User talk:Presearch/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Gurudas Banerjee

a) Find an admin to delete these edits so that you get article creator's credit. If you can't find any admin, I'll see if I can find someone! b) I suggest to remove all external links from the table, that's a risky thing and we generally avoid in Indian articles. You link IMDb, CITWF and people start linking Youtuve, (copyvio) mp3 download, video download links too! Remove all links! c) Yes, you can nominate the article. I know you need review a nomination I'll do the "one nomination review" for you! --Tito Dutta (talk) 10:28, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, the links should probably be removed from the table, though they've been very handy for writing it. Actually, they can all be turned into content footnotes, so only a moderate amount of inconvenience will be added. Also, given that the first version of the article was merely a redirect, I'd be inclined to call myself the creator anyway, even without troubling an admin. Though if there are doubts I suppose we can ask for clarification at Talk:DYK. It just seems common sense.
Finally, besides the links, another thing that needs to be cleaned up is whether the film Ramakrishna Paramahamsa (second to the last row in the table, with a YouTube link) is the same as the row above it, Shri Shri Ramakrishna Kathamrita. Do you know enough Bengali to look at the YouTube video and figure out if it's the same? (If so, if you want, you could leave me a note here or on the talk page, and then I can enter the change, without losing your capacity to be the nominator if you want [though I couldn't quite tell from what you wrote above whether you want to be a nominator or not]). Thanks! -- Presearch (talk) 10:43, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
You need an admin to delete previous edits. My internet is currently tremendously slow. If you give me the exact link, I'll try to watch it. (and yes, remove all ELs for article body specially Yioutube videos links, most of Youtube playlist videos are copyvios). About the video, you can ask User:Dwaipayanc, he is also a native Bengali speaker! --Tito Dutta (talk) 10:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Gee, that's awful if most Youtube playlist videos are copyvios. I wonder why the copyright holders don't request they be deleted? And is copyvio any less of a problem for full-length videos, like most of the YouTube video links that are currently in the FaRK and Gurudas Bannerjee tables? Thanks -- Presearch (talk) 11:26, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
That isa definitely a copyvio! Who is GajalKashim? For Indian language movies you'll get all movies in Youtube/internet! Wait for 1 week, you'll get "The Light" too! For Indian languages movie either link only those movies which are listed at (Bengali movies link: These are uploaded by Youtube partners/Film production house or distributors or check the uploader's name and profile! --Tito Dutta (talk) 13:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Writers Barnstar Hires.png The Writer's Barnstar
Thanks for writing the article Gurudas Banerjee. -- Tito Dutta (talk) 10:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Presearch (talk) 10:43, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Ramakrishna play

Add this man. I had a wish to create an article on this drama, this man portrayed the role of Ramakrishna for 30-35 years at a stretch! --Tito Dutta (talk) 05:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Re: Ready for DYK?

Yes, it is. Go ahead or suggest the hook! --Tito Dutta (talk) 09:44, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

That looks very good! Are you suggesting me to nominate it or you are going to do the work? --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:06, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Well... if you want to nominate it you could probably do it without doing a review, right? I would be happy for you to nominate it, and then I could also stay tuned and ready to respond if any issues arise. BTW, it looks from here and here that SRK's birthday may be March 13 so if you think it's a good idea we could suggest running it on that day as a special event. What do you think? -- Presearch (talk) 17:27, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
1) Ramakrishna's birthday is 18 February 2) SRK mean Shahrukh Khan 3) I am reviewing an article for you, link it as your QPQ Template:Did you know nominations/Matanaka Farm --Tito Dutta (talk) 18:17, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Ladakh International Film Festival

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Turkey talk

Several issues

  • In the UK, I just get We're sorry, but this video is not available in your region due to right restrictions. So it's not available to all Wikipedia readers, and of limited value.
  • That message suggests that the publishers have not agreed to free access to the content, so the link should not be posted here. This is why we have automatic bots that remove links to Youtube and the like.
  • You are very specific in linking a particular book and the film made from it. Neither are used as sources for the article, and probably wouldn't be acceptable in what is essentially a biology article anyway, since there is a separate article for domesticated turkeys. There are lots of books that could have been listed as further reading, but aren't. The effect, even if unintentional, is that it looks as if you are promoting these products.
  • "Further reading" and "See also" sections are rarely a good idea. If the book etc are relevant, they will be used as sources, if not, at best you get a pointless list
  • I looked at My Life as a Turkey. While some issues remain, the notability requirement appears to be met by the Emmy, so I have no particular problem with that article.

