User talk:Nat Krause

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello, Nat Krause. You have new messages at Talk:Xixabangma.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.


Nat Krause commits major fallacy on wikipedia[edit]

"I request, Attasarana, that you refrain from editing Wikipedia in the future, because you must cite sources here, but, unfortunately, we are unable to trust any sources cited by you.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 17:29, 26 January 2007"

This is called a fallacy of place. The claim of trust is foremostly unsubstantiated, not to mention that the article for ANATTA, after countless requests for discussion, go unheeded by yourself.

That you attempt to subvert the correct elabortion of anatta by constant reversion of anatta and other buddhist articles belies the fact that your attempting a Fascist dominance of wikipedia's definitions of buddhist lexicon, not based in doctrinal evidences, but sectarian dogma.

You, Nat, must comply with discussion before massive reverts in edits of the ANATTA article or mediatiation will be requested.

Of yet you've proven incapable of substantiating your position that anatta was a "buddhist denial of Vedantic monism".

Defacto, all claims require evidences and or logical coherency in doctrine. [Sola Scriptura rules of religious debate and arguementation]; Prof. Jennings.

Your above comment in logical debate is also called a "dog in the manger" fallacy, wherein one barks "you dont belong here, begone...". In addition this fallacy of place (i.e. 'your not qualified,'...'i dont trust your sources',,..etc.) only exposes your incapacity to logically defend your non-scriptural nihilistic position of anatta which is nowhere reflected in either the nikayas or any early mahayana sutra for that matter- User Attasarana. webmaster

By the way, Attasarana, I didn't write the earlier version of the anatta article that you've been reverting. It does not necessarily reflect my opinions. I simply reject your reversions of it.
If you want to do mediation, I'll come out of my wikivacation specifically to do that.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 01:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was not referring to your additions as regards anatta, but the above quote from yourself in the first line; one sentence containing three fallacies.
In the future, I suggest you bypass low sophistry and present intelligent arguements for your, as of yet, unsubstantiated and illogical contributions as pertains any and all Buddhist definitions; past history indicates a given incapacity on your behalf to accurately denotate buddhist definitions.
Your 'rejection' is irrelavent, all claims require evidences and logical substantiation, preferably with citation, and always Sola Scriptura as pertains religious lexical definitions. I am in process of writting an article for of your ilk on the buddhist-internet and wiki, by and large specifically, it will appear within 4 days on said site. - User Attasarana.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 03:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Please find notable sources. I'm assuming good faith, but post links that are appropriate. I do not find any mentioning statements with regard to Buddhism in your link. NONE. Expect GoogleAd. Prowikipedians (talk) 19:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Flag of Chicago
Chicago Collaboration of the Week
Flag of Chicago
In the past you have edited Little Italy, Chicago. This week it has been selected as the WikiProject Chicago Collaboration of the week. Each week a Chicago related article in need of attention is selected as the Chicago COTW. Feel free to come help us improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. Your input in future selections would also be appreciated. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list.
Flag of Chicago
Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago
Flag of Chicago

TonyTheTiger 00:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Standard Central Lhasa[edit]

Thre is an enormous amount of confusion around these terms in the literature. Often because linguistics work with non native speakers, e.g. an Amdowa who has lived in Lhasa for ten years. Consensus has emerged on some points however. The city of Lhasa esp. the upper class speak a slightly different dialect than the surrounding area, and this dialect is usually referred to as Lhasa and has been described in some detail by Chang and Chang in several articles and two boks in he sixties. Tourandre is contiously avoiding saying he is descrbing Lhasa dialect in order to say he is not describing this diact but rather the Lingua franka of central Tibet, which generally speaking is also what is soken around Lhasa. This dialect is described in Denwood's monograph, which is not very good, it is also descibed by Tourandre, and in an old paper by Roy Andrew Miller. Roy Andrew Miller has written reviews of almost all of the relevant literature and they are usually in JSTOR and other on-line journal collections. There is a fairly complete list of his Tibetan-Studies papers on his Wikipedia page. It would be nice though if someone wroe a book that just went through the whole literature and straightened it all out. If Bielmeier ever prints his comparative dialect dicitonary, then some things should become more clear.

Also the question of what is phonetic versus phonemic radically changes different peoples descriptions including tone count etc. Tourandre explains this tricky matter in his handbook pretty well and it is also handleed in a article in BSOAS in the 1990s by R. K. Sprigg, who disagrees with Tourandre. Tibetologist 22:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I could send you a whole library of Tibetan Studies materials in pdf if you like, with a focus on linguistics, but you would have to expose a mailing address in a public place. I dont have Tournadre with me, but could have sworn that he described retroflex consonants and he writes them as tr, thr. I dont know lhasa dialect very well, though I could get buy in it once. Can you read Japanese, there is a lot of good material about Lhasa in Japanese, esp. by Izumi Hoshi. Tibetologist 09:13, 22 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have sent an email to your hotmail account. Tibetologist 21:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP Tibet[edit]

It looks like it got created, actually expanded from T-Buddhism.

བོད་This user is a participant in WikiProject Tibet.

Chris 08:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have tried to organize the Category:WikiProject Tibet for starters but Please note though that Portal:Tibetan Buddhism exists and all the categories for WikiProject Tibetan Buddhism most of which are empty. SHould this be moved to WikiProject Tibet? Plus I don't think User:Sylvain1972 is aware of events. When I suggested it to him/her they didn't seem happy with the idea. I don't know how many articles are related to Tibetan Buddhism but it can't be a huge number although I do see the idea of the project from a religious viewpoint. But I am quick to say that a major part of Wikiproject Tibet is religiously entwined anyway. What shall we do? I don't want to offend people who started that project by moving their page but isn't it best under Wikiproject Tibet especially if their work is said to be inactive? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "I've been expecting you" 15:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you interested in what I am doing or what? I have just tagged all of the cities and villages which are now part of WikiProject Tibet. I'm keeping Tibetan Buddhism as a sub project of it with its own tag to avoid the CHina templating but which also goes in Tibet articles too. I'd appreciate your reponse on this cheers ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "I've been expecting you" 20:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

THanks. Actually the projects have merged -Tibetan Buddhism is now a part of the Tibet project but I am still keeping the Tibetan Buddhism template for articles e.g like Dalai Lama which relate as Tibet articles but not to China!!!! THis is a tactful way to cover religious issues in Tibet I think which are not related or conflict with CHina ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "I've been expecting you" 18:05, 16 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I'm bo:User:Battousai from Tibetan Wikipedia. I just wanted to ask you one question. First, why don't you become an administrator of this wikipedia because as I see in, there aren't any sysops in this wikipedia. I am waiting for your reply in my en wiki user's discussion page or in my bo wiki user's page. thanks :) --A.A.J.S. 20:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Nat,

I've requested an arbitration regarding Freedom skies.

Can I trouble you to write a brief statement at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Freedom skies about your impressions of Freedom skies, his knowledge of Buddhism, and his conduct as an editor, particularly at the Zen and Bodhidharma articles?

Thank you.

JFD 10:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freedom skies. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freedom skies/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freedom skies/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 03:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi friend. When you are taking break - I should be active :) --MissingLinks 17:09, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You had earlier indicated an interest in joining a project relating to the subject of Oriental Orthodoxy. Please be advised that such a project has now been created, and that we would welcome your participation. John Carter 18:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello from Amilolo[edit]

Hi Nat, I am Amilolo(ཨ་མའི་ལོ་ལོ།) from Tibet. I love Wiki and I am very excited so see Wiki made a space for Tibetan. I want to promote Wiki Tibetan in any ways I can. I am a native Tibetan speaker and I am also literated in Chinese and English. Manybe you saw some of my contributions in Wiki Tibetan already. I am very interested to know how can I promote my status in Wiki Tibean and become Sysop so I can do much more things for Wiki Tibetan. In any cases you can send me email at Thanks!


