Jump to content

User talk:Savitr108: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Thanks + FYI: new section
Savitr108 (talk | contribs)
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 15: Line 15:


Hi, thanks for your changes to [[Mahavakyas]]. I noticed that some of the changes you did ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mah%C4%81v%C4%81kyas&diff=prev&oldid=402821962 HERE] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mah%C4%81v%C4%81kyas&diff=next&oldid=402907377 HERE]), by inserting an alternate (better) spelling, broke the link to the page [[Aham Brahmasmi]]. Therefore I created a redirect page ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aham_brahm%C4%81smi&oldid=403105316 HERE]), pointing back to the original page. An alternate way to preserve the link, of course, would have been to redo the text as: <nowiki>[[Aham Brahmasmi|aham brahmāsmi]]</nowiki>. I don't think it matters much which way is used, but I think it's important to preserve an unbroken link. Thanks again for your work. Best regards -- [[User:Health Researcher|Health Researcher]] ([[User talk:Health Researcher|talk]]) 01:28, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your changes to [[Mahavakyas]]. I noticed that some of the changes you did ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mah%C4%81v%C4%81kyas&diff=prev&oldid=402821962 HERE] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mah%C4%81v%C4%81kyas&diff=next&oldid=402907377 HERE]), by inserting an alternate (better) spelling, broke the link to the page [[Aham Brahmasmi]]. Therefore I created a redirect page ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aham_brahm%C4%81smi&oldid=403105316 HERE]), pointing back to the original page. An alternate way to preserve the link, of course, would have been to redo the text as: <nowiki>[[Aham Brahmasmi|aham brahmāsmi]]</nowiki>. I don't think it matters much which way is used, but I think it's important to preserve an unbroken link. Thanks again for your work. Best regards -- [[User:Health Researcher|Health Researcher]] ([[User talk:Health Researcher|talk]]) 01:28, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

== Kristubhagavatam devanagari needs more updating ==

Hello Savitr, thanks for your work on [[Kristubhagavatam]]. I edited the devanagari text you added to fit into the table at the appropriate place. But while doing that, I noticed that the romanized version of those two verses (XII 1 and 3), which I had entered myself a while back, was incorrect! Mostly the problem was putting ms and hs instead of anusvaras and visargas, though I also had misspelled krtva as krstva. So I was wondering if you could rerun the updated romanized text through your software, and generate some correspondingly updated devanagiri? (and perhaps insert it where the current devanagiri resides?) Many thanks -- [[User:Health Researcher|Health Researcher]] ([[User talk:Health Researcher|talk]]) 22:04, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, HR, I put in the revised Devanagari. Doing that brought me to noticing some other oddities. Do please look at your KB text to make sure the Devanagari I put in matches it.

And yes, I did wonder about the word 'kRstvA', and I did expect 'kRtvA' there. I also found 'aca~nvalam' in what you'd entered, which I just now changed to 'aca~ncalam,' meaning 'unmoving' or 'not shaking.' I changed it in the Devanagari too. Presumably that is what you meant to enter there? Furthermore, I split up some of the words, using dash marks, in the transliteration. Why? Well, the only reason they are together in the Devanagari is due to a writing rule -- not even a sandhi rule, but a writing convention. I see no reason to complicate the readability on that account. Agree?

But again, please check it again against the original, and do revert my corrections if you find them faulty. And while you are considering that, take a look at the original word which you entered as 'tapattapaḥ'. I would expect some long vowels in that word, such as maybe 'tApat-tapaH' or 'tApAt-tapaH'.(and note that I am using a simplified iTRANS writing style, to save time here, rather than putting in the diacritics.)
[[User:Savitr108|Savitr108]] ([[User talk:Savitr108#top|talk]]) 17:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:51, 26 April 2011

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Savitr108, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Talk:Mahāvākyas. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! —Ed!(talk) 03:05, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks + FYI

Hi, thanks for your changes to Mahavakyas. I noticed that some of the changes you did (HERE and HERE), by inserting an alternate (better) spelling, broke the link to the page Aham Brahmasmi. Therefore I created a redirect page (HERE), pointing back to the original page. An alternate way to preserve the link, of course, would have been to redo the text as: [[Aham Brahmasmi|aham brahmāsmi]]. I don't think it matters much which way is used, but I think it's important to preserve an unbroken link. Thanks again for your work. Best regards -- Health Researcher (talk) 01:28, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kristubhagavatam devanagari needs more updating

Hello Savitr, thanks for your work on Kristubhagavatam. I edited the devanagari text you added to fit into the table at the appropriate place. But while doing that, I noticed that the romanized version of those two verses (XII 1 and 3), which I had entered myself a while back, was incorrect! Mostly the problem was putting ms and hs instead of anusvaras and visargas, though I also had misspelled krtva as krstva. So I was wondering if you could rerun the updated romanized text through your software, and generate some correspondingly updated devanagiri? (and perhaps insert it where the current devanagiri resides?) Many thanks -- Health Researcher (talk) 22:04, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, HR, I put in the revised Devanagari. Doing that brought me to noticing some other oddities. Do please look at your KB text to make sure the Devanagari I put in matches it.

And yes, I did wonder about the word 'kRstvA', and I did expect 'kRtvA' there. I also found 'aca~nvalam' in what you'd entered, which I just now changed to 'aca~ncalam,' meaning 'unmoving' or 'not shaking.' I changed it in the Devanagari too. Presumably that is what you meant to enter there? Furthermore, I split up some of the words, using dash marks, in the transliteration. Why? Well, the only reason they are together in the Devanagari is due to a writing rule -- not even a sandhi rule, but a writing convention. I see no reason to complicate the readability on that account. Agree?

But again, please check it again against the original, and do revert my corrections if you find them faulty. And while you are considering that, take a look at the original word which you entered as 'tapattapaḥ'. I would expect some long vowels in that word, such as maybe 'tApat-tapaH' or 'tApAt-tapaH'.(and note that I am using a simplified iTRANS writing style, to save time here, rather than putting in the diacritics.) Savitr108 (talk) 17:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]