User talk:HeBhagawan/Archive 1

Hi

Nice edits on Hinduism. You may want to join Wikiproject Hinduism.Bakaman _Bakatalk 00:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!HeBhagawan 02:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please could you check this (probably POV)

A comment which I believe is POV has been added to Reincarnation. On 06:28, 6 October 2006 203.196.206.243 A user added this comment to the section on Hinduism.

[..This idea was designed to perpetuate the lavish living of priests, kings and aristocrats at the cost of working Shudras and atishudras. Thus shudras came to believe that the sorry state of their lives is because of the kukarmas in the last reincarnation and the lavish living enjoyed by the priests and aristocrats is result of satkarma in the last incarnation. Further the idea of brhma as amurta swaroop was designed to evade uncomfortable questions asked by rationalist scholars.

I believe this is POV but since the author seems very Knowledgeable in Hinduism I thought it better to bring it to your attention than to revert it myself. -- Chris Q 06:38, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since then I have removed it myself. I could not see why there should be some speculation of political motivations behind Hinduism where I don't see similar comments about other religions. -- Chris Q 12:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Friend.

Hi Friend HeBhagwan,

No offensive intention, you make me exclaim HeBhagwan - your name by not discussing and maintaining your Raj Yog at par with Jnan, Karma and Bhakti and not maintaining branches of Vedas. I have seen somebody explained these branches thouroughly well. You are my friend and not enemy. Pl. don't make the article your personal publication. I also feel of doing so but Wikipedia is a free software created to give true and maximum facts. I think, you are becoming possessive, you are attaching yourself rather than detaching. Pl. take it easy and don't carry any un-pleasant feelings or opinions.

Another thing, pl. place your message on bottom of my talk page. Usually, everyone would be seeing bottom lines. Hope you have no difficulty in doing at the bottom of talk page.

With due apology, putting comments at bottom could be done by clicking "+" sign on discussion page of the user whom you want to inform. This will give you a box where you can write and put your title in place provided so that it will seperate it from last message and make the headline in block letters.

Wish you good day.

Jay Shrikrishna.

Swadhyayee 04:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:How is it POV to include both views?

Namaskar HeBhagawan. It isn't POV to include both views at all. If you are referring to the "Raj Yoga" controversy, I think you should place a notice WT:INB here and send messages to everyone on this list and start a vote/organised discussion. Keep up the good work on the Hinduism article. I do not have much time to help because I have school exams coming up soon. I will just add my comments. Gizza^Chat ^© 08:40, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Raj Yog

Thanks for your efforts towards the Hinduism article. I am afraid, in a short while I might be linked to you and accused of making self-support group. I just wanted to assert my view on putting Rajyog on the article. It is unfortunate, how the people of the same goal (but coming from different paths) are not ready to accept each others' views. Anyway, I just wrote this after I saw your proposal at Swadhyayee's page that we can incorporate by saying, some Hindus do not believe in Rajyog etc. I will not accept that, just to satisfy one single person's POV. Some Hindus do not believe in so many things. How we will put all that here. As such, I am not here to make friends and/ or enemies. I just want the right information to be there without compromise. Thanks again. --Apandey 14:33, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I am planning to invest my time on the Hindi wikipedia. The tools that the admin Gizza has given will help write Devanagari fast. One more thing. Please keep an eye on the Hinduism main page. Mr Swadhyayee is again irrelevant and non-cited information again and again and I am the only one to revert. If you do not want to be a part of edit wars, its fine. You can choose to be moderate. But his acts are pure acts of vandalism filled with ignorance. I will be inactive for a few hours now and I want that the article is not reverted to contain any wrong information. Please see what you can do. Thanks. --Apandey 19:25, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. i have answered.

