User talk:Mkweise

Please note that discussions relating to an article's content should take place on that article's talk page. That allows other contributors to take part in the discussion, and keeps past discussions available for future reference.

If you want to ensure that I'll visit the appropriate talk page as soon as possible, a brief message on this page will suffice to call my attention there.

please see the talk page for Ahmedabad. Talk:Ahmedabad --kunjan1029 06:36, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that split for Buddhism (20040302 17:51, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC))

Hello and Welcome! I hope you like the place. --mav 19:10 Jan 25, 2003 (UTC)

Regarding your comment on the naming convention for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints see Talk:Mormonism as a Christian religion -B

Wait. You're setting a precedent by putting see List of notable vegetarians on all the pages of people on that list. I have 2 objections.

1. Does that does this now mean that we have to put see list of (Hindu, Christian, German, African-American, left-handed people, architects etc..) on article.
2. The see also: is for lists of related articles, the word Vegetarian is not listed once on the Origen page for example Mintguy

Nice work with the human history page.. although, shouldnt there be an article containing perhaps an brief overview of the varied theories about human pre-history? - 'Vert

How about at Alternative views on the origin of mankind? --Mkweise 22:31 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)

&#25431 &#32880 (make progress+Wise) -&#35918&#30505

If you have a better way of phrasing things, then rephrase them. There is no need to be offensive. -- Oliver P. 05:12 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)

I agree with you (or what I think you were saying) regarding the list of words of disputed pronunciation or whatever the hell they changed it to. Even though English is an "open" language, there is a way to properly pronounce certain words that are often not pronounced the proper way. I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but there you go... there's a point where political correctness goes overboard. Saying "some people prefer" this pronunciation of so-and-so is, to me, a promotion of ignorance. But what do I know, maybe every English dictionary ever written was wrong when they stated "February" phoenetically as "feb-ROO-airy".

Anyway, once an article's title has been changed any protests seem to fall on deaf ears. It seems like this article's title was modified without any much-needed discussion. I shrug indifferently. -- ヤギ

No discussion is needed for NPOVing. NPOV is the Wikipedia way. If you don't like it, go to Internet-Encyclopedia. -- Oliver P. 05:38 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)

It is not POV to say "this word is pronounced this way". There is a correct way to pronounce words, and an incorrect way to pronounce words. Some words can be disputed, but in the case of dispute generally both uses are acceptable (such as "Antarctica"). The use of nucular, though, is generally regarded as incorrect (especially among people who speak fluent English) because it is a mutation of pronunciation of other -cular words such as particular and molecular. Some words are beyond dispute, but it makes no sense to make two pages... just combine them to avoid conflicts between lists, and for ease of use. Make a horribly convoluted title for the page as well, if you must. -- ヤギ

Nonsense. That's like saying that Cuba MUST be pronounced KOO-ba, or KYOO-ba, but KYOO-ber is wrong. It's called dialect, son. -- Zoe

LOL!  :-) -- Zoe

Don't encourage childishness, Zoe. Your behaviour is not at all fitting for a collaborative project. -- Oliver P. 08:35 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)

I didn't mean you, Mkweise, I mean't Oliver, who seems to have a need to tell people how they should speak. -- Zoe

Well, I'm the one who started the article that has mutated into the mess everyone's now at the verge of nukular war over. Mkweise 09:01 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)

Zoe, as far as I can recall, I have never told anyone here how they should speak. If you think I have, please cite an example. -- Oliver P. 09:09 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)

You don't have any kids, I take it? I taught mine to speak proper English, and given the opportunity would love to do the same for my President who, after all, represents my country to the rest of the world. Mkweise 09:15 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)

Cite for ancient sourdough from http://www.sourdo.com/book.htm

"the organisms of sourdough that produced man's bread for 5,000 years."

