User:Joshua Jonathan/Appreciation

The appreciation is much appreciated. All the best to everyone, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:43, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

2011

October 2011 In response to one of my first edits, I received this: " Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Zen. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. SudoGhost 17:44, 25 October 2011 (UTC) Hi SudoGhost. I put an explanation on the talk-page. It's not my intention to atract attention from search-engines - I didn't even know thatb this might be possible. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 19:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC)"

		The Buddhism Barnstar
		For your much appreciated work in researching and improving Buddhism related articles, your edits are not going unnoticed. :) SudoGhost 07:30, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

2012

		The Modest Barnstar
		You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.7.19 (talk) 15:47, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I know I already gave you a barnstar above, but I've been seeing your name on my watchlist way too much, and not just for minor edits but for quality content. Your efforts on Buddhism-related articles are greatly appreciated, thank you. SudoGhost 03:48, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again! Though I hope I'm not overresponding, when I don't agree with other Wikipedians. I like the differences in opinion, they're stimulating. Joshua Jonathan (talk) 03:56, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

For being cool with the new user and discussing on the talk page , the article looks great now, good work. cheers ÐℬigXЯaɣ 18:51, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Would you like to have a biscuit with the tea? Joshua Jonathan (talk) 18:52, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

• DBigXray likes this. certainly Why not --ÐℬigXЯaɣ 18:58, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For all your work on Advaita Vedanta and Neo-Advaita. Lova Falk talk 14:30, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Spider

Mind in the center
Radiates to eight legs,
Creating a supreme web
To sift Tao.

— Deng Ming-Dao

I thought that you deserved something a bit extra for all of the amazing work you've done for the project. I've nominated you for a gift from the Wikimedia Foundation!

Lova Falk talk 08:33, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

2013

Just a little encouragement in case you need something really, really sweet... Lova Falk talk 14:43, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:34, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

		The Purple Barnstar
		For staying true to yourself and to Wikipedia in spite of recurrent harrassment. Lova Falk talk 06:40, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

2014

	The Citation Barnstar
	Very nice work on Slavic Vedism, in terms of citations and content. Bladesmulti (talk) 12:38, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm surprised, though; it may not exactly be what you expected. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:01, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Is it a bird? Is it a plane?