I don't know you, but I watch the Senkaku Islands page where I've seen you comment from time to time. We are currently talking about the name at Port Hamilton, which several authors seem to admit is the most standard name in English. Nonetheless, they are persisting in claims that "since Korea owns the islands, it should be named in Korean." Being from Korea myself, I know there are a lot of name issues that I really do care about, and I think it's important to stick to this "common usage" policy everywhere. I'd like to get some editors opinions who are interested in naming in general, but not necessarily that page. This island is a rather unnotable place that had a base on it, and always appears in that context. There are some ambiguity concerns, but these happen for several of the choices (the Korean name itself, for example) and does not currently conflict with any other articles. I'd appreciate it if you could take a look at this page if you have time. You seem to have a level head and have stuck to the policies in the past. Komdori 21:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you have any further query against the South Tibet article ?[edit]

I'd like to explain them to you.--Ksyrie 05:40, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Barnstar redux[edit]

If I could, I'd give you a thousand barnstars -- or perhaps just the North Star, as you are a guiding light on WP Buddhism. As you know, I thought you were an admin when I first came aboard and I still would support that such powers be given to you if ever you wanted to pursue it. Thanks once again for your on-going sharing of your great knowledge, excellent analysis and supportive kindness. You have a wonderful mind and heart. Best, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 22:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yoga and Buddhism[edit]

As an experienced Wikipedian, could you please suggest what options are available for improving or treating in some other way the Yoga and Buddhism article? I don't consider myself the right person to actually edit it. --Knverma 23:19, 24 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


A quick look at a few Internet sites seems to show that Lokesvara is known in Theravada Buddhism.

[1] [2] [3]

I'm not claiming they are authoritative by any means, but they do suggest that you need to take a closer look at your removal of the reference to Lokesvara and Theravada in the Avalokitesvara article.

Bathrobe 08:50, 25 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 8 December 2006, you wrote as follows on the talk page of Avalokitesvara:
The article said: "In the Theravada tradition of Southeast Asia, Avalokiteśvara is known as Lokeśvara (Lord of the World)." I took this out, since I don't think Avalokiteśvara is known in Theravada at all. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
An inspection of the history of the article shows that you did actually remove the above sentence from the general introductory part -- although you left a mention of Lokesvara down in the bowels of the article (under Origin, Western Scholarship). I think we should consider reinstating this information in the introductory part, unless, of course, there are scholarly sources to indicate that Avalakitesvara (under the name of Lokesvara) is not found in Theravada.
Bathrobe 02:47, 26 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's fine. I don't dispute your scholarship. But you did actively remove a piece of information that relates to the existence of Avalokitesvara in Southeast Asia based on the fact that you "don't think" Avalokitesvara is known in Theravada at all. There appears to be a case for saying that Lokesvara was/is known to the Southeast Asians. As for how solid or convincing a case, I'm not qualified to judge. I remember reading some years ago a very good article on Avalokitesvara that specifically mentioned how he came to be worshipped in Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia. Not to mention the rather complex situation surrounding his worship in (I believe) Nepal. If I remember rightly there was in fact some "mixing up" of boddhisattvas/gods there.
At any rate, leaving the Southeast Asian reference to languish in a section about Western scholarship doesn't seem quite right.
Let me point you to this site: [4], a book review which deals quite specifically with Lokesvara in SE Asia.
Bathrobe 08:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Buddhism addition of "Nichiren"[edit]

Hi Nat - Sorry for troubling you over something that I think is a straighforward nit, but I'm trying to get feedback from regular contributors to WP Buddhism regarding the recent inclusion of Nichiren on Template:Buddhism (under Template_talk:Buddhism#needs_more_Japan). Am I overreacting? Do you have a take on this? Thanks for any help. I hope you are doing well, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 11:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks so much once again, Nat. In my mind, your voice definitely helped build the case for the revision. As always, you're the touchstone for sanity. Best, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 03:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tibetan transliteration[edit]

Hello Nat. What do you think of our nameconventions discussion? Should we come now to an agreement or should we take more time to discuss? I lack the ability to have a complete overview on that topic and the many points of discussion. Maybe it is well to make a summery of the present situation there and condense out of them the next possibly steps we have to take regarding that matter? Waht do you think? Thank you very much, --Kt66 12:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

  • Freedom skies is placed on standard revert parole for one year. He is limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, he is required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.
  • Freedom skies shall select one account and use only that account. Any other account used may be indefinitely banned. Pending selection of an account Freedom skies may not edit Wikipedia.
  • Violations of paroles and probations imposed on parties of this case shall be enforced by blocks for an appropriate period of time. Blocks and bans are to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Freedom skies#Log of blocks and bans.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit 18:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good to have you back. Do whatever is correct. I have no knowledge of phonetics!!! One of our targets should be to add all the places in Tibet and expand articles on the counties ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 16:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

3RVT the South Tibet in 24 hours[edit]

--Ksyrie 20:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I had already talk about the other guy who just deleted what I had edited without any justification.The version which I restored includes all the edits s/he had made,but what I had edited and referenced,his/her version didn't give a word.So it is apparent vandalism.--Ksyrie 20:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can check the differnces between the two version,restore my last version SVP.--Ksyrie 20:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This warning should be discounted - "four diffs" given at WP:AN3 post were in fact only two, after false links and repeated diffs were discounted ~ Anthony 00:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ksyrie, the reason for the edit war which is going on is that you keep inserting unsourced material without addressing the issues on the discussion page of that article:
  1. 18:50, 20 April 2007
  2. 05:54, 6 May 2007
  3. 01:00, 7 May 2007
  4. 04:14, 7 May 2007
  5. 21:43, 8 May 2007
Nat, it doesn't help to just revert Ksyrie again and again, but I don't know how to solve or where to report this problem. I find the policies and instructions on how to deal with Ksyries behaviour rather confusing, I don't want to report Ksyrie as a vandal if s/he doesn't really fit the definition, and I don't want users from China to be banned, if another way can be found.
I've made a request here: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography
I've asked for a third opintion here: Wikipedia:Third opinion # Active disagreements
And I've made request of the Mediation Cabal for mediation.
I'm not sure if that's the right way to deal with this, but maybe it works. —Babelfisch 07:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I urge you to take a look into the action I called vandalism before vouching for the actions of tendentious editors.

"Knverma" asked for redirect on 07:48, 8 May 2007 and went ahead on 07:49, 8 May 2007. It took him less than two mins to blank a well sourced article.

"Knverma" blanked Patriarch (Buddhism) and redirected it to Lineage (Buddhism). It's vandalism.

He blanked content elsewhere.

I'll have to ask you to examine the actions of these editors for yourself before you vouch for them; your name is held in high regards by editors like me and your last comment was very unexpected.

Regards, Freedom skies| talk  18:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tibetan work[edit]

I find your comment quite rude. Who said anything about inaccuracy? I am trying to help out - and one of the things about understanding the country is to surely map out the places even if they are stubs? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 20:51, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My aim is to try to provide information about places that are unknown to the wider audience -hopefully there wil be some info to go on e.g local economy landmarks etc ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 20:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you are certain that the articles cannot in the slightest bit be expanded I will just create redirects to the prefectures for the counties if there is nothing to go on at all. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 20:56, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Then there is no harm in stubbing them until "reliable information" can be found. It is very difficult to know if any info is exactly correct - I think I'll do an ok job which has potential so please don't use that tone again. Thankyou ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 21:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you are referring to the transliterations - I didn't add these -I am trusting the judgment of others - you appear to have good knowledge of it so please let me know if you see any errors. Thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 21:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK I apologize for those errors they are a insignificant compared to the benefit I have been to wikipedia- but I will try to be careful. I thought the Dalai Lama was from Amdo -did I write Amdo County? . ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 21:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have checked Mainling county it should be sman gling rdzong - apologies for my error. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 21:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've created some prefecture templates to try to put the articles in their geographical concept. Geographically I think of much of Tibet has a grey area of unchartered territory and I hope I can try to fill in the gaps on wikipedia as much as possible. I have also created new categories Category:Counties of Tibet and Category:Prefectures of Tibet to try to begin organizing the area geographically. I hope I can get some maps of the counties within the prefectures uploaded also so they can be located within the units. Many of the counties cover quite a substantial area there must be some info to go on. Best wishes ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 22:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC).Reply[reply]

For instance see Category:Shannan Prefecture the category should not only include the counties and all the landmarks also. This way we get a picture of more specific areas of Tibet rather than just Tibet. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 22:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK hurrah I've now found the county maps. Expansion and proper work can now commence - I've expanded Mainling County a little but the prefecture articles should be all be developed like the Tibet articles!!! I hope you can see I am trying to improve those stubs that have been there for WAY! too long. There is more to Tibet than Lhasa although it is the spiritual centre! All the best -each county should now become like this -minimum ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 22:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And that other thing you said -I got it from a Lonely Tibet guide from the 1980s -I notcied some of the transliterations are slightly different - I created Milarepa's Cave though so you must surely see the positive aspects. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 23:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I thought it was Amdo. Of course in Kundun, the Dalai Lama film bio the town was visited and mentioned in Seven Years in Tibet too. Anyway I'll try to keep the work as professional as possible . Basically in Category:Counties of Tibet I want to to see 71 high quality detailed articles by the end of it. Also should the prefecture be Shigatse Prefecture or the other which seems official? My liking would be Shigatse prefecture - I also prefer the name Tibet rather than Xizang -the Chinese name. What is best do you think? I'm off to bed now but all the best anyway!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 23:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I created History of Exploration in Tibet which centres on western exploration of the country. I also created a template for Lhasa which connects its articles. Anything missing you can think of? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 21:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've made a few changes in that template. "Zhefeng" and "Yangbajing" don't make sense. —Babelfisch 01:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Papayana": Proposed for Deletion[edit]