--Dr.Ed Wood

Cite for wheat in ancient egypt from http://teaching.ucdavis.edu/nut120a/0032.htm

"G. Regarding cereals-grains

1. Wheat and barley were the cereals used most commonly. Indeed, during the Greek and Roman period of Egyptian history, Egypt was the grain producing breadbasket of the ancient Mediterranean. Even today, one may travel westward from Alexandria along the coast towards Libya, and in springtime, see the hundreds of ancient mounds that represent ruined villages where cultivators were housed; the irrigation system, cisterns are still in place and today, some of these are used by settled Bedouins. '

--Darrell

Please insert your additions to the list at British sitcom chronologically as best you can. I'd have done it myself, but I'm not familiar with most of the ones you added. Mkweise 18:57 Mar 21, 2003 (UTC)

I will where possible- some are really little more than dim childhood memeories tho... quercus robur 17:31 Mar 22, 2003 (UTC)

Hi Mkweise,

Sorry that I changed those links, I confused [[animal fat|animal]] with [[animal|animal fat]]. - Patrick 16:12 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)

Hehe...I've gotten used to it by now, but the order of arguments in piped links has always struck me as counter-intuitive. Mkweise 16:21 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)

The nav nested table in Yttrium looks really nice but there is a problem; Where should I put the locator image when I create it? The format of the old nested table was built with the image in mind. It is just that some users have been creating the nav link tables much faster than I have had time to create the images needed to make the tables work right. See Lithium for an example. --mav

I noticed you replaced the -- in Artificial meat with —s. Please don't do that. I agree it looks slightly better, and it might be a worthwhile addition to the software to render "--" within text as such, but it makes the text slightly harder to edit for newbies not familiar with HTML entitites. To them, it just looks like random gibberish. Let's work by the principle of least astonishment wherever possible. --Eloquence

I find using '--' for dashes unacceptably ugly. I formerly used ' - ', until the discussion at meta:Automatic_transformation_of_hyphens_and_dashes, from which it appears that the Wikipedia consenus is to use the HTML entities for now. Mkweise

You call that a consensus? Wow, you have an interesting definition! :-) Most people are opposed to messy wikitext, and we can easily fix the "--"s at some point in the future. --Eloquence 11:27 May 8, 2003 (UTC)

Well, go bug the coders to implement '--' as shorthand for '—'; once that's done—assuming I haven't died of old age by then—I'll be happy to use it. Meanwhile, I'll do what's necessary to have correct punctuation in the articles I edit. Mkweise 11:38 May 8, 2003 (UTC)

I am one of the coders. Give me money and I'll hack it for you :-). Meanwhile, I'll do what's necessary to avoid messy HTML in articles I edit. --Eloquence 14:33 May 8, 2003 (UTC)

Good day, Mkweise. Using the 'Move this page' option, I attempted moving the article Lamaism to Tibetan Buddhism but this did not work since the latter already exists (I tried temporarily deleting the content). Perhaps I did something wrong but I believe this is only for new articles. Any ideas? Usedbook 01:39 22 May 2003 (UTC)

If the destination article has ever contained a "real" article (as opposed to just a redirect), only a sysop can execute the move. For mere mortals such as you and me, that means requesting a sysop move at wikipedia:village pump. Mkweise 01:46 22 May 2003 (UTC)

P.S. When merging two articles, there is no way to preserve both edit histories. In that case, the shorter article should be merged into the longer one?as you have correctly done with Lamism/Tibetan Buddhism. Mkweise 01:53 22 May 2003 (UTC)

I understand now. I am changing all wiki links from Mahayana Buddhism to Mahayana manually (and for Theravada). If I may ask though, why should we preserve the page history? Do not most contributors move pages manually? Usedbook 02:13 22 May 2003 (UTC)

I used to think so myself, until someone told me what I told you earlier tonight. I assume the reason preservation of edit histories is desired is so that the origin of all content can be traced. (Ask at wikipedia:village pump if you want to know the official answer.) As for changing all the links to a moved page?while that certainly doesn't hurt, it isn't really necessary as long as the old location remains a redirect page (as opposed to becoming a disambiguation page.) Mkweise 02:43 22 May 2003 (UTC)