User talk:Joshua Jonathan/Archive 2014#Copied from Raj Malohtra. [Rajiv: Lets discuss the following issue after peole have read Indra's Net because this book is centered on the issue of Vedanta-Yoga unity and a defense of Swami Vivekananda on this controversy.] Hi Rajiv, I was trying to elaborate on Swami Vivekananda's contributions to yoga in Wikipedia, but I got the following response and my changes got reverted. The id that I use on Wiki is "Manipadmehum". Here is the link to my arguments with the editors of yoga - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yoga I have copied the sections below highlighting in bold and underlining those parts which are plan wrong to an average Hindu / Indian. But this is the line of thinking followed by western scholars in some prominent universities like White, University of california. There is also an embedded pdf in the section which explains the "thesis". It is also the first time I hear about Madame Blavatsky who seem to have influenced modern Hinduism and modern Buddhism. Vivekananda & Early Buddhist Texts Vivekananda is absolutely not a reliable source on Yoga. He was a Hindu nationalist, not a scholar. To insert a text like this has nothing to do with understanding the origins of Yoga, but with promoting Hindu-nationalism, and is plain WP:OR. See White (2011) p.20-21 for an assessment of Vivekananda: "Vivekananda’s rehabilitation of what he termed “rāja yoga” is exemplary, for its motives, its influences, and its content. A shrewd culture broker seeking a way to turn his countrymen away from practices he termed “kitchen religion,” Vivekananda seized upon the symbolic power of yoga as a genuinely Indian, yet non-sectarian, type of applied philosophy that could be wielded as a “unifying sign of the Indian nation . . . not only for national consumption but for consumption by the entire world” (Van der Veer 2001: 73–74). For Vivekananda, rāja yoga, or “classical yoga,” was the science of yoga taught in the Yoga Sūtra, a notion he took from none other than the Theosophist Madame Blavatsky, who had a strong Indian following in the late nineteenth century. Following his success in introducing rāja yoga to western audiences at the 1892 World Parliament of Religions at Chicago, Vivekananda remained in the United States for much of the next decade (he died in 1902), lecturing and writing on the YS. His quite idiosyncratic interpretations of this work were highly congenial to the religiosity of the period, which found expression in India mainly through the rationalist spirituality of Neo-Vedānta. So it was that Vivekananda defined rāja yoga as the supreme contemplative path to selfrealization, in which the self so realized was the supreme self, the absolute brahman or god-self within." Replies By RK [Rajiv: I agree 100% with this post. But what have people done about it since the same issue of wicki was discussed her months ago? Nothing. Some folks here resolved to gather and DO something. They put up a totally new entry on Rajiv Malhotra. It was deleted in a few days by the gatekeepers citing all sorts of reasons and lack of due process Our side lost stamina. Because it seemed contrived and not natural from our side the wicki folks toughened their stance against me. Change is supposed to be done gradualy with each change backed by evidence cited in footnotes and links. Hence the half-ass effort by our folks has backfired. So dont start something amateurish as its better to do nothing if you dont know what you are doing. This is not a game for inexperienced folks with passion/opinions but no competence. This entity "Joshua Jonathan" is editing anything that touches Hinduism and Buddhism. �I think it is an organization of multiple people and not a single entity. �If it is a single person, he has a full-time job to do this. �Probably a well-funded entity considering how many man-hours it invests editing and enforcing its views. �This entity "Joshua Jonathan" likes anti-Hindu scholars like Martha Nussbaum. �I conjecture that it may �be related to receive patronage of U of Chicago or some other AAR member. � Just go and take a look at Rajiv Malhotra wiki page and you will see that this entity inserted all kinds of text from references which are anti-RM and some are patently Indian Christian. �In fact, RM's wiki page is dominated by one highly spurious anti-RM reference. �No prizes for guessing - "Joshua Jonathan" is the most active editor of RM wiki page. �Compare that page to those of Wendy Doniger or Martha Nussbaum. �You can see the difference of night and day. � This entity will out-win you by sheer expense of time. �Wikipedia has been turned into a joke by these characters. � "Joshua Jonathan" claims to be a Buddhist but do not buy it. �It is on a mission to demolish anything labeled, or even remotely connected with the label, neo-Hinduism. Unless you are willing to spend considerable time waging an intellectual battle, forget it. By S Well, I have to agree that Vivekananda was not a professionally trained scholar. Rajiv: Based on whatever your criteria of "professional training" means, nor am I or you professionaly trained". Nor was Sri Ramakrishna, Sri Aurobindo, or any of our great acharyas. Nor Buddha, etc... Only Wendy Doniger, Witzel, Hawley, and their large lineages would be considered by you as "professionally trained". You have in effect bought into the coloniation of what makes a competent Hindu thinker. You assume that western style system accredition is what makes one trained. Therefore, all yogis in history are in effect rejected by you as none of them from Patanjali on had certification by western style institutions. Bladesmulti (talk) 12:01, 26 January 2014 (UTC) Thanks. Man, I'm really impressed by your courage - courage for possibly attracting the reactions of people who may be distracted by my actions, but also the courage to expose yourself to views that may challenge the worldview you have inherited. And no, I'm not "an organization of multiple people", I'm just a single person with an intense drive to understand this one insight that 'the "I" does not exist.' I do have an academic training (three times, actually), but that hardly makes me more professional than anybody else. I feel flattered that Rajiv (Malhotra) thinks I'm an organisation. Thanks. The best piece of advice I can give "his" people: read those damn books which you hate, so we can discuss them on a par. I'm even very willing to explain what I read in them, what understanding they give me. And a second "piece of advice": cherish the tradition, but seek out what's relevant for today, and what's not. Your worth and self-esteem is not in what "the" tradition says, but what you do with this tradition, and how it can help you to be a fully human being - one who can tolerate ambiguity and uncertainty, and stay close with another human being, especially when they are suffering. Thanks. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:44, 26 January 2014 (UTC) Actually that comment about you being an organization of multiple people is not from Rajiv Malhotra, but Rohan Kanji. The formatting here is a bit off. VictoriaGrayson (talk) 16:58, 26 January 2014 (UTC) Oaky, thanks. Revealing anyway. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:37, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, this was dumb. Shouldn't have done this...