Raj2004 21:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HeBhagawan, Swadhyayee is doing damage to the Hinduism article even beyond the material on Raj Yoga. I will try to help as best I can. This really appears to have begun yesterday. It is not acceptable for members of the Hinuism Project to allow the tenets of Hinduism to be misrepresented to avoid "edit wars" with a singler person against the entire community. This is not an "edit war" really. This is the entire community trying to combat distortions from a single person that sees himself as immune from any cooperation or criticism. This is a very serious situation. And I don't know the remedy. Chris 01:13, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HeBhagwan : I am not knowledgeable enough to comment on Raj Yoga. Sorry. Tintin (talk) 14:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sufism

Hi, I already know about Sufism, but thanks anyway. Why did you think I was interested? BhaiSaab ^talk 04:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. Sorry about the misunderstanding. BhaiSaab ^talk 04:47, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some suggestions

HeBhagwan, Thanks for continually working towards the betterment of the Hinduism page. I really appreciate your hard work and specially finding citations and references. As you can see, I am contributing much less. But generally I prefer to keep a watch on articles for possible vandalism and other non-desirable acts. I have however two suggestions here.

I am humbly requesting you to please not make changes in the comments on the talk page. Specially if it is a comment from another user. It might not be perfect and you might like to make certain things clearer, but that you can do by writing additional text in the end. You have recently made two changes in my comments. I have not kept the word Swahdyayee in my first comment intentionally. Sometimes people feel bad when they see their name explictly. However a pronoun or an indirect refernce like "this user" may not sound offending to them. Similarly adding or removing sections is also a problem. Removing or modifying the name of a section is a big problem, because someone could have referred that section through a link to some other page, and modification will break the link (this has happened with me in the past, when you renamed a section, which I had already referred to some users to look into). Adding a new section in the old comments also might be confusing in cases, where a user searching for something in an old section will believe that section to be finished, while the content could have been moved in the new section. I mean, in general please do not make changes in the talk page from from its structural point of view. Of course you are free to edit your own comments or fix any other error. I am sure, you are going to take it as a friendly and humble advice from a fellow editor and not a critisism.

Regarding movement of text from this article to other main article, let me read the modified version and I will reply at the main talk page itself. Thanks. --Apandey 19:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i am not well versed with rajayoga. thanks anyway for informing me,i will try my best to resolve the edit wars.

Hello

Hi I see that you are the member of the Hinduism Wikiproject, I am too. I have however a large concern over one article, "Hinduism". The article is Huge and I think it needs some help in many areas. Do you agree with me on this concern.--Sea dog .M.S 01:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Namaste and Thank you for replying, I did however added a short section on Hinduism Festivals. I did it because it was on the to-do list, let me know what you think.--Sea dog .M.S 12:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I tried my best to keep it small. And yes I did fix that huge gap in the article I hope the others like it, Oh yeah sorry to ask this but if you don't mind, can you tell me what your username is a referance too, I like your username alot

--Sea dog .M.S 13:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks that is very interesting, I thought it had to do with God because Gandhi's last words (a believed by some) were HeRam. Is it okay that I took out that gap in the article (I would dislike to be breaking any rules:))--Sea dog .M.S 13:14, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words, I just read it (its in my watchlist) I totally agree in taking out the etmology section.--Sea dog .M.S 13:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok you can get back to work. I cleared up the really bad edits by that user. However, I didn't remove the new section he made on "The Vedas," even though I don't think it adds anything useful to the article. The reason I left it is that it is the first time in a month he has provided a citation of any kind for anything, so I would hate to discourage him from doing that. He already dislikes me for removing some of his other low-quality edits, so I am hesitant to remove this edit, which is probably the best one he has made (even though even this one is of questionable value to the article as a whole). However, if you want to remove or re-word this section, I won't complain. (Note, we already have 2 other sections that discuss the vedas: One after the "God and the Soul" section, and one under "Shruti", at the bottom of the article. I'm not sure we need a third section on the vedas. Based on your previous edits, I trust your judgement. Do what you think best. HeBhagawan 13:28, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can take your meat cleaver to the etymology section. Perhaps move it to the "Hindu" page which is currently of pretty low quality.

