Bakasuprman (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
Hello, I am an outside observer. As far as I can see, there is no real dispute. The claims of "Buddhist persecution" are made by Buddhist scripture.However, just about all academic sources (including eminent premier top notch Kluge Chair holding super-duper historian [[Romila Thapar]]) refute the exaggerations strongly as cited in the article. Whats more accusations of Hindu-Nationalist bias against Freedom skies are comical given that he cites [[Romila Thapar]] a know anti-Hindutva (i.e Hindu nationalism) speaker. Academic sources carry preference over religious scripture, which is invariably partisan. Can Tigeroo produce historical or scholarly narrative that supports the Buddhist claims to the letter? <b><font color="saffron">[[User:AMbroodEY| अमेय आर्यन DaBrood]]</font></b><sup><b><font color="red">[[User_talk:AMbroodEY|©]]</font></b></sup> 15:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC) |
Hello, I am an outside observer. As far as I can see, there is no real dispute. The claims of "Buddhist persecution" are made by Buddhist scripture.However, just about all academic sources (including eminent premier top notch Kluge Chair holding super-duper historian [[Romila Thapar]]) refute the exaggerations strongly as cited in the article. Whats more accusations of Hindu-Nationalist bias against Freedom skies are comical given that he cites [[Romila Thapar]] a know anti-Hindutva (i.e Hindu nationalism) speaker. Academic sources carry preference over religious scripture, which is invariably partisan. Can Tigeroo produce historical or scholarly narrative that supports the Buddhist claims to the letter? <b><font color="saffron">[[User:AMbroodEY| अमेय आर्यन DaBrood]]</font></b><sup><b><font color="red">[[User_talk:AMbroodEY|©]]</font></b></sup> 15:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC) |
||
:No he (tigeroo) cant. Romila Thapar is known for virulent [[anti-Hindu]] polemic under the guise of "academics". allegations of [[Hindutva]] are thrown around way too frequently on wikipedia by [[anti-Hindu]]s who wish to [[Persecution of Hindus|attack Hindus]] for their religious beliefs.<b>[[User:Bakasuprman|<font color="purple">Baka</font>]][[User talk:Bakasuprman|<font color="red">man</font>]]</b> 16:10, 26 December 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:10, 26 December 2006
Wikipedia Mediation Cabal | |
---|---|
Status | new |
Request date | Unknown |
Requesting party | Unknown |
[[Category:Wikipedia Medcab new cases|]][[Category:Wikipedia medcab maintenance|]]
Mediation Case: Decline of Buddhism in India
Please observe Wikipedia:Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.
Request Information
- Request made by: Tigeroo 12:28, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- Where is the issue taking place?
- Who's involved?
- What's going on?
- Revert war, Non-communication. Initially there was bad article. We both agree. The difference is over how to resolve NPOV and what material should be included and if the presentation is NPOV, relevant and accurate.
- What would you like to change about that?
- Inviting uninvolved third parties to take a look and help us arrive at an amicable solution that actually results in the improvement of the quality of the content in the article. We appear to have had a communication breakdown, can this be mended?
- Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?
- User page. Which ever method is the most effective will be fine.
Mediator response
Compromise offers
This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.
Discussion
While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Wikipedia is based on consensus.
Hello, I am an outside observer. As far as I can see, there is no real dispute. The claims of "Buddhist persecution" are made by Buddhist scripture.However, just about all academic sources (including eminent premier top notch Kluge Chair holding super-duper historian Romila Thapar) refute the exaggerations strongly as cited in the article. Whats more accusations of Hindu-Nationalist bias against Freedom skies are comical given that he cites Romila Thapar a know anti-Hindutva (i.e Hindu nationalism) speaker. Academic sources carry preference over religious scripture, which is invariably partisan. Can Tigeroo produce historical or scholarly narrative that supports the Buddhist claims to the letter? अमेय आर्यन DaBrood© 15:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- No he (tigeroo) cant. Romila Thapar is known for virulent anti-Hindu polemic under the guise of "academics". allegations of Hindutva are thrown around way too frequently on wikipedia by anti-Hindus who wish to attack Hindus for their religious beliefs.Bakaman 16:10, 26 December 2006 (UTC)