User talk:Ogress/Archive 43
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 40 | Archive 41 | Archive 42 | Archive 43 | Archive 44 | Archive 45 | → | Archive 50 |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:20, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Welcome to STiki
|
Hello, Ogress, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Here are some pages which are a little more fun:
We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Widr (talk) 06:01, 6 November 2014 (UTC) |
|
November 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Tang Rimochen Lhakhang may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- 2010-08-12|publisher=Scribd|quote=a two-legged archway chorten known as a khonying}}</ref>) is about {{convert|200|m}} away from the temple.<ref name="Brown, p.178">Brown, p.178</ref>
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:29, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Thanx much!
Seligne (talk) 11:08, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Ogress.
I saw that you have erased what I have added to the page of Meg Griffin, I just wanted to know why. Have I done anything wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cat.the.waterbender (talk • contribs) 22:32, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- Have I done anything wrong?--Kalakannija (talk) 03:27, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
I want to talk to you
S.B.Kalakannija (talk) 00:44, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- pardon me if I have done anything wrong. Do you act behalf of the civility in WP community? If yes, I would like to discuss the ongoing executive presidential election in Sri Lanka; That is something very (unusual) uncommon. Share your thoughts, Please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalakannija (talk • contribs) 07:30, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Ok then; please remove this comment, Cheers!S.B.M. Summon 23:25, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 11 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Je Tsongkhapa page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:45, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:17, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Edit summary
Sorry Ogress, I meant to type "Makara is a one day celebration" because the text I was fixing described Makara as both the festival "Thai Pongal" and the one day celebration "Pongal", when it should really have been just the one day celebration. Unfortunately I was editing on my iPad and hit "submit" before seeing that I had been autocorrected to "Malaria". I was hoping no one would notice that particular unfortunate summary :/ Hope that explains it! kara❈talk 20:27, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Please read material more carefully
Please read material more carefully before making bold claims.VictoriaGraysonTalk 07:44, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- You do not appear to have paid any attention to what I said. I made no bold claims. Ogress smash! 08:22, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- You keep saying Schaik says Bon is a continuation of pre-Buddhist Tibetan tradition, when he actually says the exact opposite. VictoriaGraysonTalk 09:13, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- You keep repeating that he says the exact opposite, when in fact he does not. He specifically states that Bon incorporates indigenous non-Buddhist ritual and practices within a general Buddhist framework. I keep quoting his own blog and articles and you seem to just fixate on the bit about Bon not being an organised religion before the 11th century, which is entirely not my issue. He clearly states that there was indigenous ritual, specifies how he visualises the idea as a "store" as per another's example, and then goes on to talk about the idea of non-Buddhist Tibetan "chos" being something we can discuss without fear of suggesting it was an organised faith like Buddhism. Then he says Bon originated from Tibetan individuals constructing a coherent interpretation based on Buddhist conceptions of religion out of this pre-Buddhist "store". My attempt to find consensus on the issue of that lone quote being problematic - and I, also, find it problematic - is to suggest we make note of this. Ogress smash! 19:46, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- No he doesn't. You keep quoting articles and blogs which say nothing of the sort.VictoriaGraysonTalk 21:07, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- You keep repeating that he says the exact opposite, when in fact he does not. He specifically states that Bon incorporates indigenous non-Buddhist ritual and practices within a general Buddhist framework. I keep quoting his own blog and articles and you seem to just fixate on the bit about Bon not being an organised religion before the 11th century, which is entirely not my issue. He clearly states that there was indigenous ritual, specifies how he visualises the idea as a "store" as per another's example, and then goes on to talk about the idea of non-Buddhist Tibetan "chos" being something we can discuss without fear of suggesting it was an organised faith like Buddhism. Then he says Bon originated from Tibetan individuals constructing a coherent interpretation based on Buddhist conceptions of religion out of this pre-Buddhist "store". My attempt to find consensus on the issue of that lone quote being problematic - and I, also, find it problematic - is to suggest we make note of this. Ogress smash! 19:46, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- You keep saying Schaik says Bon is a continuation of pre-Buddhist Tibetan tradition, when he actually says the exact opposite. VictoriaGraysonTalk 09:13, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Organised Bon incorporates an huge amount of clearly Buddhist inspired material and other influences but some ritual, practice and particularly doctrines which are very different. The trouble is the label "Bon" covers a lot of different things. In Bhutan where I live those who self identify themselves Bon have nothing to to with the organised Bon, here it is pretty well still an entirely indigenous non-Buddhist tradition.