Do you know how to put the "See also" section at the bottom into columns (as the footnotes are now)? That would clear up some white space. HeBhagawan 13:35, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did cut out the etymology section (unless somebobdy put it back). And when I have more time I will work on what you have requested. Oh yeah, thanks for fixing my mistakes in the section that I have made.--Sea dog .M.S 14:16, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Award

		The Original Barnstar
		I Sea dog .M.S award you HeBhagawan the origanal barnstar. This goes to you for all the edits you have made to Hinduism related articles. Your work on Wikipedia has gone unnoticed for too long.

I have very much enjoyed working with you if you ever have any comments related to Hinduism articles or suggestions please let me know on my talk page._Sea dog .M.S 14:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I probably will edit the hinduism article here and there every once and a while. Do you mind if I add you to my Wiki-friends list.--Sea dog .M.S 14:31, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thats what I thought too, I went ahead and delete Brahmas name.--Sea dog .M.S 22:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quick Question

Well it seems that there should at least be something on them. The section near the top called "The Vedas and Later Scriptures" is probably the most important one to keep, because it contains some ideas which also apply to the religion in general. The section called "The Vedas" (at the bottom) should, in my opinion, be deleted. And the Classification of Scriptures Section--well, I'm kind of sitting on the fence about that. HeBhagawan 23:18, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again I have a question. Do you think that the Hindu Texts have a place in this article, it takes up a lot of space and there are so, so many texts that could be classified as hindu. There is an entire article on Hindu texts (I think) maybe we could add it too the See also category. I honestly think the article has gotten too big.--Sea dog .M.S 22:46, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was what I thought I'll keep the Vedas at the Top and Delete it at the bottom.--Sea dog .M.S 23:48, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are still editing the Hinduism article. The article is really starting to take shape

. Maybe if we keep working on it we can make it reach Featured status. And thanks for adding the reference to the one Moksha part(the newest version of the article)--Sea dog .M.S 13:40, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, I have done another edit to the hindu article. Instead of the See also list going up and down, I made the list go from side to side. Let me know what you think--Sea dog .M.S 20:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the B-star, that really made my day

. If you have any ideas for the article let me know so we can work it out. I would love to see Hinduism as a featured article one of these days.--Sea dog .M.S 22:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for giving that vandal of the Hinduism article a stern warning, thats what we need in wikipedia--Sea dog .M.S 23:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Core of Hindu Dharm

Namaste, HeBhagawan,

While I do have my own thoughts on what the core fundamentals of Hindu thought are, I would prefer to discuss what they might be with the other contributers. Other than the yogas, there seem to be many arbitrarily chosen sectarian practices mentioned, perhaps out of popularity, i.e. Bhagavad Gita, Murti-worship, etc.

Saiva suj 15:48, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

test

Thanks but please Help

Hi again I agree with everything you said. I am trying to nominate Hinduism as a featured article but I am having a hard time please help.--Sea dog .M.S 00:15, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that

I am sorry I did that. I didnot fell it seemed right there(I was so wrong)--Sea dog .M.S 00:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's ready I think

Here it is please fell free to leave a comment, oh yeah I also put the text back that you liked :)--Sea dog .M.S

Hello

Hello and thanks for commenting. Please however Place Support or Oppose on the Project page(that way it can get nominated). Oh yeah I did revert the text you liked back. I am logging out for the night, if you don't mind let the other editors who edit the Hindu article know that it is up for Featured article candidate. Good night (or day)--Sea dog .M.S 00:53, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I will post it on the Hinduism Project page. Take care!HeBhagawan 00:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduism Wiki: Introductory paragraph

I made a comment about the introductory paragraph of this Wiki on the discussion page (see '1. About the heading ='). Could you take a look at it sometime? Merci. Splashprince 01:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduism: Religion and way of life?