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at Dharmacakra. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC) See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring# User:Devanampriya reported by User:Joshua Jonathan (Result: Both blocked) Okay, thanks for responding. I'll take better care in the future. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC) For those interested: I won't remove these block-messages. I was blocked, after all; people have a right to know this and read about it. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 21:19, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Our pet

You are our pet, Joshua.Hafspajen (talk) 16:13, 30 January 2014 (UTC) Ah! Zen in action! No Tara, but real warrior action! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 21:35, 30 January 2014 (UTC) Chocolate, at least once a day, keeps me happy! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:21, 30 January 2014 (UTC) Do you know anything about this practice? Hafspajen (talk) 20:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC) I only know about chickens and guinea pigs. They keep pretty nice in line when the food is appearing. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:25, 30 January 2014 (UTC) Some say this is an april fool. Zen meditation with blowing on a target with a blowgun instead of arrows. ... Hafspajen (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2014 (UTC) Well, there is Zen in the Art of Archery, but using a blowgun, that is something new. Hafspajen (talk) 21:47, 30 January 2014 (UTC) 'No, thanks, woede of angst Walging, afkeer, weerzin of aversie. Hafspajen (talk) 12:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC) Watching. For quick release recite, 3rd, 7th and 9th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita. If it is still there, then it is not dangerous. Hafspajen (talk) 05:07, 4 February 2014 (UTC) Eeeks! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC) It appears as the favourite pet of the Red Queen and serves as her champion for the Frabjous Day. When it comes to him confronting Alice, the Jabberwocky quotes "Ah, my old foe. We meet on the battlefield once again." When Alice states that they never met, the Jabberwocky quotes "Not you insignificant bearer. My ancient enemy, the Vorpal One." During the fight against the Jabberwocky, Alice manages to defeat it by using the Vorpal Sword to slice off the Jabberwocky's head causing the White Queen's side to win. The White Queen later uses the Jabberwocky's venom to make a potion that will get Alice home. Hafspajen (talk) 08:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Wiki-types

Original picture removed; Image:Fozzierowlf.jpg Those are buddies. Buddies work together. Original picture removed; File:Animal (Muppet).jpg There is the frustrated type who shows his teeth Original picture removed; File:Beaker (Muppet)-en.jpg There is the new begginer who does'n get a thing There is the is the frustrated type who bites Original picture removed; Dr. Bunsen Honeydew File:Dr. Bunsen Honeydew.jpg There is the Doctor with his PHDY, who knows everything and he will tell you all Original picture removed; File:Fozzie Bear.jpg There is the nice guy who will do his best, like Jonathan Then there are the Austalians who don't know how the rest of the world works Original picture removed; File:MissPiggy.jpg And there is Mr Pig who tries to hit everybody in the head with most convincing arguments Original picture removed; File:Kermit the Frog.jpg There is Kermit the Frog who is doing his best, but others don't agree, like Bladesees Original picture removed; File:Kermit the Frog.jpg There is Kermit the Frog who is doing his best, but others don't agree, like Bladesees Then there are the original editors they see everything upside down, and confuse everybody, like 74 And here is Doctor Dolittle. Original picture removed; File:ScooterMuppet.jpg There is the young genius - as he thinks of himself, in reality a Nerd or a Geek (very hard to convince them about anything.) There are the OLD wikipedians who knows best (and they usually do) Original picture removed; File:Statler and Waldorf.jpg There is the OLD wikipedian who knows best (and they usually do) The editor who has multiple a accounts and there are the editors who allways get their way by printing WP:This and WP:That ( often not quite true but it sounds good.) There are the editors who are draged to the ANI and spend a lot of time defending themselves somehow there. There are the completely Angelic editors, polite and loving like Sagaciousphil‎ and Yngvadottir (if is not busy) - (Very rare) And there are the picture cleaners who inconsiderately remove pictures and don't replace them with others, like XX And there are the editor who left or got banned by the banners And there are the editor who left or got banned by the banners There is the orphan editor who is alone and nobody cares for him or her Original picture removed; File:SamTheEagle.jpg And There Is The Eagle, who is ...a pompous as. They may know things or may not, but because they believe that they are better, smarter, or more important than other people, it really doesn't matter. They can be spotted at Christmas time. Although they have contact with a lot of editors, never get a Christmas greeting. Or a Happy New Year greating. One could mention probably names here but we leave this link Red. Here we are Donate them to you If you thought about copying it to a Wiki-essay. Hafspajen (talk) 09:52, 26 February 2014 (UTC) WP:WIKITYPE Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:04, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	Haha:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::..........................................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!................ Hafspajen (talk) 12:37, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:08, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Jah, Edgie and Holger practice for their new EP