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:13, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

I thought it seemed a reasonable compromise. The varying access isn't restricted to PBS, some BBC material can't be watched outside the UK, and Google Books also gives differing geographical access. I guess it's to do with the copyright licences under which the material is published. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:17, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I received the email below today (third paragraph) and I do not know how to get this issue corrected. I edited the article 'How To Start A Revolution' with the following addition: "The eleven second footage of the Boeing 767 landing at Logan International Airport in Boston, MA., USA, by Videographer Lyman GL DeLiguori, Sr., MCP., of Methuen, MA., USA, was shot on a Sony HVR-A1U with Carl Zeiss T* Lens in arduous weather conditions of -20F and from a distance of approximately one-half mile."

I then received the following:

22:30, 17 January 2014 Hello again. I noticed that you made an addition at How to Start a Revolution. You added a sentence explaining how a particular shot in the film was done, and who did it. Do you have a (published) source for that information? If you read up about how Wikipedia is run, you will see that all information must be verifiable through reliable sources. It would be good if you could add a footnote to the source which cites a reference supporting the information. If such a reference doesn't appear on the page within a few days (or perhaps sooner), the new sentence may be deleted (in fact, unsourced additions that look like they may be self-promotional are often deleted sooner than a few days). Best regards, and thanks again for your contribution. --Presearch (talk) 21:27, 17 January 2014 (UTC)"

Here is the problem: I, Lyman GL DeLiguori, Sr., MCP., am that Videographer. How do I prove I am he? I can and will sign an Affidavit if necessary, but I know of no other way to prove that my addition is truthful.

ANY help greatly appreciated!

LGLDSR73 (talk) 23:57, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Wikipedia content should be based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject. What you're adding here is likely original research, something Wikipedia is not the place for. If no one else has written about you doing that shot, say a newspaper or a film magazine, Wikipedia should not write about it either. Your own affidavit clearly is not an independent source, and you extolling your own achievements will indeed be seen as self-promotion, again something Wikipedia is not the place for. Thus it's probably best to remove that content until you can provide third-party sources that discuss your effort in some detail. Even then, due to your conflict of interest it's better for you to propose changes on the talk page than to edit the article yourself. Huon (talk) 00:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Boston Film Festival, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Last Kiss (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Altai-Sayan region, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stella (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Altai-Sayan region at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 08:30, 27 January 2014 (UTC)


Nice edits; well done. I've left a few suggestions at the talkpage. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 21:02, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Indra's Net (book), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Seva and Richard King (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Talkback message from Tito Dutta

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Presearch. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Indra's Net (book).
Message added 02:23, 5 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TitoDutta 02:23, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Friendly gesture

Friedrich Friedländer Die Dorfpolitiker.jpg Friendly gesture
Hi Presearch. We probably won't agree on the value of Malhotra, but again I get the impression you're a nice fellow. So, a friendly token. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:55, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the friendly token, Joshua. Likewise, I appreciate what seems to be your friendliness, and your genuine good intentions. Let me also point out what I suspect is common ground shared by you, me, and Malhotra: All three of us, I suspect, are non-Hindutva — recall that Malhotra describes himself as a non-Hindutva Hindu. I regard such a claim as completely realistic, since I know many non-Hindutva Hindus, as well as non-Hindutva non-Hindus, who, like Malhotra, perceive and are appalled by phenomena that Malhotra identifies and criticizes. I hope that the broad sectors of people who feel similarly will all be able to express their views without being pilloried as Hindutva.
I would also encourage those who believe in the interconnected cosmology of Indra's Net to apply it consistently: Don't apply Indra's Net to most phenomena, but indulge in a Promethean approach to understanding Buddhism and the Buddha himself, pretending that the Buddha did not arise in an (admittedly somewhat degenerate at the time) Hindu culture. The Buddha, while a great creative genius, has also sometimes been called a "child of the Upanishads". These ideas need not be in conflict. Both from the standpoint of Indra's Net and from the standpoint of modern cultural studies scholarship, the presence of a Vedic inheritance seemingly should be a default stance for studying and representing the Buddha, as well as for discussing his legacy. There is plenty of room to give credit to both Hinduism and Buddhism. But I agree with Malhotra that the predilection of recent western scholarship has been to give more credit to a (conveniently Promethean) Buddhism, and deny it to Hinduism. I think this is a mistake that should be corrected and will in time be corrected, and I hope you will do your part (with time available), as a person of good will, to help correct it.
I would add that the notion that Hinduism has suffered from some remarkably poor scholarship (mostly by Westerners) in the past 40 or 50 years is not inconsistent with how scholarly fields can sometimes run aground. In such cases, even when scholars get their facts correct, they can look at the world with astonishingly narrow blinders: Consider, for example, the case of behaviorism, prior to the onset of cognitive psychology. From this perspective, Malhotra is analogous to a cognitive revolutionary who seeks to correct a field run aground in narrowness. Not that the cognitive revolution is the last word. --Presearch (talk) 20:23, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi presearch. Thank you for your kind reply. I'm aware that the political divisions in India are complicated, which is also reflected in the discussions at Wikipedia. There's pressure on the article on India Against Corruption to remove Arvind from it; it appears, to my surprise, that those people also reject Vivekananda.
Did I mention already Geoffrey Samuel's "The origins of Yoga and Tantra" to you? Samuel argues that Jainism, Buddhism and the Upanishadic tradition originated in the same cultural milieu, in northern India. With, indeed, a strong Vedic influence, but also non-Vedic elements. From what I've understood about it, making strict distinctions between "Buddhism", "Hinduism", and "Jainism", is not very useful; they are various manifestations of a broad cultural complex. Which is illustrated by the spread of both buddhism and "the Hindu synthesis": both spread from the north to the south of India, and to south-east Asia.
I think that the metaphor of Indra's net applies better to Indian culture as a whole, including Buddhism and Hinduism, but also, I guess, Islam, and the influence of the west.
Regarding the "poor scholarship": I see something different, namely a correction of the popular understanding of Hinduism, which is strongly influenced by Vivekananda and other "neo-Advaitins". I can't regard Malhotra to be a compensating factor here; his depiction of, for example, Rambacharan's work i suggestive and, therefor, incorrect. But this is the area where we disagree.
Anyway, I appreciate the details of your edits, and your carefull sourcing. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Indra's Net (book)