Under the same '1. About the heading=' section of the discussion page, I've asked a question. Would appreciate you sharing your thoughts on it. Thanks. Splashprince 03:35, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, Hebhagawan!!

Raj2004 23:28, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: vandalism on Hinduism

That's fine, I'll keep an eye on it from now on. :) Cheers, riana_dzast a 03:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit on the section 'Hinduism' on the Chosen people Wiki

I found your writing on the topic there informative and more nuanced than the preceding version. The quote by Vivekananda is an interesting comment. Moreover, I, too, have always thought that the caste system is an ancient social institution for the division of labour. But then I could be wrong. I'm no scholar of Hinduism or religion and so do not know if the caste system has its roots in Hinduism. But then again, perhaps it is a complex thing -- I've heard it being said by some that Hinduism is not only a religion but a way of life. Splashprince 04:17, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Participant's list[[1]]. Entry 69.Splashprince 04:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

INCOTW

You voted for Lucknow, this week's Indian Collaboration of the Week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. - Aksi_great (talk) 08:47, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reincarnation

I must apologise for getting mixed up on the Hinduism section on the Reincarnation page. Eventually after much to-ing and fro-ing I came to the conclusion that your original edit of a few days ago was a more accurate version than both the previous one, and my cobbled version of the two. I've since reverted back to your older version and then altered a few points where I saw fit. Should all make more sense now. Regards, GourangaUK 09:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear fellow Editor

I Sea dog .M.S am inviting you to edit my quote page. I do understand that you are very busy in the Wiki but I would greatly appreciate you editing the quote page. If you decide to edit the page please follow the rules you see inside.
Sinceraly yours,

Sea dog .M.S 21:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again

mediation

I would like to ask you to give me the permission to handle with mediation of Turkmenistan article. Many thanks!-- Wissahickon Creek ^msg 16:00, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Diwali

Best wishes celebrating good triumph over evil! Gizza^Chat ^© 23:36, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduism

Great job with your work on Hinduism. I added my support on the featured article nomination page. Whether it's accepted or not, it's become a very good resource for people interested in Hinduism. ॐ Priyanath 21:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduism/Reincarnation edits

Hi HeBhagawan, since you've also been editing Raj2004's comments about the 'divine accountant', you may may be interested in the discussion we're having here. Thanks. ॐ Priyanath 04:33, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HeBhagwan, because I respectfully disagree, I am threatened with three revert rule? Please.. Raj2004 19:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I cited numerous references but you didn't.

Raj2004 19:34, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help with tantras

Pranams HeBhagawanji,

I am very worried about the "other half" of Hinduism is being portrayed on wikipedia. On both the Hinduism wikiproject page and the main Hinduism article, the notion of the Tantrika Parampara are excluded, and the articles that talk about this are filthy (Tantra). I had just started writing on the article Tantras, without knowing about the former article and am taken back by the staggering amount of work to do here... I would very much appreciate your help in cleaning up these articles.

Saiva suj 19:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Karma

Thanks for letting me know about the disscussion going on at the Hinduism Talk page. I would have never engaged in it. I am glad that everybody talked it out to get a good agreement on things. If you ever need me in anyway please feel free to contact me I would love to help. And thanks for adding the quote to my page it was simply beautiful.--Seadog ^e

Thank You

HeBhagawan, Thank you for your efforts on the Hinduism page. You showed extreme patience and goodwill - way beyond what could reasonably be expected. You surely earned great good Karma, maybe even with God's direct involvement! Om Shanti Shanti Shanti.