Hallo Nat. I hope you are well. I have liked your contributions to the "Hinayana" discussion. I wanted to notify you that I have proposed the "papayana" article for deletion. You might like to express a view on this? I think the article is barely more than gossip or rumour - without hard evidence to support the inclusion of "papayana" as a significant Buddhist concept within Wikipedia. Anyway, see what you think. Thanks, Nat. All best wishes to you. From Tony. TonyMPNS 11:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Nat Krause, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:CreativeCommonsSomeRights2.png) was found at the following location: User:Nat Krause. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 11:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The History section of the article is very badly written it is in no coherent order and some of the statements seem misleading. Its gonna need a lot of cutting and rewording ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 12:29, 26 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually I haven't got around to copy editing it yet in fact I'll do it now I should have rewritten it when i created it but got sidetracked. I thought somebody else had re written it. Hope you are well ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 20:30, 26 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What I mean is it needs copy editing and also "copy" editing e.g copywright editing to reword it. Also other sources need to be compiled and written into the article to assure it is not too POV china which it is. Hopefully there are Tibetan sources to help balance Its got to start somehwere -I think this is quite an important article but also a very difficult one to write and would appreciate you working with rather than giving me a grilling. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 20:39, 26 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You really are quite a disappointing person indeed. I intially I thought I had come across a pleasant user and even looked forward to working with you when you returned. It seems I was completely mistaken. I guess your're one of those people who always focus on the negative and criticise but do very little about a problem you see yourself. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 20:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In fact you are quite pathetic putting it up for deletion. I removed the copywright and pov. Now we are left with a pathetic looking article. Thanks a million friend. What a great guy! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 10:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry but where is the insult? Look. Copywright isn't a good thing no. And neither is pov china. But the fact you just put the article up for speedy deletion rather than trying to rewrite it into a neutral article of our own you shows that you couldn't care less about it. You forget that I always trying to improve and cover new articles particularly on Tibet and fill in important gaps in knowledge. You haven't given me one ounce of credit on any work I have done on Tibet. -you focus on the minor errors and articles where I haven't rewritten into my own words rather looking at the big improvements I have made to most articles. The project needs people like me who have the enthusiasm to try to improve wikipedia -ok I was wrong not to rewrite the economy of Tibet articles I apologize but you should never discourage me from my work particularly on a country which has few contributors as it is. All you have done is made me feel like an idiot and it is not what I expected from you at all, whatever major blunder I have done. I am offering a chance to clear the air- I would rather discuss articles rationally rather than confrontation. I hope you'll try to think that I always try to mean well in my work and forgive me. All the best ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 10:06, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy Vesak[edit]

A Happy Vesak (according to the Vietnamese calendar) to you Nat. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I was wondering if you would be willing if I posted what we discussed yesterday on the wikiproject, so that it speeds up the discussion. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image:Nat_Krause.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Nat_Krause.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 15:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wiki pokemon is now trying to replace template:History of Manchuria with template:History of Northeast China, so I have nominated template:History of Northeast China on TfD(Template for Deletion) for POV forking here. Please help reach a consensus on this issue. Cydevil38 20:19, 21 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indians redirect page[edit]

Thanks for fixing that. I'm not quite sure why it got changed like it did, but I've made sure no other pages were affected by the error. Regards, --Milton 03:47, 26 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A little confused[edit]

Hello sir,

  I am confused by the message you've sent me about reverting the Buddhism article.  I have never even visited the article before!  I think you must have me confused with someone else... 01:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RfD nomination of Jumbo Whales[edit]

I have nominated Jumbo Whales (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. GDonato (talk) 19:20, 9 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tibetan yaks[edit]

Hey you should check out the new article on Yak racing - I had some time to convince it wasn't a hoax!!! I've also started Khata -which you may have info to elaborate on. Hope you are well ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 13:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The transliteration of the song is a modified version of the one at YouTube. By the way, which one is correct? The YouTube one or the one? ionas68224|talk|contribs|email 18:48, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I modified it and I will replace it with the correct YouTube transliteration. I also don't like Wylie, because it is silly and not phonetic. It shows letters, such as /b/ in Daa-lai bla-ma but the voiced bilabial plosive, released or unreleased, does not appear in the word "lama". ionas68224|talk|contribs|email 21:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Nat, thanks for checking up on Buddhism by country. I really appreciate it. best, bikeable (talk) 05:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hi. Can you have a look here. WE need more content inspectors. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:17, 25 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article you made on Tenga Rinpoche seems to be copied from another website. What is its copyright status?—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 04:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I beleive there are no problems, however, I did change a lot the text, summerizing it. I have asked about copy right and will let you know. --Rédacteur Tibet 16:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for your response. I am quite sure the very reason of the text is to be shared, but its much better to see or ask in the first place. However, Tenga Rinpoche is one of the very last great master from ancient Tibet (...). I'll get back to you and/or the page to indicate the status. All the best. --Rédacteur Tibet 18:41, 4 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The webmaster from said "please feel free to take text from for wikipedia. Kind regards, " I believe you would have similar response from Buddhist follower generally. All the best. --Rédacteur Tibet 10:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indigenous people of america[edit]

It's obvious the cheating of claiming the aboriginals died of diseases.If they were really of no immunity to the oldworld epidemics,they would die out for the moment.But the fact is that,they survived,especially in the West of America,where later the european collonist arrived than the East.So In a word,the Epidemics is not the killer of these men.Simple analytical logic will overturn the disease theory.It was only an excuse or pretext to whitewash the evil doing by these colonist.If all the indians do die of the virus,why the female one survived and inbred with the european?Did you ever find any virus selectively kill men but no women?--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 19:51, 4 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I didnt find the necessity to discuss,the answer is clear,amercian cowboy hunt indian people,evey head worth some money,it's fairly known history.American do the sterilization to the indian women and men.That's why nowadays,in the New World,only the US had the smallest percentage of indigeous.They really did evil,just like Nazi.--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 20:05, 4 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A template you created, Template:Curia, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. --MZMcBride 17:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Naming Boxes[edit]

I have gotten in a little dispute with Babelfish about his naming boxes. In particular it seems ridiculous to me (and Non POV) to give the Chinese names for everything having to do with Tibet, even for periods of history when Tibet and China had no special relationship. He has let it drop, but I am still unsatisfied. I wonder what your opinion on the matter is, maybe I am being silly. Another issue I have is that he gives THDL transliteration, and then lists the Tournadre system under 'other'. This treats the best system as if it were just another ad hoc transcription. Also, THDL is just a dumbed down version of Tournadre for which Germano is trying to take the credit. I personally think that Wikipedia should go for Tournadre consistently if it is not going to do Wylie (which would be better). Tibetologist 00:27, 14 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Scout motto in Tibetan[edit]

Hi, Nat. Chris asked me to translate the scout motto into Tibetan.
I've proposed a creative non-literal translation: gtan gyi thugs rje meaning 'continuing ever responsive energies' and/or karuna.
Please feel free to correct.
Tashi delegs,

A template you created, Template:Cardinal, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. --MZMcBride 04:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ringsel in Tibetan[edit]

are you sure the Tibetan word you inputted in the ringsel page is correct? I don't know tibetan but

1) i am pretty sure if it is correct then according to google, its the first time that the term, typed in Tibetan, has appeared in the web, ever. (i copied it and pasted it into google search and nothing came up.)

2) it just seem wrong somewhat, i can't tell exactly why, but ther other tibetan words i've seen seems to have a different flow to it.

of course, as i said, i don't really know Tibetan, but if you can, please double check :)

Philosophy.dude 00:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am not sure if your correction "looks right", intuitions doesn't really work when you try to use it :)

I think there might be something like vowel/consonent harmony to Tibetan.. or something of the sort? I think that's where the looks comes from. Like if you read Finnish/Estonian you can catch typos even if don't understand a single word because certain vowels never appear together and certain vowels always appears together... Most human writings comes with some kind of patterns.

