User talk:Satya Jaimala

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Satya Jaimala, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi Satya Jaimala! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like 78.26 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse
We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


July 2020[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Bleaching of wood pulp, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 13:53, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Away from home (AFH) (July 16)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Calliopejen1 were:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:39, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Away from home (AFH) (July 17)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Timtrent was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Fiddle Faddle 18:05, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Away From Home (July 19)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Robert McClenon were:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The term "away from home" is not defined in a way that is notable. The term is defined once in a glossary in a standards document and not used elsewhere. This draft does not establish that this is a well-defined class of paper products for which an article is in order.

This information should probably be included in articles on types of paper products.

Please discuss before resubmitting.

This page has too many redlinks. Occasional red links may be used as suggestions that the topics enclosed in brackets are notable topics for which articles are in order. However, multiple red links are distracting, and tend to indicate sloppy drafting. If drafts for the red links are in process, please note them in a comment or on the talk page. Otherwise, review the red links, which may be converted to plain text by removing the brackets or resolved by correcting spelling errors or introducing appropriate redirects, before resubmitting.

Advice about links may be requested at the Teahouse.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Robert McClenon (talk) 03:36, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Control copyright icon Hello Satya Jaimala, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Kabir have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 18:08, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are continuing to break our copyright policy at Kabir and are at risk of being blocked[edit]

You copied material from [1] in violation of policy - changing a few words is not enough. jagatgururampalji.org/ fails WP:RSas a source, you can't use it. Doug Weller talk 13:17, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020[edit]

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Kabir, you may be blocked from editing. Wikipedia can never state that someone's god is real or never died. Doug Weller talk 13:18, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

\

Original/unsourced material[edit]

@Materialscientist: your warning seems to have had no effect. At Bijak this editor keeps adding material such as: "Kabir is be considered as the originator of the meters and musical modes without any doubt in absence of any prior work composed in these meters." See the entire edit[2] which seems to include some cherry-picked material without page numbers from here. Doug Weller talk 13:25, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020[edit]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  RegentsPark (comment) 14:11, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Satya Jaimala (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have understood reasons of block; I have citations ready with page numbers, kindly unblock

Decline reason:

In order to demonstrate you understand WP:CITE and WP:RS, please demonstrate by placing a specific edit, with appropriate citation, here on your user talk page. Yamla (talk) 15:05, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Bijak[edit]

This compilation of hymns in numerous measures comprises the most reliable record of Kabir’s teaching. The word has distinctive connotations of a manuscript by which a hidden treasure can be traced. To avoid loot the people bury their treasurers out of sight, carefully marking the places of concealment by secret signs on a carefully preserved chart. This chart they call a Bijak or key[1]. Kabir refers to this word in Sakhi of 37th Ramaini[2]. The Bijak tells the secret of the treasure which is hidden; It teaches such words to soul, but there are but seldom anyone understand it[1]Satya Jaimala (talk) 13:16, 30 July 2020 (UTC) Satya Jaimala (talk) 11:57, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b Kabir (2011). The bijak (or The complete works) of Kabir. New Delhi, India: Low Price Publications. p. 29. ISBN 978-81-7536-286-4. OCLC 904031149.
  2. ^ Kabir (2001). The Bījak of Kabir. Delhi: Motilal Bonardsidass. p. 86. ISBN 81-208-0216-0. OCLC 225750222.
Ahmad Shah doesn't seem to be a very good source. As Linda Hess says in your second source, "Ahmad Shah’s 1917 translation of the Bijak is stiff and far from the original style of Kabir, and lacks notes on dubious points of translation."[3] or another preview at [4]So the translation is bad and avoiding dubious points of translation is bad scholarship. This article needs modern academic sources - such as Hess (another book by here is here.
It needs to reflect what reliable sources say about it. It must not be written from the point of view of someone thinking Kabir is god, by the way. The bit about secret signs, chart, treasures, - that needs much better sourcing. The article needs to be an overview of what it is and what reliable sources have to say about it generally. And it doesn't need an outline - this is an encyclopedia. Doug Weller talk 17:43, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: thanks for your valuable comments. I do agree Ahmed Shah's translation is stiff. We can use Hess & Singh reference till we find more WP:RS for Bijak article. Should I edit Bijak article by using other references including Hess & Singh but excluding Ahmad Shah. Since you have long experience of editing and I am a new enthusiast, I wish to show the draft to you before editing the page. I look forward to your advise before I start writing. Satya Jaimala (talk) 05:38, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: I do wait for your green signal to edit (minus Ahmed Shah) using Hess & Singh references till we find more WP:RS for Bijak article. Kindly reply appropriately. Satya Jaimala (talk) 14:24, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Start a new section on the talk page and post the edit you want to make, please. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 07:46, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages![edit]

