User talk:Shantavira/Archive 2

The Wind in the Willows

Hello Shantavira,

Thank you for your copyedit of the synopsis of 'The Wind in the Willows'. I wrote it last week, and, with me not being a native speaker of English, the synopsis obviously needed a lot of work. There were, however, some changes you made that I think were not for the best, for (as far as I can tell) they made the synopsis not reflect the book accurately anymore. For instance you wrote "Rat and Mole want to do something about Toad's obsession, but Rat believes the only person who will know what to do is Badger,". But I can't find that in the book, I think in the book it is implied that Mole just wanted to meet the Badger out of curiosity/for fun, and not because they were looking to enlist his help. They just happened to get the help when they met him.

I have made a few changes to the synopsis so that it is accurate again. I wrote this message because I wanted to explain why I made the changes.

ssepp^(talk) 00:12, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Copyedits to "How to copyedit"

Excellent edits, all. In particular, I want to commend you for having the strength of will to not remark on the extreme irony of the phrase "A common problem is that articles are verbose..." Nicely concised, Prof. Strunk would be proud! :) Eaglizard 22:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for your help

Your background is impressive and you seem to be a very good editor. Assuming it's true (which I do), you would be very helpful in this proposal. Talk:Eastern_philosophy#Merger_proposal. Thank you. And thanks for responding to my post at WP:Ref desk. Zenwhat (talk) 06:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I do not think we should encourage western misconceptions. Most western philosophers acknowledge "Eastern philosophy = Eastern religion." About this comment:

However, I do think the article should be renamed Eastern philosophies. There is of course no Eastern philosophy as such, and having this title perpetuates the myth.

I agree with you actually, but most philosophers and authors don't. As it stands now, I agree that there should be a distinction made between "Eastern philosophy" and "Eastern religion," and I also agree that it makes sense to use the plural, "Eastern philosophies." But since Wikipedia's standard is WP:V and WP:RS (since both of us could be wrong), it seems to make the most sense to merge them, so that it reflects the mainstream view -- even if that is false. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 01:32, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank u

Hi Shantavira, thank u for your response to my astrology question. do you know about Vedic astrology? western astrology? both? can u give me some MAJOR guidance? I KNOW I am meant to delve into this...and maybe if u look at my natal chart, u'll agree.. hehe.

thanx a lot again. -Cosmic girl (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi Shantavira, thank you for your response on my talk page. I can't find the link to email you. I'd like to discuss 'the philosophy of astrology' with you, if there's such a thing, lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cosmic girl (talk • contribs) 14:24, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Substantial edits at the Dorje Shugden article

Dear editor I like to draw your attention to that specific article, Dorje Shugden, which was substantially changed by a group of three new editors, without any discussion on the talk page. Rather one of the new editor revealed: "Many of these changes were discussed between at least three of the editors." which must have happened outside of WP, because there is no discussion on the talk page or their WP-accounts. One of the new editors claimed: "You seem to be the only person who accepted this article as it was. If you check you will see that the changes made make this article more neutral and unbiased then it was before previous edits." If I check I see the article omitted different POV's, deleted verified passages, included passages from anonymous websites and turned the article to a more bias Pro-Shugden POV. I'd like to ask you to check that and to give your opinion or to collaborate if there is a need for improving the article, so that we can have an unbiased, neutral, well-informed article which fairly presents all POV's. Thank you very much, --Kt66 (talk) 19:33, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Crocodile wife

Very groovy. I don't think we got to the bottom of this, though. I have a strong suspicion that there is an Egyptian fable similar to the Timorese one. --Milkbreath (talk) 11:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikicookie

I am awarding you this WikiCookie for your constructive edits on Wikipedia--LAAFan 16:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I Can Only Concur

You keep getting to questions on the Reference Desks before I do and giving excellent answers. I am at a loss. I am beginning to question the reason for my existence here...! Regards Mhicaoidh (talk) 10:55, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Birmingham Council election, 2008

I don't mind either way. If you nominate it for deletion, I'll be happy to support you. I think Rochdale Council election, 2008 should also be deleted. D.M.N. (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Beeline

I really liked your examples, though did add some further (and slightly contrary) content to the hyphenation query just now. Now I can't get the images of a line of bees and line of bread out of my mind! -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 13:00, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Cantontese Opera On Language Desk

I particularly asked a yesorno question to elicit more response, and to get responses that would provide as much information as possible. Yes, thank you, I didnt' think Cantonese music employed Major and minor keys like in the West, which exactly brings up another question, what exactly do they employ then?68.148.164.166 (talk) 08:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC) 68.148.164.166 (talk) 08:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Eyesore

Hi!

I'd gone through your user page (no, your user page is not an eyesore!), and thought your opinion might be helpful in this thread immediately below your query on "Grace" in the Humanities Reference desk.

Thanks in advance and regards.

—KetanPanchal^taLK 07:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Grace

Hello, Shantavira! If you'll be having further discussion with your interlocutor regarding his disparaging (?) a blessing for toilet functions as "extreme," I would offer this thought: Perhaps only people who have experienced health problems or medical conditions that impair their "process of elimination" can appreciate what others take for granted. I'm unfamiliar with Eastern religions, but wonder whether their contemplative focus includes a regular, ritualistic expression of appreciation for good health (or praying for such)? This sort of humility and awareness is perhaps so uncommon as to labeled extremist, which I find a lamentable attitude. -- Thanks for reading, Deborahjay (talk) 17:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of earthquake non-question

Hi there, just a quick note. I can understand why you did this – the Ref Desk is certainly not the place for that kind of posting. However, I am also a big fan of 65.* and his eccentric, breathless reports on UFOs, earthquakes and whatever else he happens to see on Fox News. I guess what I'm saying is, I know it doesn't belong there, but I would have left it there anyway. Ah well. Best, --Richardrj ^{talk email} 17:21, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of fictional foxes

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of fictional foxes, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. 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. Verbal chat 12:54, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

new WP:RDREG userbox

This user is a Reference desk regular.