Philosophy.dude 13:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello how are you? Well? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 18:12, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I created Lungshar but I am unwilling to add any information whatsoever as you brand it as copywright rather than try to make it seem less so yourself. All new articles now will be useless stubs of course so we don't get the big black mark on them . You may want to expand it using your own unique knowledge ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 18:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I haven't created many Tibetan articles anyway for a while. That Ngawang was admittedly a mistake the bullet points were scruffy anyway and repeated the same info at least five times in places. I guess I am so busy with my wealth of work on wikipedia that occasionally I slip up trying to improve things quickly. In doing so occassionally I forget to rewrite fully which I guess is unacceptable. Anyway the new bot system blocks out any new copywrighted stuff now. I wish we could just start again between the two of us. I really believe our recent confrontation has given the wrong impression of me and my perception of you. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 19:35, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Believe it or not I have created many good Tibetan articles without copywright porblems Yak racing was a DYK. I also started Khata] which you may want to expand All the best ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 19:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've also started Trimön. Now is this acceptable? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 19:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've also started Drapchi Prison . There is a wealth of information available for this but I am unwilling to attempt to add more detail . ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 20:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And another Gyai'ra Losang Dainzin copywright free !!!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 20:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thankyou for adding Tibetan to many places. I am currently adding all the towns and villages in Tibet any edits you can contribute to adding the Tibetan would be warmly appreciated. ALl th best ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 19:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is there any way we can get the Tibetan-chinese language box to include the images of the people this way it looks less cluttered, ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 19:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can see what you meant about Trimon. I've tried rewriting it a little. It obviously isn't a direct copywright as the bot dodn't pick it up bu I agree some of the sentences were close enough. It would be good if more sources were available. The more there are the easier it is to avoid similarity. I am going to work hard on the towns and villages in the coming weeks and get them all onto wikipedia. All the best ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 09:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can I clarify something with you. Does Co mean lake in Tibetan? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 12:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I want to create a standard infobox Tibetan settlement for all the towns and villages under [[Template:Infobox Tibetan Settlement]]. Is there anyway we can have something like this: Domartang but with parameters to include the Tibetan/Chinese language section like on Deleg at the top so it all goes neatly in one box for settlements? PLease repsond on this as soon as you can as I feel it very important thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 13:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK thanks I thought so. Please see Deleg or Jaggang (you you add the trans to this?). I now want every town and village to have a layout and infobox and transliteration like this. If you could add it to the infoboxes gradually this would be excellent. Thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 09:59, 19 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AfD nomination of Buddhist polemics[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Buddhist polemics, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buddhist polemics. Thank you. lincalinca 15:29, 24 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

contribution to celebrities[edit]

See here the history of my recent contribution that you 'undo'history List of Buddhists Well, to explain why this list fell on the article List of Buddhists, this was a list that came from the french version. However, the celebrity part of the fr:Personnalités du bouddhisme was recently deleted, celebrities are not well viewed obviously attracting some jealous reaction. So, I was concerned that the worked accumulated was going to be loss (more or less), and I though someone was going to check... So, it is up to you to see whether to keep or not. Of course some names are very well known buddhist, like Richard Gere, missing in the List of Buddhists. Richard Gere: My Journey as a Buddhist All the best --Rédacteur Tibet 19:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, could you take a look at my question please? :) Thanks Mallerd 12:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for alacritous and thoughtful vote at Talk:Buddha#Renaming_vote[edit]

Hi Nat - just wanted to thank you, yet again, this time for your well-articulated and judicious voting at Talk:Buddha#Renaming_vote. It looks like you started a definite trend. If things continue along this trend, I'll move the current Buddha article to whichever voted upon title has a majority vote and then redirect the second-place title(s) to the first one. I hope you are doing well. Best wishes, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 14:57, 30 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Nat - I wanted to primarily thank you for the "Support" vote and explanation on Talk:Buddha (disambiguation)#Requested_move. Your voice always gives me cheer. I guess I'm feeling a wee like a deer in headlights with this process, especially with the recent undo of the move of Buddha to Buddha (general). I wonder if I'm losing perspective on this matter but decided to ask about this undo on the responsible admin's talk page. Please rap me on the head if you think I'm going astray :-) Thanks again, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 20:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:Fleishersuperman.jpg You are my HERO!
For giving voice to the voiceless
and swiftly undoing the wrongly done!
Many bows to you!
Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 03:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Larry and I gathered many more facts on talk:Buddha (general), and we feel it is time to vote again. Both Larry and I now favor "Buddhahood", which was one of your options in the first place, but we feel it would be better to alert all voters. — Sebastian 05:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tashi Wangdi[edit]

Do whatever you like to the page and suggest whatever questions you wish. It's open. --David Shankbone 05:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request to semi-protect this page please.[edit]

Check the edit history. Someone keeps logging on and vandalising it, I just thought that you should semi-protect it, thats all.

Ignore this if you are not an admin, I just figured that cause you were the first person to 'welcome' me to wikipedia i'd drop this by JAStewart (talk) 23:41, 26 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi. I'd like to nominate you as an admin, as I think you're qualified. Let me know if you're interested. Epbr123 (talk) 14:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I happen to come across the Gene Callahan (economist) page, and I was trying to figure out what makes this article notable? I saw you had created it, and it's got a lot more info since you started it, but still, does every economist-author-scholar get their own wikipedia page? Thanks for any perspective, Rhetth (talk) 01:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi Nat! Nice to hear from you! I do not remember where I got the Śaka spelling. Please edit to your best judgement! Best regards. PHG (talk) 21:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi Nat! Thanks for the correction. Yes, I didn't check the links, I am sorry. On principle I think that standards should be used when transliterating text from non-Roman scripts, but I don't do much changing. By standards I mean IAST, ISO9, Chinese transliteration standards, whichever they are (I know nothing about them). So on pages where Sanskrit words are used, IAST should be used consistently. Also the phrase or Shakyamuni is not necessary - if you want show the pronounciation, write it in the parenthesis in IPA or IPA chart for English. In Shakyamuni you again have a short 'a', instead of a long 'ā', which originally triggered me to do the change - this would mean something like a sage called Śakya, Śakya being his name, instead of a sage from the Śakya clan. The long 'ā' in Śākyamuni tells that 'Śākya' is patronymic. Regards. NikNovi (talk) 14:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, again! Well, I think if this is a public media, and even more if it is an encyclopedia, it should strive for the most 'legal' solution ('legal' is not the correct work, but I suppose you will know what I mean; maybe most correct, coherent, consistent). What people write privately in their e-mails doesn't matter (but it still that shows what kind of attitude they take to their correspondent, I can't imagine writing someone's name incorrectly, if he respects the person).
Also, shouldn't it be Śākya, rather than Śakya? - Yes, in fact it should be Śākya. From the dictionary: 'm. Name of a tribe of landowners and Kshatriyas in Kapila-vastu (from whom Gautama, the founder of Buddhism, was descended)'. It could be derived from 'Śaka' (a tribe) or 'Śāka' (power, might) as an adjective or patronym (descending from Śakas or relating to the Śakas or power...) Dict. says 'mfn(adj). derived or descended from the Śakas'. Regards, Nik. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NikNovi (talkcontribs) 01:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Thank you for fixing the Singh article. Much appreciated.


Gorkhali (talk) 02:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello Nat. Please, can you verify that you are the author of these two images? I take them, long time ago, from en:wiki but now they are going to be deleted because they have the no source tag (here, at, your name appeared as the author name) Thank you so much. And sorry for my english ;). Airunp (talk) 17:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Scott Shaw[edit]

Hello. You've made several contributions to the page on Scott Shaw. There's some controversy about where he went to university and I wondered if you'd be able to help. Apparently the pages on the internet that say that he went to a whole string of universities in the States, England, and China, are actually based on Wikipedia.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 19:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Nat Krause, Losar is currenting happening, how may I ensure that it is flagged as a current event? Is there a News Wiki article that this Wikipedia article can interwiki? How may I progress this? Is there anything else you recommend?
Blessings in the mindstream
B9 hummingbird hovering (talkcontribs) 05:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please vote![edit]

Hi! Please join us here:

Thank so much!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 12:51, 10 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Zen Buddhism in the United States[edit]

I am looking for editors to come to my sandbox at User:Mind meal/Sandbox26 to collaborate on creating a first-class article on Zen Buddhism in the United States. Interested parties can contact me on my talk page. I would like to see a group of research-oriented editors come aboard. I think it may work best if various editors focus on one particular dimension of Zen in America (always backed by references) and we can add various sections, come up with section titles, and eventually bring the article to "completion." While this is a labor of love for me, I fear it will take eons to get the article right alone. With the help of other editors, however, we can make progress much faster. Please contact me before starting to edit my sandbox. I want to know the members I am working with before doing so. I've known you to be a good editor and thought I'd ask. Thank you. (Mind meal (talk) 19:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC))Reply[reply]

HI friend. See Tenzin Gyatso. I;ve added parameters to the main monarch infobox to save having it cluttered with the blue translation box also. Looks much better doesn't it. If you could help merge boxes for many of the dalai or panchen lamas this would be great -I'm afraid I'm a bit busy adding french towns at present. Hope you are well ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 22:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Any advice re: Buddha page churn[edit]

Hi Nat -

User:Abtract has taken it upon him/herself to change Buddha from a dab page to an article. In light of our all's discussions and votes, I reverted his/her changes (twice) and requested that, if he/she wanted to do such, he/she needed to restart the discussions and votes (see Talk:Buddha#This_is_a_dab_page). He/She reverted my second revert. Where do we go from here? (Should we care?)