	The Citation Barnstar
	http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdzPeMd5cR0 Hafspajen (talk) 18:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

	The Joshua John-Àthan Pet Award
	Verý good. Verá niče. VerźY tasťȳ. Hafspajen (talk) 13:16, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Brilliant! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:18, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Hafspajen (talk) 13:20, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

	The Civility Barnstar
	Whenever I see a new editor in some heated discussion, I noticed many times you personally asking them to cool down. Your sincere efforts in participating civilly in discussions is something others can get inspired by. Thank you for this and your valuable contributions. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 10:43, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. This one is really appreciated. It touches on an essential ideal of how I want to be. Thanks. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:16, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations! I saw several examples, where your kindness towards POV-pushing editors, obviously violating WIKIPEDIA policies, transcended my limited horizon. JimRenge (talk) 21:51, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

	The monthly Pet Award for Jonathan.
	A loving nice Pet Hafspajen (talk) 15:24, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Monthly?!? Man, what a good care, in these times of crisis and shortages! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	For your copyediting works in Indian caste related articles, you get this barnstar. Tito☸Dutta 05:15, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Highly appreciated, since it's a tough area to edit. Thank you very much! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:17, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Hello Joshua -- I am very new to Wikipedia. I am learning. It is interesting. Thinks for your help. TraceyWonder (talk) 05:48, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! You're welcome. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

;) Welcome!! TraceyWonder (talk) 08:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For taking the time to review all the claims on the talkpage of Koenraad Elst. Calypsomusic (talk) 09:48, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I already wanted to give you that earlier, but better late than never. --Calypsomusic (talk) 09:49, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'm happy that you appreaciate my efforts, even if I'm also critical of your edits. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:15, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	(talk page stalker) Keep up the good work that you are doing! Oh, and enjoy your holidays! =) Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 15:14, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - for the Barnstar, and for the good holiday-wishes! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:22, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		Barnstar of Diplomacy for your help in resolving disputes on Akhil Bharatiya Itihas Sankalan Yojana. Thank you. AmritasyaPutra✍ 01:47, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the barnstar! I'm really happy that my interference is appreciated. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:04, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

		The Indian Barnstar of National Merit
		I am truly feeling honored to give you this barnstar. Thanks for "everything" you have done to improve WikiProject India
		this WikiAward was given to Joshua Jonathan by Tito☸Dutta on 03:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Sincere thanks for this Barnstar. I'm really moved that my contributions are being appreciated, not just for the good of India and the need to live together with so many different groups, but also given the resistance those contributions have also met. Thank you, very much! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

"Bagatelized", I say! "Bagatelized"!

