User talk:RamgopalChandrasekaran

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, RamgopalChandrasekaran! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! S0091 (talk) 17:07, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

26 July 2021

Please, stop your disruptive editing on C.V. Raman as they appear to be vandalism (kindly read this link). If you have a reliable source, please do add information. But do not remove sourced contents a you repeatedly did. Otherwise you can can be banned from editing. Chhandama (talk) 11:10, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've edited with a reliable source. I went over the citations you've posted and have found the statements posted in your wikipedia article to not have supporting evidence from the cited link. I'm reverting your edits. I'm sorry. I've gone over a reliable biography of CV Raman's by Penguin to come to my conclusions. I find your edits to be dishonest, speculative, biased and thus violative of neutrality.

You seem to be utterly on the wrong foot. My source Science Reporter, which you removed, in this article actually says, "Raman categorically stated that he was an agnostic" (p. 22). Then, the source which you mentioned (C.V. Raman: A Biography, which I do read by the way, as you may have noticed the citations) actually says that he was most influenced by the philosophies of English agnostic Herbert Spencer, atheist Charles Bradlaugh, and American agnostic Robert G. Ingersoll; Parameswaran's own words were: "[His] leanings towards agnosticism" (p. 5). You also deleted a whole quote on his agnosticism from a scholarly journal. So, removing a well-sourced content explaining Raman's personal life is a violation of Wikipedia policy. Others can judge on my dishonesty and bigotry from this justification.

I further request you not to incite edit war as this article is under good article nomination as you can see here. Chhandama (talk) 13:47, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Then, the source which you mentioned (C.V. Raman: A Biography, which I do read by the way, as you may have noticed the citations) actually says that he was most influenced by the philosophies of English agnostic Herbert Spencer, atheist Charles Bradlaugh, and American agnostic Robert G. Ingersoll; Parameswaran's own words were: "[His] leanings towards agnosticism" (p. 5). "

This passage in Parameswaran's book refers to CV Raman's father and not to CV Raman. I shall edit to correct it. RamgopalChandrasekaran (talk) 15:21, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let's avoid contentious expression like "he was thought by some" as in your edit. Try to also use punctuations properly, e.g., ",[39].". The source is specific on it: "Raman categorically stated that he was an agnostic (p. 22)." It can also be noted that Raman was influenced by his father's agnosticism. Chhandama (talk) 04:40, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your statement - "It can also be noted that Raman was influenced by his father's agnosticism."

His father, though initially agnostic, later turned to Theosophist beliefs. So how can you make such inferences that Raman was an agnostic because his father once was? This isn't called inference but his conjecture

On what basis are you making these edits if you aren't aware of basic facts on Raman's life? Please read his biography. RamgopalChandrasekaran (talk) 17:38, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I used "he was thought by some" is because Mascarenhas in his article on Raman mentions Raman was agnostic but doesn't cite his source wrt the same. Uma Parameswaran on the other hand in her biography published by Penguin has discussed the matter in detail. RamgopalChandrasekaran (talk) 17:43, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to say you are the one who does not read Parameswaran's carefully enough, or my revised information (I have made clear that Raman's father was agnostic, as did Raman). My exact cited page (p. 8) last line reads: "Raman clearly inherited his desire to keep away from the dogma of the faith from his father." Other cited source cited also clearly states he was a professed agnostic. So why are so much against the sources (or that he was an agnostic)? Have a good heart for good information and revert your edit. Know that by reverting my edits, you are also damaging the citations which I corrected. Chhandama (talk) 06:15, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Vidyaranya, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:59, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Vidyaranya. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:53, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on C. V. Raman. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 18:18, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Explaining my sequence of actions

1. The previous author mentioned CV Raman was agnostic citing an article that claimed the same but cited no sources for that conclusion.

2. I stated Raman was not agnostic, citing a book published by Penguin, written by Uma Parameswaran where CV Raman's religious views were mentioned in detail.

3. The previous author then edited the article stating that Raman was influenced by the Hindu religious philosophy of Advaita Vedanta but maintained that Raman was agnostic. To do so he used the same source that I cited (the Penguin publication by Parameswaran). I looked into the pages the previous author cited and saw that the pages in question referred to Raman's father and not Raman. Realizing this, I made my edits. I also left a message in the author's talk page, to explain my actions.

4. Despite the fact that I explained my actions, the previous author refused to give a constructive reply and rather vaguely replied that Raman might've been influenced by his father. This is purely conjectural and cannot stand by the standards set on Wikipedia.

I've made my edit to improve objectivity, since a claim was made on this website with citations that did not verify the claim being made. If you doubt what I've stated here, please check the work that both of us have cited. RamgopalChandrasekaran (talk) 19:11, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DS-alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.