As always, thanks for any guidance.
Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 18:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, User:Jerzy has made my concerns moot, thankfully. Perhaps as a future potential hypothetical you could advise me on how I would proceed if such were to recur?
In addition, if you have any thoughts on the style of dab page for Buddha, I'd always be interested in hearing them at Talk:Buddha#This_is_a_dab_page. I kind of recall that you weren't crazy about making Buddha a dab. Perhaps it's time to explore making it a collection of article summaries (e.g., like Śīla) regarding Gautama Buddha, Buddhahood and Buddhist art, with an extended "See also" list?
Hope you're doing great!
Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 01:35, 20 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nat - Thanks so much for the helpful follow-up! Hope you are well, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 04:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Nat - just wanted to thank you yet again and acknowledge that your most recent contribution was the key to the current detente and stabilization. I hope you are comfortable with the way things currently are. Best wishes and thanks again, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 14:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:UpdatedDYK2[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:UpdatedDYK2 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:04, 19 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Panchen Lamas[edit]

Hi, could you take a look at Gedhun Choekyi Nyima and Qoigyijabu‎ if you are willing and available? If you remember, there was an earlier discussion about the treatment of these two subjects in relation to balance. I made a couple of edits recently on the basis of what I believed was the consensus of the discussion, and to eliminate a "cite needed" tag. I am being reverted by Blnguyen without discussion. Could you take a look at the edits and give your opinion, if any? Thanks. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 03:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your attention and objective opinion on those pages. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Anarchism and Society[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Anarchism and Society, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Anarchism and Society. скоморохъ 00:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AfD nomination of Karmapa controversy[edit]

An editor has nominated Karmapa controversy, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karmapa controversy and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Nat,

I saw your comment on the page Invasion of Tibet (1950–1951). I was actually in the middle of reading some books about Tibet when the recent events in Tibet occured and decided to try to update the page some and flesh in more of the details, using what I read. The book I quoted from is pro-Tibetan, but it does appear to try to give a reasonable attempt to look at the issue from multiple sides. Since you seem to be interested in Tibet-related articles, you might take a look at the recent edits and see what you think. Sections of the book I used are available on Google Books. --Yuje (talk) 22:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Öser and Garzê[edit]

Hey Nat,

Long time no talk. :-) I was editing the Öser page, and noticed that it mentions that she worked in Kardzé. This is undoubtedly a reference to the city, but it redirects to Garzê Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture. So does Garzê. In the "Subdivisions" section of the article, it gives mention of the city, but links to "Garzê (Großgemeinde)." We should probably create a separate article about the city/town, but I don't have a lot of information about it. There is already an article about Garzê County. Finally, should it be titled "Garzê" or "Kardzé"? Khoikhoi 04:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your response. Maybe the article should be titled "Garzê (city)" or "Garzê (town)." (I'm not sure which one would be more appropriate) Only problem is that we have Garzê County which is basically the same. I guess I'll contact the user who created the page as you pointed out. I have no idea what "Großgemeinde" means BTW. Oh, and how do you think the 2008 unrest in Tibet article should start out? ([5] or [6]). Khoikhoi 20:56, 23 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"China is a country"[edit]

Hi, I'm attempting a re-write of the opening of China to resolve the definitional issue that has plagued the article. I noticed that you commented previously on the issue. I've opened a straw poll to gauge whether consensus is to define "China is a country". Could I ask you to comment/vote at Talk:China#Straw poll? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AfD nomination of[edit]

I have nominated, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Guy (Help!) 11:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For the record, I created it as a redirect.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 23:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

People's Liberation Army operations in Tibet (1950–1951) page[edit]

Please vote here --Littlebutterfly (talk) 17:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Knowledgeable editors needed[edit]

For help with the Drukpa article. It would be appreciated. There is a new user who removes every mention of the Drukpa school being a Kagyu lineage, deleting legitimate sources in the process. Sylvain1972 (talk) 18:14, 4 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Nat. This is the former Alexwoods. Someone has proposed a move back to the original title of this article. It would be great to have your input. Please chime in. Thanks. Yunfeng (talk) 20:07, 11 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We're looking for editors to improve History of Tibet to Good Article status. Since you've contributed to the article in the past, I hope you'll be able to participate. Longchenpa (talk) 01:28, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article name[edit]

Hello, we are revoting to propose a new name for the People's Liberation Army invasion of Tibet (1950–1951) article. Many people would like to move it to "PLA occupation of Tibet". If you have any last minute opinions, please join us here. Thanks. Benjwong (talk) 17:42, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I fear an Edit war regarding the Shugden Article[edit]

Hi Nat, I would be happy if you can have a look and if needed a comment or suggestion regarding the article Dorje Shugden. In the last days there were substantial changes in a very one-sided was by new editors. Complete passages were deleted, quoted statements were deleted and instead quotes from an anonymous site inserted. The article needs to be improved of course and has a lot passages without sources, so I welcome every improvement. I guess the changes are based on the background of NKT followers who want to start demonstrations against the Dalai Lama on April 22, Hamilton, NY; and wish to bring the article more to their POV of the subject matter. Please look in the History and maybe leave some advice at the tp. If you can contribute, I'll be happy. I know of three academical researches on that subject matter: Dreyfus, David Kay and Michael von Brück, all of them are religious scientists and work with plenty of original sources. Thank you very much, --kt66

Substantial edits at the Dorje Shugden article[edit]

Dear editor I like to draw your attention to that specific article, Dorje Shugden, which was substantially changed by a group of three new editors, without any discussion on the talk page. Rather one of the new editor revealed: "Many of these changes were discussed between at least three of the editors." which must have happened outside of WP, because there is no discussion on the talk page or their WP-accounts. One of the new editors claimed: "You seem to be the only person who accepted this article as it was. If you check you will see that the changes made make this article more neutral and unbiased then it was before previous edits." If I check I see the article omitted different POV's, deleted verified passages, included passages from anonymous websites and turned the article to a more bias Pro-Shugden POV. I'd like to ask you to check that and to give your opinion or to collaborate if there is a need for improving the article, so that we can have an unbiased, neutral, well-informed article which fairly presents all POV's. Thank you very much, --Kt66 (talk) 19:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dalai Lama Article[edit]

Hi Nat, I've seen the passage in this Dalai Lama article of Relgious Controversy, and I wonder, why there are only information from one side: a)NKT/WSS and b) Ole/Shamar Rinpoche. Someone put in a neutrality template which has my full support. I'd like to ask you to balance this section. My suggesion is to remove it, until at the TP a neutral POV has been worked out. Reagrding the Dhogyal article the Admin Board helped. It seems to work well so far. Thank you, --Kt66 (talk) 16:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I made a quite radical step and deleted all and inserted instead the Wiki Articles. Please have a look and leave your comment, if possible, thanks. --Kt66 (talk) 19:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Any idea why it has been locked from editing? Has there been an edit war or something? ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ $1,000,000? 20:00, 17 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

still here after all these years..[edit]

Yes - and WP has changed a lot also. I doubt I shall resume such a close link with it again - is it any more stable? Hope all is well with you. 20040302 (talk)

Article Buddha[edit]

Keep in your mind that the text from the Qu'ran has nothing to do with Buddhahood. Its an view from an seperate religion (Islam). That religion section is about the name Buddha. The text Buddha found in the Qu'ran. Deleting information about other religion text found or meaning in any other seperate religion is an violation. --PadmaDharma101 (talk) 15:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You perhaps do not understand ? That article Buddha is an Disambiguation and could refer to anything that means Buddha. If you want to change the section by adding (In Buddhism) go for it however if it's under (religon) then the text of Islam goes under Religion its common sense. --PadmaDharma101 (talk) 18:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ishta-deva vs. yidam[edit]

Greetings Nat. I know you've a lot of experience with Vajrayana topics. There is a discussion underway about moving "Ishta-deva (Buddhism) to "yidam"--if you'd care to review the arguments pro and con on the talk page, your input would be appreciated.Sylvain1972 (talk) 14:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aro Ter Hello Nat. In the interest of Wiki readers having access to credible, informed information on Tibetan Buddhist practice and lineages, could you please have a look at the Aro gTer page. Main problem is his lineage and so-called tulku status has no validity -then there's the allusion to tantric practices for novices. The Criticism link is to a blog which has a lot of interesting info, most crucially the lack of recognition for Ngakpa Chogyam from any Tibetan teacher of repute. The blog does get a bit disorganised and long-winded the further one delves into it. But nevertheless, the writer has good intentions, i believe.