From Talk:Ego death#"Bagatelized", I say! "Bagatelized"!: Dan Merkur notes that the use of LSD in combination with Leary's manual often did not lead to liberating insights, but to horryfying bad trips. It also lead to fatal accidents, which were bagatelized by Alpert. Almost nobody knows what this word means. This is the ONLY Wikipedia article to use it. There is no online-dictionary definition for it. A Google search produces a very few other pages using the word, but again, no definition. (All false modesty aside, if I don't know an English word, it isn't in common use.) We shouldn't be using language that isn't in Wiktionary, and we definitely shouldn't be using words most people have never encountered in their lives! Furthermore, the sentence is poorly structured. Even with a more-familiar term in its place, there would still be a simpler and stronger way to say it. The passive voice is often a pretension, and rarely clear. "... which Alpert bagatelized" would be the way to go, if "bagatelized" was a word worth using (which it isn't). "The gun was carried by Frank" is never as good as "Frank carried the gun." Do feel free to let me know, if you know, what "bagatelized" means. I am certain there's an equally accurate way to say what needs to be said, without resorting to esoteric terms or neologisms. --Ben Culture 06:09, 30 October 2014 (UTC) Hey Ben. It's an mistranslation by me, I'm afraid, of the Dutch "bagatelliseren". Which means "to trivialize", "to belittle". Thanks! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:08, 30 October 2014 (UTC) I appreciate it, but really, thank YOU! I now know English is a secondary language for you. I wouldn't have known that if your User Page hadn't said so. I didn't know who put "bagatelized" in the article originally, anyway. I hope you didn't feel insulted by my above comment. I was just frustrated, because I like to think I have a good English vocabulary (if no other languages.) Thank you for clearing this up, and I think you picked a perfectly good substitute, "trivialized", which any English-speaker, native or otherwise, will surely know. You have really contributed a lot to this article! It's an interesting topic, but I don't think I've ever done so many edits to a single article, in such a short span of time. It is better to do a lot of small edits, as you have done, instead of a few big ones. I'm impressed and appreciate your work! Have a great day! →Ben Culture 21:18, 13 November 2014 (UTC) Thanks! See also Bagatelle (music). Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 21:53, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

enjoy the peace of mind
Thank you for quality articles on Buddhism, such as Zhongfeng Mingben, for quoting and explaining, for inspiring images and "enjoy the peace of mind", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! What a nice surprise! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:05, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Wonderful

From Talk:Subitism#Wonderful: I confess that my enthusiasm for Wikipedia is waning as a result of finding article after article on aspects of Buddhism that seem more like showpieces for the author's (or authors') esoteric wisdom rather than genuine attempts to reach a general public. What pleasure then to find this article, which lays out the ideas, follows allied threads in a coherent way, and generally presents comprehensible language rather than arcane terms. My only suggestion would be to wonder whether the impossible is possible: can the two views (sudden/gradual) be reconciled rather than merely left (as I believe here) alongside one another? At present the "sudden" and "gradual" schools seem incompatible. But I have read elsewhere that in practice, there wasn't this separation: that neither "school" believed in an extreme position and held only loosely to both: the "sudden" school admitted that the ground needed to be prepared, and the "gradual" school admitted that there could be a "moment" of enlightenment (** all my wording **). Of course the author(s) here cannot propose such a course. Let me see if I can find a reference to this effect. --User IP 24.244.23.226 19:40, 17 November 2014 (UTC) Hmm...not yet the reference I was looking for but the presentation here covers related ground. Unfortunately, the author seems to have a particular axe to grind (the authenticity of the Northern School) so it isn't as objective as one might wish.--User IP 24.244.23.21 20:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC) Thanks for your appreciation! And yes, you've got a point here: in real life the two stand along eacht other, or are actually mixed. "Sudden and gradual" is a wonderfull book on this topic. Actually, the problem may be at the root of Buddhism, as reflected in the difference between dhyana and insight. See Presectarian Buddhism#Dhyana and insight. According to vetter, the core practice of early Buddhism was dhyana; according to Schmithausen, and others, "liberating insight" was a later addition. See Majjhima Nikaya 36: after parcticing dhyana, the Buddha attains three knowledges, the third one being the four noble truths, which shows the path to liberation. On realising what the path is, he is liberated! That's weird, isn't it? Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:13, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Hi there! I want to thank you for your recent edits on the Nirvana article. Thanks to you, I think the article is in a much better place, with better organization and lots of new information. I was thinking of doing the same over the holidays, but I was pleasantly surprised to find that the article has been greatly modified since the last time I checked. Manoguru (talk) 17:09, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm glad it's being appreciated. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:50, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Though, I guess you mean Nirvana (Buddhism)? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:44, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

