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

Thought for the day:

When I see editors warring on Wikipedia I think of a story about the importance of working together and securing allies. The Pañcatantra, an Indian collection of folk wisdom, tells the story of the Doves and the Fowler.

--Adapted and abbreviated from The Pañcatantra: The Book of India's Folk Wisdom, Patrick Olivelle translation, Oxford World's Classics, ISBN 0-19-283988-8
The story teaches the benefits of working together and valuing diversity as a source of strength. The charming animated film Ek Anek Aur Ekta ("One, Many, and Unity") [1] uses the story to teach these values to children (and Wikipedia editors). Don't worry if you don't understand the language, the animation speaks a universal language.
Wikipedia:Harmonious editing club This user is a member of the Harmonious Editing Club.
Aum.svgThis user is a member of the WikiProject Hinduism.

Symbol question.svgThis user has written or expanded 1 article featured in the Did You Know section on the Main Page.
No-spam.svgThis user is a member of WikiProject Spam.
Editor - silver star.jpgThis editor is a Veteran Editor III and is entitled to display this Silver Editor Star.

Words to live by[edit]

I pray that I may always practice vāda.

The tradition of debate is well-developed in India. In Bhagavad Gita 10.32, Krishna says that as an example of his excellence, "I am vāda of the debaters." (वादः प्रवदतामहम्). A commentary by Madhusudana Sarasvati (b. 1490? - d. 1580?) on this verse explains that in the tradition of Hindu debate there are three varieties of discussion: vāda, jalpa, and vitaṇḍā. Vāda is discussion with open-mindedness, with a view to determining true purport. Jalpa is pointless debate. Vitaṇḍā is wrangling discussion.

Madhusudana Sarasvati explains:

"Vāda is the discussion between two unbiased seekers of truth, or between two brahmacārins who are seekers of truth and are classmates, or between a teacher and the taught, with the help of valid means of reasoning, and (proceeds) in the form of proving or disproving (statements) by taking up positions for or against, culminating in the ascertainment of truth.... Jalpa and Vitaṇḍā are forms of discussion of one seeking to score a victory for protecting the conclusion about the truth -- which was arrived at through Vāda -- by defeating an illogical and obstinate opponent; and they end merely in victory or defeat. This has been said in 'Jalpa and Vitaṇḍā are meant for the protection of a conclusion arrived at (through Vāda), just as a fence made of thorny branches is necessary to protect the sprouting of a seed. (Gautama-Nyāyā Sūtras, 4.2.50)"

"The countering of an opponent's view through Chala (circumvention), Jāti (false generalization) and Nigraha-sthāna (fault in a syllogism) is common to Jalpa and Vitaṇḍā. Among them, in Vitaṇḍā one's own point of view is firmly adhered to by one, while it is merely refuted by the other (without stating his own conclusion). In Jalpa, however, their own points of view are advanced by both, and the opposite view is refuted by both. This is the distinction.... However it has already been stated that Vāda is superior because it culminates in the ascertainment of truth."

Quotations from: Bhagavad Gita: With the Annotation Gūḍhārtha Dīpikā. Translated by Swami Gambhirananda. Advaita Ashrama Publication Department: Calcutta, 1998. ISBN 81-7505-194-9. pp. 631-632.

I pray that I may always practice vāda.

My activity on Wikipedia[edit]

Articles I started[edit]

Updated DYK query On February 9, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ganesha Purana, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 22:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


Links I use often[edit]

These are links to some issues which I enjoy following:

Transliteration and Indic scripts[edit]

I am studying Wikipedia:Romanization standards and wish I could find a good model that I can live with. My notes are at

I prefer the IAST transliteration methods (See: Template:IAST) and have compiled some ideas about the use of IAST on Wikipedia that are not exactly the same as any current style guide:

I try to keep in mind this general point from Wikipedia:Citing sources:

"Because this is the English Wikipedia, English-language sources should be given whenever possible, and should always be used in preference to other language sources of equal calibre. However, do give references in other languages where appropriate. If quoting from a different language source, an English translation should be given with the original-language quote beside it."