Also, while i'm fairly new to all this Wiki-biz, it seems that the one editing and commenting on the discussion page largely in favour of Aro Ter, 'arthurchos' is presenting himself as an unbiased Wiki editor (unless some of the comments have actually been done by a Wiki editor & not attributed, so that it looks like it's all emanating from 'arthurchos'). I have made a comment about this on the Administrator's board as well.

I suspect that you are already aware of this Aro Ter controversy but have had neither time nor fortitude to grapple with yet another grassfire. But it seems to me that maybe you're the Chosen One to provide clarity, possessing Wiki know-how and an informed perspective on the subject matter.

i haven't gone to the trouble of registering here yet. regards, Matilda (talk) 08:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

About the Vandal[edit]

Blanking a page which is not considered by the wikipedia community is just a qualified vanval behavior.--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 13:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are not removing significant materials but blanking the page!--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 02:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What are you talking about?there's no consensus of merging the two article.--Ksyrie(Talkie talkie) 14:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some new things in Dalai Lama[edit]

go to that talk pageRaintwoto 05:36, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Your revert on Buddhism article[edit]

Hello again, I believe that we have discussed issues before! I am wondering why you reverted my edit. It has already been stated clear that Buddhism is not a religion. It does not play a central role of faith in a supreme being or creator. It talks about beginningless time and endless time. The Buddha himself has also stated that the belief in the Buddha was dangerous. Please refer to Mingur Rinpocheś book on The Joy of Living for more information.

P.S. I have already stated the reason on the talk page. Reverting again. If there is any proof that Buddhism IS A RELIGION, provide NOTABLE PROOF. I consider the proof from sources like .com sometimes unacceptable, considering the poor quality the external website was written in. Prowikipedians (talk) 18:06, 13 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please consider reading this on Wikipedia´s guidelines on verifiable and reliable sources. Prowikipedians (talk) 18:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I doubt that the resource provided by that site is even valuable. Take a look yourself. The resource I have provided you was written by Mingur Rinpoche, Buddhist monk. FIND SOME RELIABLE INFORMATION OTHER THAN THE SITE PROVIDED. I don't mean to get into an edit-war, which I don't want to for a 3RR and all. Prowikipedians (talk) 19:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The link was misguided as See for yourself. I'm removing that section for the final last time today. Prowikipedians (talk) 19:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I know. But right now, it has to be fixed solid. The link has got to go. It is irrelevant. So a revert would do worse. Prowikipedians (talk) 19:36, 13 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
IF IT IS A LINK, SERVE IT AS A LINK. (I am highly doubting that this is even relevant. Find a more appropiate site. I will assure you that some sites, even .org, are not even notable. Keeping "religion" but removing link to webpage. Prowikipedians (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Dear Mr Nat, How do you know that I am a "sir" ? But thank you for your message on my Talk Page and comments elsewhere. Nice to see that there are a few pleasant people around. Yes, I do now realize that some editors are very difficult to work with and interpret rules to suit themselves. I have had a good read of the back numbers of various Talk Pages and note that this Sacca individual seems especially problematic. The word that comes to mind usually comes next after "stupendous" in most dictionaries. As I have pointed out, I was intending to put references for my additions soon afterwards, but I never expected somebody to jump all over my work just because I can't work to the pace he demands. The problem about adding things piecemeal is that it shows. There are a number of non sequiturs.

What I am particularly concerned about is that portions of the article on Mahayana and the related one on Mahayana Scriptures do not reflect current consensus scholarship -- which, for example, is pushing back Mahayana origins earlier and earlier (now at least 2nd century BCE) -- but instead relies on a limited selection of books, especially on outdated scholars such as Warder (whom I have never met, of course). They also seem cleverly slanted in places to rubbish Mahayana through a unsubtle selection of hostile quotes, laboring the point over and over again. And the use of Warder is totally disproportiate. I can see the appeal, since this Sacca seems to be some kind of Theravada fanatic who is anxious to marginalize Mahayana as much as he can.

I'll see how it goes, but if this Sacca character makes life too difficult, I'll drop out of Wiki. --Anam Gumnam (talk) 00:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS: I used to teach Buddhism at university level before I was disabled, so I do know a little bit about the subject.

Dear Mr Nat,
Thank you for your kind reply. I think you idea about pre-composing text for articles is excellent. In fact, I had just realized myself that that would be the answer and better for my eyes than the small edit screen. I am not rushing anything but would like to give the Mahayana & the Mahayana Scripture article a major overhaul. In part, they seem quite unbalanced and potentially confusing for a neophyte reader. The implications of current scholarship on proto and early Mahayana has changed our understanding of how this fascinating movement developed. I hope when the times comes other editors will display a better sense of fair play than I have encountered in that area so far.
As for an email address, I would be happy to hear from you but unfortunately I am very old-fashioned and never use email. I enjoy writing to those who know me in the real world the traditional way. I did use email for a while once but had some bad experiences with it that convinced me it was not for me. I hope you will understand and not take this personally as I am sure you are a decent man of integrity. --Anam Gumnam (talk) 00:40, 15 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Neutrality problem[edit]

Dear Nat Krause, Could you have a look at the discussion here : Many Thanks--Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 14:14, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Balance Problem in the Dalai Lama article[edit]

Hi Nat. I added a balance template on the Controversy section of the Dalai Lama article, and gave reasons at the talk page:,_14th_Dalai_Lama#unabalanced_template_in_Controversy_section I would be happy to hear your opinion, advice or suggestion or if you can make changes to balance it. Thanks a lot --Kt66 (talk) 15:44, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Buddhism article's timeline diagram[edit]

Hi Nat! Just wanted to check in: did you want to follow up regarding the inclusion of Nepalese and Bengali Buddhism in the current talk-page diagram being developed for the Buddhism article? I just thought I'd prompt you now since – unless something valid comes up – I'm inclined to insert the talk-page diagram into main space (either directly or via a template) in the next day or two. Hope you're doing well. (How's Citizendium working out, BTW?) Thanks again for your help, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 02:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Nat! Thanks for the reply and I appreciate the interesting points about Newar Buddhism. Thanks for all your help over the years. Best, Larry Rosenfeld (talk) 19:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template translating[edit]

Hello! I let you a message in your lojban discusion page. --Homo logos (talk) 23:06, 2 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply][edit]

Hi. The article Nataraja has been listed at the copyright problems board. I see that you once communicated with User:Seemagoel about reproducing text from that site. Do you by any chance still have the e-mails? If they're sufficient to pass the usual OTRS process, an OTRS ticket number will clear the matter right up. :) (I'm a little pessimistic, considering that this was over three years ago.) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:24, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. The thing to do now is to forward that correspondence to the communications committee and see if whatever OTRS volunteer addresses it considers it sufficient. (I've found some more concerned with dotting is and crossing ts than others.) The basic process is at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. Please provide a clear link to the article in your e-mail and to the website, since my experience tells me that may save some back and forth correspondence. Please let me know if you're able to forward that letter, so I can note the correspondence at the article's talk and delay processing of the copyright concern for a few extra days. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:03, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. Since we're well beyond the 7 day copyright investigation period and there's no verification of permission through usable process, I have removed the section from the article. If OTRS finds the letter sufficient, it can be restored once an OTRS number is logged. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:52, 25 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The never-ending story about Shugden[edit]

Hi, I'm just starting another attempt to stop the NKT people from 'taking over' the Wikipedia with their continuous edit-war to promote the Shugden practice. If you agree, please leave a note at Administrators noticeboard. rudy (talk) 13:20, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Vesak at YM's temple.