ॐ Priyanath 04:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Friend

Hello HeBhagawan, I just got your message and I want to say thanks for all the info. I have considered myself a Hindu for over about a year and I have also been a vegetarian for the same amount of time. My personal hero is Lord Ram and I believe in the Trimutri (Bhrama, Vishnu, Siva) but I don't know what type of Hindu that would make me. I believe in an open path to God that anyone can follow i.d Christians, Muslims Jews and etc. I am definatly not a member of ISKON because I believe in an open-path. I do not believe that any religion should have a so called Humen"leader" such as the Pope of Catholicism. I am a follower of the Gita and as I said eairlier a vegetarian. So what type of Hindu am I? I would very much appreciate answer to my question if you dont mind . I would love to go to a Hindu Temple if I was welcomed and not intruding. I think there is one close to my area (I do not wish to say where I live at this time) and I may go when I get the chance. Thank you so much for your time and helping me with my questions. There is so much I would love to learn about the mighty Sanatana Dharma. May the Lord bless you and your family.--Seadog ^e 21:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Namaste

Thank you that helped alot. I am going to find those books and read them if I can find them, I promise! During my reaserch I have read alot about Ramakrishna, he truly is a master. I love what he said about vegetarianism I will strive to become a better person in my life. I have always thought that temples that charged money is contridictory in its actions, as money is only material and the only real thing in this world is the Holy Bhraman. I am very pleased that you too have read the Bhagavad Gita it is definatly Masterfull in my humble opinion. Another Hindu Philosopher I have read about is Adi Shankara, which I believe in most of his masterful philosophy. I have also read the Upanishads (Well all that can fit into a paperback book) and the Rig Veda. Another person I admire is Mahatma Gandhi, is he an important figure in Hinduism? I hope you don't mind the questions! It is just that you are very helpful since where I am from there are very few Hindus to teach me. Thanks and by the way I have deleted the paragraph that you requested. I would hate for you to get spammed!--Seadog ^e 00:49, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, in my opinion he was a philosopher/politician. But I still follow his teachings.--Seadog ^e 01:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Reincarnation

Hey.. Please have a look at Image talk:Samsara.jpg. --Incman|वार्ता 03:08, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you remember what comments you made in your 1st post to me?

What I stated is no personal attack but pl. check all your messages to me, if you can ever understand yourself.Swadhyayee 13:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't know which message you are referring to. You may remind me if you like. In any case, I am committed to avoiding personal attacks in the future. I hope you will do the same. Thanks. HeBhagawan 13:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With your permission, I remind you.

Well, thank you for your contributions, Swadhyayee. It is great that you want to work on the page. With due respect, however, there are a few problems with your edits:

Lack of citations Poor English Poor organization POV imposition (e.g., implying that the Bhagavad Gita is the only "authentic" Hindu scripture). Please don't feel insulted. I recommend that when you make new additions, you should use citations, have a native-level English-speaker check the grammar, and think about how your additions can compliment the overall organization of the article. If you do not have time to do this, another way is to just put your ideas on the discussion page for others to incorporate into the article. What do others think?HeBhagawan 19:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Swadhyayee, I have a suggestion: Why don't you help to edit other issues in the Hinduism Project? Let us leave the Raja Yoga issue. I was willing to accomodate you by putting a disclaimer, but it seems that other editors do not want to do even that. I felt compelled to report you to the admins because of your unfounded reversions, but I will gladly withdraw my report if you can put your efforts toward improving the article. There are so many things that need to be improved. Consider working on the Bhagavad Gita section, since you have great interest in that, and I think you will be able to find citations. I will try to find citations for the things you mentioned on the talk page. For a few of those things, a single citation is meant to cover multiple sentences. Thanks! HeBhagawan 03:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the "Karma and Reincarnation" section, you have modified the language of other users in this section in a way that has introduced grammatical errors that did not exist before. I hate to say this, becasue I appreciate your earnestness, but I have to agree with the user who pointed out that your edits sometimes reduce the quality of article rather than enhance it. I am sorry if you feel offended by this, but becasue of your level of English, I recommend that you seek the review of native-level English speakers before posting your edits. I do not say this to insult you. If you are honest with yourself I think you will understand what I am saying. I have no desire to exclude you from editing, but I do have a desire to protect the quality of the article. I am sorry if you feel hurt by anything I said. HeBhagawan 03:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know. It is ridiculous that one single user is bringing the progress of the article to a halt. It was improving daily until he arrived on the scene. It is very frustrating. HeBhagawan 03:26, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