For help with Indic scripts see:

A LANG template for Sanskrit: ([[Sanskrit]]:{{lang|sa|गणेश पुराणम्}}; {{IAST|gaṇeśa purāṇam}}) which looks like this:

(Sanskrit:गणेश पुराणम्; gaṇeśa purāṇam)

Vandalism and SPAM[edit]

Warning templates
PageName is optional

See additional templates and examples of output


  • {{subst:uw-unsourced1|Lingam}} ~~~~
  • {{subst:uw-spam1|Hinduism}} ~~~~
  • {{longterm4im}} ~~~~
  • {{IPvandal|}} - continued vandalism after final warning ~~~~
  • {{vandal|Sparklybubbles}} — continued vandalism of after final warning ~~~~
  • {{Cleanup-spam}}
  • [[Category:Wikipedia spam cleanup]]
  • Tool for analysis of editorial activity: [2]

For more spam fighting tips see WikiProjectSpam.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Trivia Cleanup

Wikipedia:Guide to layout

Wikipedia:Summary style


Wikipedia:Notability (academics)

Citation methods[edit]

It is best to use a consistent citation method within the same article. Two options for book citations are:

Two useful resources:

  • Enable Reftools under Special:Preferences -> gadgets -> Editing gadgets. This will add a form for adding citation information in the edit windown.
  • This website quickens the process of filling in all the refernce information for (many) books that have an ISBN.

For the example you give, the formatting can be (see in edit mode):

Jones (2003, p. 345) claims that Wikipedia is the greatest source of human knowledge, but this is refuted decisively by Vyasa (2010, pp. 23-49, cf. 88) who proves it is filled with errors.

Incidentally, Vyasa 2010 is just a reprint of much older work, and is considered outdated nowadays. Abecedare (talk) 01:23, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
How about a work with two authors: Jones and Abecedare (2003, p. 14) claim to have discovered a novel method of editing Wikipedia articles through direct thought-transference, but Vyasa and Bachmann (2010) have proven it unfeasible. My problem is to work in the text by Arya & Joshi, for a real example, with that of Wilson. I thought Vyasa was at University of Chicago, by the way. Buddhipriya (talk) 01:35, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Jones & Abecedare (2003, p. 14) and Vyasa & Bachmann (2010) works.
Vyasa was at U of C, but had to move to Gainesville to prevent a public scandal over him taking credit for work actually done by his assistants. It was all hushed up, of course. Abecedare (talk) 01:40, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

The characterization of Agni as "priest" in RV 10.52 is from Macdonell (1898, p. 171). Arya & Joshi (2001, p. 319 (volume 4)) note Wilson's version "(the servant) of Yama" referring to Agni as the burner of the dead.

Arya & Joshi (2001, vol. 4, p. 319)

Various links related to citation:

More Citation Templates[edit]

Web Template:cite web
<ref name=""> {{cite web |author= |title= |url= |work= |publisher= |page= |language= |doi= |date= |accessdate= |quote= }} </ref>
Journal Template:Cite journal see also {{cite doi}} {{cite jstor}} //just say jstor|1234567//
<ref name=""> {{cite journal |last= |first= |coauthors= |date= |title= |journal= |volume= |series= |issue= |pages= |publisher= |location= |issn= |doi= |url= |accessdate= |laysummary= |laysource= |laydate= |quote=}} </ref>
Gazette Template:London Gazette
<ref> {{LondonGazette |issue= |supp= |startpage= |date= |accessdate= }} </ref>
News Template:Cite news
<ref> {{cite news |first= |last= |author= |title= |url= |agency= |work= |publisher= |page= |date= |accessdate= |quote= }} </ref>
Newspaper Template:Cite news
<ref> {{cite news | last = | first = | title = | newspaper = | pages = | date = | url = }} </ref>

  • {{tl|unreferenced}}
  • {{verify source}}
  • {{page number}}
  • {{citation style}}
  • {{citation needed|reason=need proper, complete, direct inline citation|date=April 2009}}
  • [[WP:RS]] appears as WP:RS
  • [[WP:ATT]] appears as WP:ATT
  • [[WP:EL]] appears as WP:EL
  • [[WP:EQ]] appears as WP:EQ
  • [[WP:NOT]] appears as WP:NOT

Mediation processes[edit]

Concerns about Wikipedia[edit]

My current opinion is that there are serious problems with the Wikipedia paradigm. See:

More specifically:

A delightful collection of absurd situations is cataloged here:

One very good article:

A second very good article from New Yorker:

If all else fails, consider editing at Unencyclopedia.

A new low for astonishing nonsense[edit]

Citing "Ripley's Believe It Or Not" television show as a reliable source of information on sadhus. See:

Previous thoughts for the day[edit]

--Jimbo [3]