A meaningful Vesak to you my friend. YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 05:51, 8 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Rlname[edit]

Template:Rlname has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Chillum 00:04, 10 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK nomination of Shitou Xiqian[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Shitou Xiqian at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Shubinator (talk) 13:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK for Shitou Xiqian[edit]

Updated DYK query On May 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Shitou Xiqian, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

JamieS93 15:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chinese era names[edit]

A long time ago, you created the Template:Han emperors for List of Emperors of the Han Dynasty, the latter which I am now trying to nominate as a featured list so it can be part of a greater Han Dynasty featured topic. I was able to cite everything in the table which you created, except for one thing: the Chinese era names! I was able to find information on era names in several sources, and even explained the history of the Chinese era name by using Wilkinson (1998) and Sato (1991) in the written section above the table. However, I can't find a source which explicitly lists all the era names and date ranges. Could you be of some help in this regard and point out which sources you used to create the table? That would be an enormous help. Thanks.--Pericles of AthensTalk 16:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P.S. Did you use online Chinese sources? Such as Book of Han and Book of Later Han? It would be difficult for me to utilize these sources, as I am only a third-year speaker and writer of Mandarin.--Pericles of AthensTalk 16:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah! I see. Thanks for the heads up.--Pericles of AthensTalk 16:45, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, Nat Krause. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I removed your name as you requested; note, though, that I did not explicitly state that you said it was a discriminatory term. I only suggested that you and Colophon could find a reliable source that said "Han Chinese" was a discriminatory term after you seemed to be supporting Colophon's position. Anyways, have a good night.--Pericles of AthensTalk 07:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see that you're into Tibetan Buddhism. Have you ever seen this article of mine? Tibet during the Ming Dynasty. I'd like to get some input from people who know this area well; unfortunately I don't, but I was able to gather enough sources to add some good material on Tibetan Buddhism's role with Sino-Tibetan relations during the Ming Dynasty.--Pericles of AthensTalk 02:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Thank you very much for your oppinion on the Qing Dynasty discussion, I totally agree with you. Wiki8884 (talk) 19:07, 4 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Abusive behaviour[edit]

Please could you confirm if you are responisble for moving a post of mine to a new article under Buddhism?.UkFaith (talk) 17:39, 31 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dealing with copyright violations[edit]

As I noted Talk:Samdhong Rinpoche#Two articles, if you come across copyright violations, please don't just ignore them. Either deal with them yourself, e.g. by removing the infringing material or tagging it as outlined at Wikipedia:Copyright problems; or at least note it somewhere that gets more traffic so that someone else can deal with it. Cheers Nil Einne (talk) 11:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1913 Declaration of Independence[edit]

Dear Nat, Funny I was just reading about this in Goldstein's book. I am not really sure where one could get an original, except perhaps in the Tibetan version of Shakapa's book. The previously available English translation was highly abbreviated. A new translation has just been published by Brill (2010) in their Tibetan Studies Library. It presumably has a frsh translation of the edict. I am also surprized to hear that Goldstein just copied Shakapa's translation, I didn't notice him saying that when I read it a couple days ago. It is true in any event that bod ljongs means 'the region of Tibet'. However, I am somewhat surprized to hear that DL XIII uses that term because I have never seen it in pre-communist texts. The question is however moot because the DL does use the word 'independance' (I forget whether it is rang 'dzin or rang dbang or what have you) and Goldstein specifically gives the Tibetan for this word.

I think Goldstein summs it up quite nicely, the DL clearly thought of himself as clarifying Tibet's legal position, in particular that his authority in no way depended on Peking. However, this was not so much a 'declaration of independence' a la Americaine so much as the final statement in ongoing correspondence originally between DL and the Manchu emperor. Tibetologist (talk) 09:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WP:RUS and BGN/PCGN do not concern...[edit]

Hi, would You support me here, please? As you see, I am convinced that WP:RUS and BGN/PCGN do not concern names/toponyms or parts of them, which are written originally in Latin alphabet and are not Russian. --Finrus (talk) 21:18, 28 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tibetan transcription[edit]

This table is great. But you have made me very curious about what the last column is. (I had forgotten about that wierd acute accent in the Germano system, how ugly). Tibetologist (talk) 08:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wow, you really have gotten a handle on Tibetan phonology. I just teach what Tournadre says and have always put off figuring out in detail how Chang and Chang, Sprigg, and everyone disagrees. I have thought about something like a little article called 'the many phonologies of 'Lhasa' Tibetan' but I think you would probably be more able to do it, what do you say? Also considered proposing a book for Oxford's series 'Tibetan Phonology' which would parallel Svantensson's one on Mongolian with sections on Lhasa, Old Tibetan, and other Tibetan dialects (highlighting things people will find sexy like post aspiration, aspirate friatives, etc.). Tibetologist (talk) 09:08, 4 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Small note, on your table you have '- as no pronunciation. I think in Lhasa it can often be w- or voiced h-, but that NT likes to see this as how zero is pronounced in the low tone. Also, there are descriptions of -' marking vowel length in Central Tibetan (though perhaps not in Lhasa). I have written about all of this in my three papers on '- which you can find on my work homepage.
Nat, please note I have replied on User talk:Tibetologist. Kind regards, Davin (talk) 16:14, 11 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ArbCom Election RFC courtesy notice[edit]

A request for comment that may interest you is currently in progress at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure. If you have already participated, then please disregard this notice and my apologies. A Horse called Man 15:18, 1 November 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

APPEAL TO YOU Reg: [BRAHMAN PUJAN] , [UNIVERSAL PRAYERS] . written by [Naresh Sonee] On wikipedia , These above two pages are far older than the present article [Brahman] References of above titles are also available on New York site - Meanwhile, Can your good selves in Wiki Project Indian Community re-create a precise pages on [Naresh Sonee] & his book [Brahmand Pujan] – [Brahmaand Pujan] . However, Sonee is the writer of this book [Brahmand Pujan] written in 1999 . registered with Government of India- HRRD. Details of the registration is provided here on . More than sufficient, news and reviews are there on Since 5-6 yrs, for one or the other reason pages of [Naresh Sonee] & [Brahmand Pujan] are faced by communal bias from outside India so these articles over and again get deleted here in Wikipedia for minor reasons. However, many hits of - Naresh Sonee reflects on google search engine also. So, I request Wiki Indian community to kindly come forward and generously help these two pages to grow, as I am fed up to fight my case alone here [left] and moved out long back. Meanwhile, such an important info/issue on ‘Indian literature’ which adds & spell ‘new meaning /dimension’ to Brahman -should it stay lost else ignored? Your community panel has to judge at last. Myself, will not be on Wikipedia, for the same i apologise, but- pls. help these two pages to get reinstalled, reap, sow and grow, if you too feel so, I appeal to do this munificent favour. Regards- Dralansun (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:12, 27 December 2010 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Shefts and Chang[edit]

I suggest reading volume one of this one--

  • 1981 Spoken Tibetan texts. Vol. IV. (Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica, special publications, 74.) Taipei: Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica.

Which even has some stuff on articulatory phonetics. I can give you a copy if you want. Tibetologist (talk) 20:06, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:History of Buddhism[edit]

Category:History of Buddhism, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 23:13, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tibetan naming conventions[edit]