- OTOH I don't think that anyone has produced any real evidence that there was writing in Tibet before Songtsen Gampo as some Bonpo adherants like to claim - so all Bonpo _texts_ must have been written after the advent of Buddhism, indeed most centuries later, and so would clearly be subject to Buddhist inspiration or at least influence.
- Chris Fynn (talk) 12:32, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
- @CFynn: The articles I cite from van Schaik explicitly discuss pre-Buddhist religious activity recorded at Dunhuang by Tibetans. I'm not arguing Bon qua Bon was an organised religion; far from it, I also agree Yungdrung Bon was a conscious organisation under a Buddhist framework alongside the Nyingma organisation of Buddhist material in the face of the Sarma. But it wasn't ex nihilo: it incorporated pre-Buddhist religious practice and ritual. The article seems to warrant a comment about that, right now it's taken as insulting to Bon (which in of itself isn't a sin) but I also found it scholastically misleading. Also, the entire Bon page needs major revision but I don't have the spoons for it. *sigh* Ogress smash! 22:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
- Chris Fynn (talk) 12:32, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Dzongkha pronunciation
The whole question of "correct" Dzongkha pronunciation is a bit of a minefield in Bhutan - people from the west say it should be that of native speakers, others argue that Dzongkha as spoken in Trongsa (where the local people are not native Dzongkha speakers) on the grounds that this is the Dzongkha of the royal family ("King's Dzongkha") and it "sounds best" - while many others claim that, since it has been made the National Language, all the different pronunciations used by people from various parts of the country are OK. In the capital city Thimphu native Dzongkha speakers are now the minority - and in most Government offices more that half the people working there seem to be from the east so they are speaking Tsangla amongst themselves. (Tsangla probably has the highest number of native speakers in Bhutan - though no one will officially say so). As I mentioned elsewhere many Dzongkha teachers are from the east - often from families of Nyingma Gomchen - and now many of these teachers are monks who studied at the Nyingma shedra in Mysore - so Dzongkha is a rapidly changing language. In schools English is used for teaching almost all subjects - so most young Bhutanese read an write English much better than Dzongkha - and in Thimphu many educated Bhutanese speak English to their children. Nepali speaking Southern Bhutanese and eastern Bhutanese students are often the ones who do best in Dzongkha exams - not the native speakers. One of the reasons for this seems to be that these non-native speakers pronounce Dzongkha closer how it is spelled (closer to Choke) so they make fewer mistakes on written exams. Chris Fynn (talk) 07:54, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
| For being an exelent, and fast, vandalfighter. I am glad we have someone like you on "our" side. (t) Josve05a (c) 17:23, 18 November 2014 (UTC) |
Settle down, tiger
I think you're averaging eight edits per minute the last fifteen minutes or so. I didn't think it could be done. You're totally clogging up Recent changes. I understand that the Steelers game is far from exciting, but I believe you owe it to your heart to slow down, lest Jimbo be held responsible if you pop a vein. In other words, thanks for cleaning up, but don't forget regular exercise of other muscles. Happy editing, Drmies (talk) 03:28, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- @Drmies: Sorry if you thought I was a bot. I was only using STiki to check for vandalism. I do it sometimes when the vandalism alert is in the red to remove the thousands of penis references people add to Wikipedia. Ogress smash! 16:54, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
There is no rule as far as I know of editing to fast on enwp. (There is on svwp, where I was blocked for 15 min.) Fighting vandalism, is the only reason for which the recent changes feed really exist. And if someone edits to fast for fighting vandalism, I don't see any problem if that is what's "clogging up [the] Recent changes [feed]". Keep it up! (t) Josve05a (c) 17:11, 18 November 2014 (UTC)