O yes, I meant the Nirvana in Buddhism article. You did a better job than I could have done anyway. :-) Manoguru (talk) 07:50, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Yhanks. I'm really happy that the efforts are appreciated. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:22, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

	The Civility Barnstar
	Much love to you, JJ. Iṣṭa Devata (talk) 01:53, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, though I'm not sure if I'm a good help for your position (what's in a name...) on Malasana. Anyway, I've been typing Sanskrit for the first time in my life. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:25, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

2015

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	The Teamwork Barnstar is awarded when several editors work together to improve an article. Thanks for your edits! Hafspajen (talk) 07:44, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Wow, great! Ehm... which article? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:48, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

• Ah, uh, this and that, all. Hafspajen (talk) 14:40, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Ah, that's nice. Thank you! It's a pleasure. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:47, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Talkpage Stalkers I need some WikiLove! Talk page stalkers: how many disputes, RfC's, and ANI-threads have we going on now? I need some WikiLove! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:50, 28 January 2015 (UTC) float Here's a toast to the host Of those who edit wiki near and far, To a friend we send a message, "keep the data up to par". We drink to those who wrote a lot of prose, And then they whacked a vandal several dozen blows. A toast to the host of those who boast, the Wikipedians! - From {{subst:Kautilya3}} To our HERO Wikipedian! The Civility Barnstar Can't find anything else for remaining patient under harassment. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:30, 28 January 2015 (UTC) Thanks, very much. And sigh... Thanks. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:32, 28 January 2015 (UTC) The Good Heart Barnstar You deserve it JimRenge (talk) 19:06, 28 January 2015 (UTC) "The Good Heart Barnstar"? I didn't even know that that one exists. Thanks, Jim. And everybody else around here; after all, we can work together, can't we? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:28, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

See here With the absence of power vested in me, I recognize you as a Thigle's reformed mind emanation. Naming as "Joshua Jonathan Thigle". May all wikipedia dharma names be purified as such to immortality. Omh Ah Hung. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 20:22, 14 March 2015 (UTC) Or purified by the chance to improve themselves, and show that human beings always have more sides to their personalities than one might expect. By the way, "Oh Ah Hung" is the same as "Om Am Hum" or "Om ah Hum"? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:25, 16 March 2015 (UTC) Could be ... I just went with what is natural, and sufficiently conventional. The elaborated 100 syllable mantra is intended to purify speech. Unfortunately, typos are my natural delusion so I fixed the Om. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 19:58, 16 March 2015 (UTC) See here The Resilient Barnstar Your patience, my friend, is beyond belief. Vanamonde93 (talk) 09:43, 16 March 2015 (UTC) "Beyond belief"... That's a nice twist of the tongue. It's not about belief, it's about practice. Beliefs may differ, the practice is the same - or, at least, should be - I think. Thanks, very much; these days have been rough. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:51, 16 March 2015 (UTC) :D I stand corrected. Your patience is beyond my current practice; with practice, I hope that I will be able to practice patience as you practice it. Cheers, Vanamonde93 (talk) 10:11, 16 March 2015 (UTC) See here This user pledges to return to Old Fashioned Wikipedian Values. Guess you earned this userbox. Hafspajen (talk) 20:45, 18 March 2015 (UTC) Thanks. It's highly appreciated, as you know. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:15, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Thanks for "brilliantly" copyediting my recent edit. Kudos! Kapil.xerox (talk) 02:00, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! "Brilliantly" means you like it, I hope? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:03, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		you are one of the Tireless Contributors ever.cheers.Eshwar.omTalk tome 23:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Eshwar. Nevertheless, let me use the opportunity to urge you to take serious those people who are concerned about your edits. I also think that your intentions are good, but that the edits themselves are often problematic. I think you're a nice guy, and I'd hate to see you offended by these criticisms. So, myadvice: take them serious, listen to those people, and consider what's best to do. Nobody's perfect; that's a painfull truth, but it applies to everyone. And perfect people don't become wise, I guess; only imperfect people do. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:26, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Just as an example: you thanked me 12 times for my edit at Kashmor Shaivism. How come? I was just going to search for info on "performal intelligence" (I seem to have a discrepancy between cognitive intelligence and performal intelligence); the topic may be of interest to you too. Take care, and all the best, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:31, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