Hello, Satya Jaimala. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by David Biddulph (talk) 08:29, 31 July 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

July 2020[edit]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  RegentsPark (comment) 14:27, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked you for a week because you still appear to lack an understanding of sourcing. You should also learn to use the article talk page when you are reverted repeatedly. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:30, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@RegentsPark I don't mind being blocked for my errors. During last block I practiced for citation. Of course I may not be perfect, but I tried to add today with citations. I definitely need your help to do better to meet Wikipedia standard. Kindly pinpoint my mistakes and suggest corrective measures. I am keen on making my efforts.Satya Jaimala (talk) 15:57, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A few general ideas. Don't edit war. Use the talk page. If you see yourself reverted, rather than just re-inserting your edits, open a discussion on the talk page. On sourcing, you should avoid using primary sources and prefer to use reliable academic sources. I suggest reading WP:RS and WP:BRD for starters. I'll let @Doug Weller: respond, if they wish, on the specifics of your edits. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:20, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: As you rightly raised objections on my edits in Bijak article. As suggested by you, today, I first provided more citations from WP:RS leaving aside the website you suggested to ignore, and then strengthen the matter. Kindly suggest me where do I go wrong and what exactly should I do.Satya Jaimala (talk) 16:50, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: thanks for your valuable comments. I do agree Ahmed Shah's translation is stiff. We can use Hess & Singh reference till we find more WP:RS for Bijak article. Satya Jaimala (talk) 02:38, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: Should I edit Bijak article by using all other references including Hess & Singh but excluding Ahmad Shah. Since you have long experience of editing and I am a new enthusiast, I wish to show the draft to you before editing the page. Kindly advise. Satya Jaimala (talk) 01:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@RegentsPark: I do wait to response of Doug Weller for editing without using Ahmad Shah's references. What am I expected to do? Kindly respond appropriately. Satya Jaimala (talk) 14:30, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're not blocked so you can go ahead and edit. I suggest posting your comment above in the Talk:Bijak page first to see if your sources are good or not. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bijak[edit]

A numerous collections of Kabir poems are popular among the literate as well as the illiterate people for over past five centuries in major parts of North India. Large number of Indian population follow the teachings of Kabir are collectively called as Kabir Panth. The Bijak is a sacred book for Kabir Panth as well as other sects devoted to Kabir. Bijak is known to westerners in early twentieth century[1]. Kabir referred to this word Bijak in the Sakhi of 37th Ramaini[2] of the scripture. The Bijak tells the secret of the treasure, which is hidden, to teach to soul a word of creature but there are a few who understand.

The language of the Bijak[edit]

Bijak has the representative language usually communicated in the middle of the fourteenth century in the neighborhood of Banares. Kabir himself has said in the 194th Sakhi[3] of the Bijak, My speech is of the East, no one can understand except him who is from the far East. Furthermore, the eastern dialect (purbia-boli) in the dialect of the villager were largely less liked by the literate.

The Hymns of the Bijak[edit]

The hymns of Bijak consist of three main sections[4][5] including Ramaini, Sabda, Sakhi and a miscellaneous folk songs with Gyan Chowntisa, Vipramtisi, Kahara, Basant, Chachar, Beli, Birhuli, Hindola.

@Doug Weller: I have done a sample edit of Bijak article by using references including Hess & Singh but excluding Ahmad Shah. Kindly advise. Satya Jaimala (talk) 13:52, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Satya Jaimala, you should post this at Talk:Bijak, not on your own talk page. That way you'll get a wider audience. --RegentsPark (comment) 14:15, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Hess, Linda; Singh, Sukhdev. The Bījak of Kabir (2001 ed.). Motilal Bonardsidass. pp. xi. ISBN 8120802160.
  2. ^ Hess, Linda; Singh, Sukhdev. The Bījak of Kabir (2001 ed.). Motilal Bonardsidass. p. 86. ISBN 8120802160.
  3. ^ Hess, Linda; Singh, Sukhdev. The Bījak of Kabir (2001 ed.). Motilal Bonardsidass. p. 112. ISBN 8120802160.
  4. ^ Hess, Linda; Singh, Sukhdev. The Bījak of Kabir (2001 ed.). Motilal Bonardsidass. pp. xii. ISBN 8120802160.
  5. ^ Das, Jagessar. The complete Bījak of Kabīr : Guru Kabīr's mystical teachings on God-realization (2015 ed.). New Age Books. pp. vii. ISBN 9788178224763.

discretionary sanctions alert[edit]

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.

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.

--RegentsPark (comment) 14:48, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Away From Home[edit]

Hello, Satya Jaimala. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Away From Home".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 04:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been pruned from the Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Members list.[edit]

Hi Satya Jaimala! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Members, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 1 year.

Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Members.

Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:01, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Satya_Jaimala&oldid=1048421598"