman 01:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Some major Maya(Hinduism) edits were based on Shankaracharya work which like Swami Vivekanand's work can't be copyrited by anyone.-Holy Ganga 10:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Nemomoman, I have already explained in your talk page about Your attitude against Hindus here and Your direct voilation of wikepedia policy on use of copyright materialand I sincerely suggest that you will edit your direct lift article as per rules.-Holy Ganga 10:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Jesus Christ...--Dangerous-Boy 06:55, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


Thanks Holy Ganga, for the barnstar! Hoping to work more with you in future :) deeptrivia (talk) 11:27, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

David Dworkin[edit]

Thanks, I will fix.--Nemonoman 14:47, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing. I never finished cleaning up that article. Now it's fixed.--Nemonoman 15:01, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


Holi greetings. --Bhadani 11:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank You -Holy Ganga 16:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Har-Har Mahadeva. --Bhadani 16:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of Naked Yoga image[edit]

Hello, I would like to know why you deleted the naked yoga section image? Thank you. Dandelion1 02:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism/Peer review[edit]

Under the request section, can you write your reason for nominating the article and sign by using four tildes (Dangerous-Boy 03:58, 2 April 2006 (UTC)).

Welcome to VandalProof![edit]

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Holy Ganga! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Prodego talk 21:16, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

The link was not vandalism[edit]

The link was not vandalism, it was a genuine contribution. Could you please put it back? Thanks!

Wikipedia is not for posting such chat and discussion forum links. Please sign your posts on Talk pages. - Holy Ganga talk India flag 300.png 09:14, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Why did you remove my link?[edit]

Why did you remove my link,, there are links to forums that contain less information than this one? email:

Because Wikipedia is not for posting such chat and discussion forum links. Please sign your posts on Talk pages. - Holy Ganga talk India flag 300.png 19:30, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


If you are going to use a citation to back up something, then make sure the citation actually says that. There is no assuming or commonsense in using one fact from a citation to proove something else. Please see WP:CITE. -- Jeff3000 14:42, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I was not assuming anything. You was probably mistaken when you claimed that citation says Hinduism is the oldest religion. Actually, citation never claimed that it is the Oldest religion. It says it is among world's oldest existing religions. With some changes, i think now BBC site prefectly match with citation. - Holy Ganga talk India flag 300.png 15:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

3RR violation[edit]

You have been reported for the violation of 3RR - your 1st revert, 2nd revert and 3rd revert has begun a unnecessary revert war in Pakistan article. Anwar saadat 20:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the above edits:


You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. --InShaneee 21:03, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

The simple answer is to do what I did -> [1]. I moved the original link to the BBC article down a bit and added the following day's article about the Pakistani government reaction. I also added the link to the original source and then let readers decide for themselves. Avoid edit wars by remaining neutral and using the talkpages as much as possible. Green Giant 22:41, 8 May 2006 (UTC)