@Gotitbro: Nothing such order is prescribed that Hindu first. Kinnara and Kinnaris, male and females are in Buddhism only, in hindu they are only kinnaras who are paradigmatic, thay themselves are husband ands and wives,they have no genders. see the Mahabharata quote in the article. No need to capitalize as they are common names.JaMongKut (talk) 04:37, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
- Do you know anything about precedent and standard order? Check out any article for an Abrahamic figure/entity, e.g. Solomon [Jewish, Christian, Islamic], or most other articles on Indian religions the order usually followed is Hindu, Buddhist, Jain no need to break from the norm here unless you are specific about POVPUSHing a particular religion here which is the case with most of your edits. The Mahabharata quote is expository and explanatory, the term kinnari very much exists in Hinduism. If you are not familiar with what paradigmatic means or what concepts in other religions are, please don't engage in needless diatribe and familiarize yourself with the topics first. You have been already reverted over your edit-warring here by other editors as well. And do you even read edit summaries or check out what was edited before reverting? I specifically lower capitalized the common name. I am afraid if you continue with such disruptive behavior (which has been noted by multiple experienced editors), you are only looking edit restrictions from the topics or a ban. Gotitbro (talk) 06:08, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Gotitbro: There's nothing such guidelines or any policies on Wikipedia as far I've read. Please understand. And also, I've created the talk for duscussion, but you edited it without the talk reaching to conclusion. Hence, let the discussion come to an end first then edit. Please, Do not start edit war. You are reverting yourself without a conclusion for discussion, but saying me instead to follow the policies.
- Please understand what precedent, norms and standard order are. Not everything is covered under guidelines, using that as a cop out for your POV is no excuse. And you are the one who needs to start a discussion and reach a consensus not other editors who notice your problematic edits. I am not going to cite the relevant policies to you again and again and if you continue to act oblivious to them this would need to taken up at WP:ANI. Gotitbro (talk) 06:57, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
- "Not everything is covered under guidelines", this what the excuse you are giving, for your no reason conflict or the point of order that make no sense, which you are doing with me. And you are reverting without consensus. Also you have also exceeded the limit of 3R rule.JaMongKut (talk) 08:10, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
- @JaMongKut: You have not addressed any of the concerns about the general WP:PRECEDENT on wiki of the Hindu-Buddhist order, male/female dichotomy in both the religions. Yet you insist on POVPUSHing your highly disruptive edits. Please don't. Neither are you following the basic guidelines of WP:BRD, WP:CONSENSUS and WP:STATUSQUO. Yet here you are accusing others of edit warring. Make yourself familiar with what Wikipedia is, than lecturing others about guidelines. You have been in dispute with multiple editors ever since your first edit, this does not reflect good on you nor are your edits going to be taken in good faith if you continue as such. Gotitbro (talk) 13:10, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
- I always try to asuume good faith, that's why I very few times call it POV pushing, although they were. Don't you think you are the one who is doing POV pushing, when I first edited the article to have the difference in two. When some other editors edited the article, Don't you think you were the one saying, Hinduism should be first and all other after that. I will suggest you to avoid such arguements that Hinduism should be first. You're not only wasting times in such arguements, but also disturbing other editors in their works. Also not giving the proper reason for your reason, but reverting everytime. I've also many time asked you to please discuss on the article not on editors. If you still find, Your POV pushing is right , I'll ask you to let's have consensus in Administrator's noticeboard and will ask them for is there any such policy or at least generalization or al least this POV is valid.
Obviously the statemnt The Kinnara and Kinaari are most beloved mythological creatures in Buddhist tradtions" doesn't mean Kinnaris are npot in Hinduism. The statement only conveys in Buddhist traditions they are most beloved than other mythological creatures. It only shows their status in Buddhism, the statement has to do nothing with Hinduism. JaMongKut (talk) 04:17, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
.svg){kind=small}
_name_of_the_God_as_per_the_Vedas.svg){kind=small}
,_early_1900s,_Central_Africa,_Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo,_Pende_people,_wood,_fiber_-_Cleveland_Museum_of_Art_-_DSC08700.JPG){kind=small}