The edits you made today contained some constructive ideas, but once again they caused a lot of damage to the article. You inserted a lot of extremely low-quality material and deleted high-quality material at the same time. Please do not do this

To other editors: Please help to monitor the changes made by Swadhyayee until the mediators decide whether to block him from this page. In my view, almost all his edits have failed to meet Wikipedia quality standards. With some exceptions, the substantive content of his edits is appropriate, but the way he implements his edits (without citations, disorganized, ungrammatical and muddled language) is a problem. Use your own judgement. Thank you! HeBhagawan 13:03, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Swadhyayee: I understand your approach. Although it would be fine if you were the only one editing the article, it creates extra work for others to have to follow behind you cleaning up the low-quality edits. Please consider this alternative: Make your rough-draft edits on a separate document, or on the discussion page. Then, AFTER you have brought the draft up to wikipedia quality standards, incorporate them into the article. This approach should work better for everybody.

Just a heads up: please help to keep an eye on Swadhyayee's edits. He has started to become active again after being away for a while. In the past I have spent a lot of time trying to dissuade him from making edits that clearly reduced the quality of the article becasue his edits were POV, factually dubious, uncited, and stylistically bad. I did not find him as easy to work with as Raj. He is very enthusiastic, and tends to make large-scale edits, but does not always have the same ideas about quality that some editors have.HeBhagawan 12:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Swadhyayee 14:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Swadhyayee, Thank you for kindly retrieving those past statements. I regret if any of them seem like personal attacks; that is not my intention. Please do not mistake good faith criticism for personal attacks. A review of the history of the context in which I made the above comments will reveal that they were made in response to your repeated violations of Wikipedia policies. It is not a personal attack to respond to such violations in a civil manner. Also, some of the comments you pasted above were made to other users on their personal discussion pages, not to you or to the community as a whole. It is not against wikipedia policies to express opposition to a user's habit of repeatedly deleting cited material and replacing it with uncited, ungrammatical, POV material, which you did on many occasions.

Moreover, if you read carefully the things I said, you will notice that I actually went to rather great lengths to state my criticisms in a way to avoid personal attacks. If, despite this, you still take my comments personally, there is not much I can do about it.

I try to say only helpful things. Sometimes that includes criticism, but my sincere effort is to make any such criticisms in a constructive rather than a personal manner. I always assume good faith in discussions unless it is obviously a personal attack. I hope you will do the same. It may be helpful to you to also review this: [[2]]. I appreciate your desire to contribute to Wikipedia, and I hope we can both continue to do so in an amicable manner. Whatever bad things may have happened in the past, let us forget them now and work together cooperatively. Thanks. HeBhagawan 14:26, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pl. leave message on bottom of my talk page.

Pl. leave message on bottom of my talk page.Swadhyayee 13:42, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

Thanks.Swadhyayee 15:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Yes, I was away. I was on a long vacation (Diwali vacation) and was accessing net in not so active manner. I have come back yesterday itself (you can see my contibs during this period also, they are nill). Anyway, nice to hear from you. I got your message yesterday about the Hinduism page. But I need time for that. Right now I am a bit busy. Moreover I do not intend to do much on that article anymore. Because of Swadhyayee's behaviour and all those unnecessary controversies (mediation etc.), I felt hurt. I do not have time and energy for people like him. And otherwise also, the Hinduism article gets so many updated every day that it is difficult to keep a watch. I am however still watching it but not sure how long I will do that. I have also started working actively on Hindi wikipedia, which is not in a good state right now. So more of my contributions will be seen there. Anyway, I will not be completely out of english wikipedia. Keep up the good work. Thanks. --Apandey 18:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar Right Back at YOU!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I, Persian Poet Gal, hereby award you this barnstar because that was just too sweet of you ^_^! ¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]