	The Civility Barnstar
	Keeping articles factual and neutral despite the efforts of enthusiasts from various camps is a thankless task, sometimes - doubly so when you get accusations hurled at you. You're doing a good job, and I admire the way you keep your cool. bonadea contributions talk 15:01, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Bonadea thanks! Highly appreciated! Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 17:40, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Keep up the good work!

Seraphim of Sarov

"You cannot be too gentle, too kind. Shun even to appear harsh in your treatment of each other. Joy, radiant joy, streams from the face of him who gives and kindles joy in the heart of him who receives. All condemnation is from the devil. Never condemn each other. We condemn others only because we shun knowing ourselves. When we gaze at our own failings, we see such a swamp that nothing in another can equal it. That is why we turn away, and make much of the faults of others. Instead of condemning others, strive to reach inner peace. Keep silent, refrain from judgment. This will raise you above the deadly arrows of slander, insult and outrage and will shield your glowing hearts against all evil." Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 20:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Jayaguru-Shishya thanks! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:23, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

You are a Saint!

		The Civility Barnstar
		In recognition of your patient kind handling of mindless accusations. Kautilya3 (talk) 09:28, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

A saint or a sant? ;) Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:05, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean? There is no such word in my language :-) - Kautilya3 (talk) 12:12, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Got my first SPI today [1]. It is quite satisfying, I have to admit. It calls for a beer! - Kautilya3 (talk) 19:26, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

I have to agree that you earned this. John Carter (talk) 19:28, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, thanks John. @Kautilya3: you were accused again? - oh, now I see: you created an SPI against someone else! Quite a list... Did you see this one? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 21:09, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

NB: see this edit by the editor in question; I think it gives an explanation of his sensitivities. Heavy shit. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 21:20, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

enjoy the peace of mind
Thank you for quality articles on Buddhism, such as Zhongfeng Mingben, for quoting and explaining, for inspiring images and "enjoy the peace of mind", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

A year ago, you were recipient no. 1021 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:24, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Great! That's really nice. Thank you! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:29, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For you incredible effort and discernment in cleaning up the Agni page. Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 09:54, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Now it's time for the fine-tuning. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:08, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

2016

	The Original Barnstar
	Good job on researching and and bringing into the discussion current academic articles that come from actual academic journals and publications (Considering some of the things that get cited here in wiki, it's a relief that there are a few that actual do their homework and bring civil intelligent discussion into the subject) Kathanar (talk) 18:45, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Kathanar thanks! I don't remember that we interacted before, so it's a pleasant surprise that you found me. Wikipedia is a magical place sometimes, with people keeping eyes on each other without being aware of it. I'm happy that you like my edits. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:24, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	For work above and beyond the call of duty on article Spirituality! SH 16:44, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! The world needs reconciliation right now. Keep up the good spirit. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

2017

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for creating Well-being contributing factors! Dr.enh (talk) 04:02, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Dr.enh: thank you! That's very kind! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:20, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

2018

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For diligent work done on the confusing and politically hot topic of Veerashaivism/Lingayatism. Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 15:54, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

It all looks much clearer now. Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 15:55, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Iṣṭa Devatā thank you! Sincerely appreciated. All the best, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:05, 22 March 2018 (UTC)