The box to the right is the newly created userbox for all RefDesk regulars. Since you are an RD regular, you are receiving this notice to remind you to put this box on your userpage! (but when you do, don't include the |no. Just say {{WP:RD regulars/box}} ) This adds you to Category:RD regulars, which is a must. So please, add it. Don't worry, no more spam after this - just check WP:RDREG for updates, news, etc. flaminglawyer^c 23:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Crocodile wife

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

first paragraph is original research, the latter two contain two pieces of trivia that are unrelated to one another. The content is non-notable, unverified, original research by synthesis in the latter two paragraphs and outright in the first.

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.

Tree on rock

Hello Shantavira, the File:Loch Voil tree.jpg image is remarkable. Although you uploaded it to complement the Plant without soil discussion, can you update the details on the file page - the location, date, etc. Also, can you upload a higher resolution pic if you have one. I'm sure it'll get into the featured pictures list! Jay (talk) 10:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Forest Schools

I removed your listing at Wikipedia:Requested moves and posted to Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2009 July 3#Forest Schools. It's archived now but you can reply to my talk page if you want. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Religion

This is not a criticism or attack, but if you "believe[] the world would be a happier, safer and saner place without religion," do you still derive satisfaction from spending so much of your career working for Buddhists, Christians, and Quakers? --71.111.194.50 (talk) 19:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest. My placing of that userbox was deliberately provocative, and I wondered whether anyone would ever bite! I am now a follower of Buddhism, which I do not consider a religion, since it is based on human experience and is not based on faith in the unseen or the existence of the absurd. Since its central purpose is the happiness and welfare of all beings, and it doesn't proselytise, no wars can ever be fought in the name of Buddhism. Cheers.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

AWB and Words to avoid

There is a discussion at the Village Pump regarding using AWB to semi-automatically remove WP:Words to avoid. You got this notice because you have participated in a discussion regarding this in the recent past. Your input is welcomed. Gigs (talk) 03:56, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello

I hope you took that as something funny I was saying, for that is the only way I meant it. I found your comment relevant and interesting concerning the question posed. Certainly a mole is a mammal, but they must somehow not qualify as a rodent.. Certainly this cannot be what you are suggesting?(stated in utter ignorance of the very idea) --Neptunerover (talk) 19:12, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Reincarnation

Dear Sir, Do you think there is any difference between Buddhist Reincarnation and Hindu reincarnation? If so how can both be correct? Do you really believe in it ( if "believe" is the valid word !)  Jon Ascton  (talk) 12:06, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I suggest you read the reincarnation article. This explains clearly the differences between Buddhist and Hindu ideas on rebirth.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Of course I have been through the article, it does not tell me anything I did'nt knew. My question stands - how can both be correct at the same time ? This irrevelence is, I think, the main problem in convincing the modern mind about rebirth. Perhaps internet and books are not the right place to learn about such profound truths of human existance. In ancient India, major books like Vedas were not written down for a long time but passed from master to disciple through generations, there must be a reason for that. What reason that might be ? Was it this that written word is subject to scrutiny and proponents of reincarnation avoided it for that reason ?  Jon Ascton  (talk) 08:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Jon. Clearly both cannot be correct at the same time. Is someone claiming they are? The reason that the Vedas were not written down for a long time is that reading and writing was not commonplace in India until about 2,000 years ago.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:17, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

BRC220 and 221

Is there any "visual" difference between these two trains so that it can be easily identified when I see it? Thanks! --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 20:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know, but the relevant articles both mention that the bogies look quite different.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:34, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

SYD - LHR (Sydney Airport)

Hello, Shantavira. You have new messages at Talk:Sydney Airport.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sb617 (Talk) 11:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:30, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: changing my daughter's sex

here. Trust me on this one: she's a she. - Richfife (talk) 00:39, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Kisumu

I saw that you contributed to the notable natives in Kisumu, I was wondering whether we could work together to update the Kisumu page which currently reads like a travel brochure, which is very undeserving for a leading town in East Africa. If possible could you constructively help me make it better, I am hoping to get together a work group of contributers to help out so that it is something close to the Nairobi page. I will be working on this for the next week or two, if you have some spare time I will be glad if you could help me open up Kisumu to the world. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krator1 (talk • contribs) 22:19, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

bof?

Please explain what "bof" means in your edit summary here? Thanks. --Thomprod (talk) 18:40, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bof = meh, whatever (Fr.).--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:21, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Higher evolution - Spiritual evolution

Hi Shantavira. In 2004 you started a stub on Higher evolution. It has been found that there is a much more developed article covering this topic under the synonymous term Spiritual evolution, that also covers various uses of the term. I have tagged the article for merging, but it has been pointed to me that there is practically nothing to merge as the other article already covers the existing content. So the only course now is to redirect this topic to "Spiritual evolution". However, before taking action I thought it proper to notify you. The discusion is going on here: Talk:Higher evolution. Thank you. Hoverfish Talk 16:19, 6 May 2011 (UTC)