It would be nice to know where you want me to comment :). Right at the bottom? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:36, 2 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Right, at the bottom is fine.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 16:16, 2 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for leaving me a note. I think your proposal is quite good, and I supported it in discussion. I'm looking forward to seeing it develop. I do have one question that I didn't raise on the talk page because I don't want to needlessly undercut an ostensibly reasonable proposal. Here it is: do you think there's really a need for a policy on this at all? and what would you like to see accomplished by putting this policy into place? Most of your proposal seems like a matter of common sense, and I'm not aware of (but I haven't looked for, either) a real article naming fight, or a systemic problem. Article duplication might occur in good faith regardless of whether a policy is posted, and an editor with a spelling agenda might be likely to disregard any policy. I suspect that whether or not this policy is put forth, articles with Tibetan-based names will continue to need merging/moving/deleting at the same rate as now. Can you point to any particular need for this policy; or perhaps do you think this would be useful mainly as a rule to point at when making needed merges/moves/deletions? I'll watch here for your reply. JFHJr () 18:06, 2 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The main reason to have a naming convention is my observation of the page move discussions I mentioned in my message to you, Talk:Qamdo and Talk:Lhoka (Shannan) Prefecture, where there was no consensus to move and participants brought up the naming convention issue specifically. A naming convention would give editors guidance on what to do in situations like that. Also, having this naming convention would block other possible naming conventions, such as this one from 2006 which mandates the use of Tibetan Pinyin for everything.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 23:50, 2 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fair enough. I think most moves, either with or without consensus, can be uncontroversial. But in the cases you cite above, variation within the policy may be called for. I hope you'd agree a naming policy shouldn't present an end run on perfectly valid exceptions. For example (again IMHO) in the cases you cite above, the arguments for consistency and deference to official usage are particularly strong. The popular name should be a redirect, unless it has historical or secondary relevance that not only meets, but exceeds the notability of the official name, which is normally the object of deference. Otherwise, the popular name belongs probably in the first line and perhaps again in its own section within any particular article (e.g. Bombay, Burma; c.f. by notoriety, Saloth Sar). And in particular, I think the cases you cited indicate what may be the proper state for some articles: even consensus stalemates can be healthy indicators as issues that need more scholarly and authoritative research. Popular naming should be among the most readily cited. And please take this in good humor: as far as other quite ridiculous naming convention proposals, I think you can rest assured since your perfectly reasonable proposal has fared as it has for as long as it has. I know I'm to thank, and so's everyone else, for a lack of input. But I hope you can see that wacky ideas wouldn't really fare any better (pending since 2006!), and if they did, they could be undone. I still very much support your proposal. It puts forth useful guidelines for editors. Thanks for putting in the time and thought! JFHJr () 02:40, 3 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your message regarding Tibetan naming conventions. I am however sorry to inform that I am a non-Tibetan and thus have only generalized outsider knowledge about Tibet and have little understanding of specialized topics about Tibet. I am also presently busy in my personal life and thus cannot dedicate time to find information and references regarding this topic to establish my views which I could share. Contact me if you need views on basic Tibetan topics, I would be willing to help. Hopefully you would understand.Regards--UplinkAnsh (talk) 19:30, 2 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the message on my talk page regarding Tibetan naming convention. The article now presented is very comprehensive and covers most aspects. Much of the problem has come up because of PRC control. The issue has also created confusion and protests among various ethnic groups which have been clubbed together (for convenience or lack of knowledge is not known) under one group as has been done in the case of Mosuo, Norzu, Yi, Pumi and Tibetan people have all been clubbed together as Naxi People, which I have mentioned in my article on Lugu Lake. Do you wish to mention this aspect also in the naming convention? Congrats for all your efforts in coming out with Tibetan naming convention.--Nvvchar. 12:29, 3 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fortunately, I don't think clubbing together has been a major problem for Tibetans in the PRC (the Naxi example affects a comparatively very small number of Tibetans), although it's interesting that the PRC chose to combine almost all Tibetan-speaking populations into one official ethnic group ("Tibetan"/"Zàngzú"/"Bhöpa") instead of separating out an Amdowa mínzú, Kham mínzú, etc. Even the speakers of Rgyalronic languages, which is to say, people who don't speak Tibetan per se, are counted as Tibetans. This probably helps the Tibetans develop a sense of pan-Tibetan unity, to the contrary of what the PRC government might hope for.—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 03:50, 4 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

mang yul gung thang[edit]

I just did a stub at Mangyül Gungthang, and would appreciate it if you could give it the one over and fix any lacunae, or indeed wipe it out if it fails minimal standards. BestNishidani (talk) 21:09, 5 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Panchen Zuma"[edit]

Please do not create attack pages. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such material will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Quigley (talk) 22:33, 12 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nomination of Douglas Lorenz for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Douglas Lorenz is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Douglas Lorenz until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Herp Derp (talk) 19:52, 18 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll[edit]

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:17, 21 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi! I'm trying to understand how to use the Template:Bo that you have created back in 2006. Unfortunately, it seems that three editors (Benlisquare, Quigley and 虞海 have made several changes over the past month. As a result, the original template cannot be used anymore, and the "c for conventional phonetic spelling" has been totally removed.

Do you think it is possible to fix it again? Thanks,--Pseudois (talk) 08:51, 12 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry if this doesn't jibe with your conspiracy theory about me working with Benlisquare and 虞海 to deliberately break the template, but Nat Krause noted as early as 29 May 2006, one day after he created the template, that the "c" parameter doesn't work. I didn't touch the code - the only thing I did recently was to remove "c" from the usage instructions, because I noticed people (myself included) trying to use the "c" parameter, and being annoyed when it didn't work, or even worse - not noticing that it didn't, and having the conventional spelling disappear from the page because the template won't display it. Quigley (talk) 17:23, 12 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Conspiracy theory? It would be nice if you wouldn't put in other people's mouths what they haven't said. Read again what I wrote, it is perfectly neutral.
"the only thing I did recently was to remove "c" from the usage instructions". You apparently forget to add that you also removed an instruction explaining how to include the conventional spelling.
It is true that the "c" was non-functional. The problem is that now it has become impossible (at least for the average editor IT skills) to insert the conventional spelling inside the Tibetan name, as it used to be the case before all the edits that took place over the past month. Just look at the current template, the common English spelling for Drime Shenyen does not appear anymore as part of the Tibetan language.
Quigley, my interest is to have a well-functioning WP with high quality standards, not to discuss things that sound like personal attacks (see "your conspiracy theory"). If you could focus on the topics being discussed, that would help everybody.--Pseudois (talk) 16:21, 13 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Poll to determine support for move from Shishapangma to Xixabangma[edit]

You have been involved in the recent naming discussion at Talk:Xixabangma. There is a new poll to determine support for the move from Shishapangma to Xixabangma. If you are interested, please provide your opinion here.--Wikimedes (talk) 00:53, 26 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Populist Party of America has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The link provided does not mention any political party.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. (talk) 21:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

South Tibet/ Arunachal Pradesh / Arunachal Pradesh dispute / South Tibet dispute[edit]

As a participant to previous discussions at the South Tibet/ Arunachal Pradesh / Arunachal Pradesh dispute / South Tibet dispute talk page, you might be interested to participate to the following poll. Thanks, --Pseudois (talk) 04:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll[edit]

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:27, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

unidentified Tibetan languages[edit]

Please help if you can clarify the red links. I suspect that Dhromo may be Tromowa, for example. We should at least know whether they are covered by an ISO code (as a dialect of another language) or if they are unaccounted for. — kwami (talk) 02:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Buddhism-Horizontal has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:05, 14 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

splitting Tib Bsm[edit]

Hi, Nat. You've helped with the Tib Bsm article in the past. If you have a moment, would you like to check:

I've proposed something there that would involve work for me but would improve the Tib Bsm article immensely in my opinion. It's turned out to be contentious. I have something coming up in the new year that would make it hard for me to devote the time to this then, so it is now or never. Your thoughts would be most welcome. Moonsell (talk) 23:54, 17 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merge discussion for Zero interest-rate policy[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Zero interest-rate policy, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. greenrd (talk) 22:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

About Ikkyu page[edit]

Hi Nat Krause, could you check if the Ken'o description is correct?

Tib Bsm on Bon/ RfC[edit]

If you have a spare moment, can I draw your attention to the "Bon" and "RfC" sections on the Tib Bsm talk page of WP ( There's been a hassle going on there for over a month.

               Moonsell (talk) 10:27, 6 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposed merger of a page you started[edit]

Greetings. It has been proposed that the page Ram Janmabhoomi, which you started, be merged into the page Babri Masjid. The merger discussion may be found here. Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:05, 8 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Loren Miller (libertarian) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – S. Rich (talk) 05:10, 7 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Moving Burma to Myanmar - new 2015 poll[edit]

You participated in a Burma RM in the past so I'm informing you of another RM. I hope I didn't miss anyone. New move attempt of Burma>Myanmar Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:49, 7 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Quang Duc[edit]

Hello Nat Krause,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Quang Duc for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. Take a look at our suggestions for essential content in short articles to learn what should be included.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. SireWonton 17:38, 10 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Tibetan)/current proposal, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Tibetan)/current proposal and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Tibetan)/current proposal during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 21:53, 6 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Standard Mandarin Chinese language listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Standard Mandarin Chinese language. Since you had some involvement with the Standard Mandarin Chinese language redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 22:35, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles that you have been involved in editing—Luang Por Dhammajayo and Luang Por Dattajivo—have been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. S Khemadhammo (talk) 13:58, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

--S Khemadhammo (talk) 13:58, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Ummon. Since you had some involvement with the Ummon redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 05:14, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Garlho Poirig Ranggyongkül listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Garlho Poirig Ranggyongkül. Since you had some involvement with the Garlho Poirig Ranggyongkül redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 21:17, 3 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nomination of Gene Callahan (economist) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gene Callahan (economist) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gene Callahan (economist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. czar 05:01, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposed deletion of Buddhacarya[edit]

The article Buddhacarya has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Clearly fails WP:GNG. I can't find nothing from any of the searches.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 15:04, 6 March 2017 (UTC)