slakrtalk / 09:58, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

That book discussion

There is no need to apologize or feel embarrassed; you have the right to your opinion, whether that be supporting or merging whatever proposal there is. If, theoretically, one of us supported/opposed a proposal and we were wrong, it isn't breaking any sort of rule because everybody is allowed to be wrong. I just logged in after a Wikibreak of a few days and found that I had made several large blunders which were pointed out while I was gone. It happens to all of us. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:13, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind and understanding words and encouragement! I feel better! Warm regards -- Presearch (talk) 00:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Indra's net

Newtons cradle animation book.gif

It's a moving book, isn't it? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:46, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm... was there a pun intended? (the page title was 'moved' but changed back recently, partly due to book project discussions. With regard to the book being moving in an emotional or spiritual or intellectual sense, I can imagine that could be the case for many people. For example, one might sympathize with the statement in one of the cited book reviews that a Hindu fellow living in the US particularly appreciated the book because he didn't want his children disproportionately exposed to what he perceived as wrongheaded (ultimately anti-Hindu) scholarship. And the reviewer thought that the book would help the situation of his children. I'm inclined to agree with him, and indeed, that is moving when I consider their situation.
For me personally, as an academic and Wikipedian, I particularly appreciated the attempt to characterize the unity (in diversity) of Hinduism. Though I can't call myself a Hindu I've had enough exposure to how the tradition "works" in practice to think that RM is fairly accurate in his description of how the tradition functions (like an 'open architecture'), and to think that a lot of the modern scholars have got it wrong - perhaps because they were, perhaps unawares, importing criteria or implicit assumptions from other traditions that may emphasize, for example, specific doctrines to a greater degree. (RM has various ideas on sources of error, some of them less charitable than others).
Sometimes adequately and explicitly characterizing how something functions can go a long way towards dispelling inaccurate characterizations. In my opinion it would certainly be great if that happens here. That might provide a lot of 'concrete' benefit on the human level, such as to that review author. And perhaps foster improved harmony between traditions. Over the long run, maybe even save lives. Indeed, making it possible for people to hold their heads up and be themselves without feeling attacked - that can indeed be moving.
Were you serious when you implied you found the book moving?
Regards --- Presearch (talk) 00:29, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
I meant the frequent change of title, though I might recommand it to Hindus. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:48, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
By any chance, just out of curiosity, have you read any significant portion of the book? --Presearch (talk) 02:44, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Raymond Paloutzian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Barbara. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sharp-From-Dictatorship-To-Democracy-ISBN-9781854251046.jpg


Thanks for uploading File:Sharp-From-Dictatorship-To-Democracy-ISBN-9781854251046.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:15, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

The image is now re-linked from its original book page, which had been damaged during AWB "repair", which broke the image file name. I have fixed it, and the image should be retained. -- Presearch (talk) 23:13, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


You should enable your email or mail me, need to discuss something about previous page that was up for deletion and problem with others. Fundarise (talk) 13:40, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I have little time for Wikipedia at present, and I have never enabled email and don't intend to. I see you seem to be fairly new to Wikipedia. I'd encourage you to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia by contributing for a while to a few articles where you have some knowledge but are also detached (not strongly tied to a particular point of view), and in that way you can become familiar with Wikipedia and how it works. -- Presearch (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2015 (UTC)