OK, I might be about to mke a spectacular fool of myself here, but this should work. Tannin 02:46 22 May 2003 (UTC)

Done. See the Village Pump for the details though. Tannin

Isn't mandate stronger than that? It's not just representing, but following instructions (mandamus=we must). A union delegate can be mandated to vote a particular way on a motion at conference, whereas an American congressman or British MP is a representative, and can vote as he sees fit. jimfbleak 20:29 22 May 2003 (UTC)

It's an interesting subject; please add what you know to the article. The word mandate definitely is used as a noun in the sense I described?e.g. when distiguishing an official who carries the mandate of the people (is directly elected) from one who is indirectly elected or appointed.

As for representatives, well...if they vote as they see fit they're not really representing their electorate, are they? Mkweise 20:49 22 May 2003 (UTC)

Spice Girls don't belong on the Scoville scale, at least in my opinion. Don't care how un-spicy they are. It was good for a laugh though --Jim 18:30 26 May 2003 (UTC)

Radharani Married to Krishna is narrated in Bhagwatham. Their marriage is not coming under Traditional marraige act of Hinduism... It is a oersonal marriage called Kandharva Vivaha!- [email protected]

I'd been wondering how long it would take for someone to find my easter egg :-) Mkweise 19:55 26 May 2003 (UTC)

I was surprised it took me as long as it did. The fact you made a useful edit immediately after that one through me off for a while. Jim 16:59 4 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Good day Mkweise! I was just curious as to where you found those two images (for the Mahavira and Jainism articles). I'd be interested in adding images to the other Eastern religions aswell. Thanks and be well. Usedbook 23:27 3 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Just a note of thanks for your contributions to the articles on Scientology. This subject is one of the best examples I know of where truth is stranger than fiction -- a lot stranger! --Modemac 02:00 15 Jul 2003 (UTC)

The words "sexed up" are not mine; they are the words of the BBC, from the original report by Andrew Gilligan. You will find that they are the words consistently used by all of the media when covering this story. So I'm going to revert your change. Mintguy 11:24 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Gujarati digits aren't completely different. Try this: Write the Devanagari digits in one color, and the Gujarati in another, on slips of paper, and hand them to someone who's never seen them before to match up. I bet he'll get all ten right. -phma

About your edit to Aromatic compound -- there is also a page aromatic hydrocarbon. The text you just added makes me think these two should be merged. (and there's aromatic too which doesn't serve much purpose]]!) You sound like you know more about this than I do; could you handle it? thanks -- Tarquin 22:06, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Hi, I wanted to ask you about Jains. I'm happy about the current Vegetarianism article, so no need to respond if you're busy. I'm curious, though, in what way ancient Jains were aware of microorganisms, as you suggest they were on Talk:Vegetarianism. Were they able to see them under microscopes or culture them to visible colonies, or something else that we today would accept as scientific proof? Did they just believe in microorganisms as a matter of faith, i.e. without clear evidence?

Thanks, Zashaw 04:00, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Re Trojan War - I'm sorry but that just isn't true. I don't have time to offer you sources at the moment, but I will get back to it later. Adam 23:56, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Why did you move Mandarin Language?

Hi,Please don't change the first line of Hinduism without discussing on the Talk Page. See my comments in the edit summary. Please don't start an edit war. All LIVING Hindus in the world refer to their religion as Hinduism only. There is no recent development at all in Hinduism, there is development ALWAYS. It has always been changing - Dravidian Gods + Aryan Gods+ Buddha as Avatar of Krishna+ so many innumerable variations today, incuding fundamentalist Hinduism. So to call it Sanatana Dharma based on how it originated is incongruous. Knowledge is constructed based on changing meanings attached to words, there is no absolute point in time when meaning is frozen. Then all words in the world have to be used in the sense of their first utterance and usage. Please consider all this. Don't change well accepted facts without going into a discussion and proving otherwise. KRS 15:11, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Hi, have you seen my comments on the Village Pump? Wikipedia is a collective effort and hence requires collaboration among the various contributors. I have addressed you twice with reference to your specific edits, once in your Talk page and once in the Talk:Hinduism page. Don't you want to respond? A neutral person has said that the same few sentences kept getting edited without discussion. Why don't we start a discussion in the talk page?

If you are not amenable to this, I am leaving the page alone for a week. Then I will take up the same issue again. Definitely you seem to be knowledgeable, but then you also seem to have a POV that you want to push. I hope you too will reconsider your edits after a break. KRS 06:35, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I did see your comments, but have been busy preparing sweets etc. for Dipavali. I'll give the matter some more thought on Monday. Mkweise 08:23, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC)

See Talk:Knot_(nautical), re: your recent edit, Stewart Adcock 18:45, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I object to your moving Work (physics) to Mechanical work. I was actually just about to perform the reverse move when I discovered your previous action. There are other types of work, such as electrical work (energy lost by a system due to pushing electrons through a circuit). -Smack 00:16, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Have you anything to say to this? --Smack 18:08, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Electrical work can be reduced to mechanical work, since it involves moving bodies (electrons or ions) against a force (electrical field). Additionally, the term "work" is not usually used outside of Newtonian mechanics - in other fields of physics, one generally speaks of energy rather than work.

That said, I don't feel strongly enough on the matter to make a fuss if you and others prefer "Work (physics)". Mkweise 23:09, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hello MKWeise, with regards to guru Not only Christians use this definition. Some Christian scholars even accept the word guru for Jesus. I'll do a revert to the previous version. If u don't believe me then take a look at the Sarlo's guru ratings. Andries 09:09, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hello, MKweise, you wrote that sat guru means teacher of truth but I always thought that it meant true guru, i.e. the opposite of fraud guru. Do u have any references for your assertion?Andries 18:57, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that the word satguru predates false gurus. One dictionary I have says that a satguru is "one who is able to lead others along the true spiritual path" - but I'm not too happy with that wording, since Hinduism acknowledges that other paths (even those of other religions) may also be true. Mkweise 23:09, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

False gurus are very old. One is even described in the Panchatantra, an old classic book from Kashmir.Andries 18:29, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

What I mean is that, arguably, false gurus are a phenomenon of Kali yuga. Mkweise 21:32, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

By the way, where is your evidence for your assertion that all sects of Hinduism say that a living guru is necessary. To be honest, I don't believe at all that you are right in this case. Besides, how can you state this as a fact. Have you studies ALL sects of Hindsuism? If not, how many have you studied? Andries 18:32, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

The belief in the necessity of a guru is one of the defining traits of hinduism - see for example http://www.swaminarayan.org/faq/bapsgeneral.htm#1 or http://www.himalayanacademy.com/books/dws/lexicon/s.html (scroll down to "Satguru"). Mkweise 21:32, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Mkweise, thanks for the reference but I think the followers of Shirdi Sai Baba don't agree that one needs a living guru. Andries 21:47, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I said all Hindu denominations; Sai Baba Sansthan is, by their own account, a universalistic movement. From http://www.shrisaibabasansthan.org/saibaba/saibaba_introduction.asp:

Devotees of all faiths find their meeting point in Sai and people from all communities and all walks of life are united by the great love and reverence Baba inspires in them. Baba had great regard for His Hindu devotees and their Gurus [...]

Mkweise 22:07, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Mkweise, with regards to guru again. Why did ur remove the section 'original and literal meaning? I found it very useful. I reverted it. Andries 21:29, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Didn't, I just removed the section heading above the intro paragraph since it's standard wikipedia practice to have at least one paragraph before any section headings. Mkweise 21:36, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

If you're interested in the spice stuff, and need something to do, you can help convert pages linked here List of herbs and spices to the template: Wikipedia:WikiProject Herbs and Spices. Even just copying and pasting the Template to the /Temp page of all herbs and spices is a big task. dave 05:19, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)