vikipeediya:prushth hataane hetu charcha/lekh/devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta


naamaankan

devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta (|vaarta|itihaas|kadiyaaain|dhyaan rakhein|laug)

devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta -vikipeediya -wikipedia ke liye Google parinaam: khoj samaachaar pustak vidvaan


naamaankan ke liye kaaran:

California vishvavidyaalaya, Berkeley ki website par "vigyaan kya naheen hai" lekh dekhiye. ismein "Science doesn't make aesthetic judgments" anuchhed padhiye. ismein likha hai ki "Science can reveal the frequency of a G-flat and how our eyes relay information about color to our brains, but science cannot tell us whether a Beethoven symphony, a Kabuki performance, or a Jackson Pollock painting is beautiful or dreadful.". isi prakaar vigyaan naheen bata sakta ki hindi bhaasha jyaada achhi hai ya angreji. yeh ek vaigyaanik prashn naheen hai.

isliye "devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta" naam arthaheen hai. yeh kaha ja sakta hai ki hindi bhaasha ke angreji bhaasha ki tulana mein bahut laabh hain. par yeh naheen kaha ja sakta ki hindi bhaasha vaigyaanik drushti mein jyaada achhi hai kyonki yeh ek vaigyaanik prashn naheen hai. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 23:38, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg virodh:achhe-khaase lekh ko naheen hataana chaahiye. kshama kare gaurav ji kintu aapko kuchh glatafhami ho gayi hai.

1. aapne vigyaan shabd ke liye angreji Science shabd ki vyaakhya di hai. ye vyaakhya sirf Science shabd ke liye hai. maana ki bhaarateeya bhaashaao mein Science ke liye vigyaan shabd ka prayog hota hai kintu vigyaan shabd ka arth aur bhaasha mein hote prayog Science shabd ki vyaakhya jitna simit naheen hai.

  • vigyaan shabd mool sanskrut shabd hai aur Science shabd evam jees bhaasha ka ye shabd hai vah bhaasha ka janm bhi naheen hua tha tab se prayog mein hai. praacheen bhaarateeya darshanashaastro aur shreemad Bhagwad geeta mein bhi vigyaan shabd ka prayog hua hai.
  • vigyaan shabd ka ek arth hai anubhav se mila gyaan. ye hisaab se Science ke liye vigyaan shabd upayog mein hai.
  • bhaashaavijnyaaan, aadhyaatm vigyaan, jeevavijnyaaan, manovijnyaaan aadi svatantr vishay he. bhaashaavijnyaaan ke baare mein padhne se aapko pata chal jaaega. apitu devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta shabd arthaheen aur vigyaan shabd ke glat upayogavaala sheershak naheen hai.
  • pruthveechandr charitra mein 64 prakaar ke vigyaan ka varnan hai. nrutya, chitr, kavit, vaaditr, mantra, yantr ityaadi.

2. hindi vikipeediya ki prushth hataane ki kisi bhi neeti ke tahat inko hataaya naheen ja sakta. -yogesh kaveeshvar (vaarta) 02:54, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg tippani @YmKavishwar: 1) agar yahaaain hindi bhaasha ka vigyaan shabd prayog kiya gaya hai, to yeh spasht kiya jaana chaahiye. varana koi ise angreji bhaasha ka science shabd samajh sakta hai.
2) angreji bhaasha mein science shabd ki ek vishesh paribhaasha hai. kisi vishay ko science kahalaae jaane ke liye use scientific method ka prayog karna jaruri (scientific method shabd ki bhi ek vishesh paribhaasha hai). agar koi vishay science hone ka daava karta hai par scientific method ka prayog naheen karta to use pseudoscience kaha jaata hai. udaaharan ke liye "jyotish vidya" ek pseudoscience hai.
3) is lekh ke sheershak se yeh prateet hota hai ki scientists maanate hain ki devanaagari bahut achhi hai. choonki ye kisi "international peer-reviewed scientific journal" mein prakaashit naheen hua hai, isliye scientists ye naheen maanate hain. is bhraanti ko hataane ke liye yeh spasht karna bahut jaruri hai ki yahaaain hindi ke vigyaan shabd ke baare mein baat ki ja rahi hai, angreji ke shabd science ke baare mein naheen. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 15:16, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
@satyam mishr: aur @sanjeev Kumar: ji, krupaya apni rai deejiye. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 16:52, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
gaurav ji, mujhe to aisa prateet naheen hua. aap Science shabd ke najariye se dekh rahe hai usaki vajah se aapko aisa lagta hai. aur ye lekh bhaashaavijnyaaan ke ek bhaag ka mukhya lekh hai. bhaashaavijnyaaan mein vishv ki sabhi lipi ki tulana mein devanaagari lipi sab se vaigyaanik hai. unki tathyaatmak saamagri ke lekh mein hai. aap pratham tippani mein angreji ki lipi ke saath tulana kar rahe the ye bhi bhram hai. lekh mein koi tulana naheen ki gayi hai. aur computer ki bhaasha mein devanaagari lipi sab se jyaada sateek hai ye bhi ek tathya hai. inki vajah se bhi inhe vaigyaanik lipi maana jaata hai aur ye baat pe vaigyaanik sahamat bhi hai. yahaaain, yahaaain, yahaaain aur [1] ye bhi dekhein jahaan devanaagari vaigyaanik hai ye spasht likha hai. aur bhi kai sandarbh mileinje.-yogesh kaveeshvar (vaarta) 17:48, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
@YmKavishwar: aapne kaha hai : "bhaashaavijnyaaan mein vishv ki sabhi lipi ki tulana mein devanaagari lipi sab se vaigyaanik hai." aur "computer ki bhaasha mein devanaagari lipi sab se jyaada sateek hai ye bhi ek tathya hai." kya aap in baaton ke liye ek vishvasaneeya srot pradaan kar sakte hain.
@YmKavishwar: aapne oopar 3 srot diye hain. un mein se do blog hain aur teesara ek akhavaar. ye vishvasaneeya naheen hain. main bhi ek blog bana ke usamein kuchh bhi likh sakta hooain. krupaya kisi peer-reviewed scientific journal ko sandarbhit karein. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 18:26, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
aapka chautha srot vikibuks se hai. chooainki vikipeediya swayam kehti hai ki vo bharosemand srot naheen hai, isliye ise sandarbhit karke bhi ham kuchh daava naheen kar sakte hain. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 20:13, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
@Gauravsood0289: gaurav sood ji, yadi is lekh mein likhi baat (daava) se aap sahamat naheen hain to use uddhrut keejiye. yadi aap is lekh ke naam se sahamat naheen hain to use badalne ke liye kahiye. yadi aap kehna chaahate hain ki ismein sandarbh naheen hain to vah likhiye. yadi aap yeh kehna chaahate hain ki yeh lekh ullekhaneeya naheen hai to yeh likhiye ki yeh lekh ullekhaneeya naheen hai. lekin aapne is lekh ko hataane ka sujhaav diya hai.
aapne California vishvavidyaalaya ki site par likhi baat ka jo uddharan diya hai vah tulana yahaaain bilkul naheen laagoo naheen hoti. yahaaain 'hava mein baat' naheen ki gayi hai. yahaaain un kaaranon ko bataaya gaya hai jisse lipi mein 'vaijnyaaanikta' aati hai aur un par devanaagari ko khara utarate dikhaaya gaya hai. yadi aapko is baat par charcha karni ho ki 'lipi ki vaijnyaaanikta' ki baat hi betuki (aibsard) hai to saaf-saaf yeh baat kahiye, jisse isi baat par charcha ko kendrit kiya jaaya.--anunaad Singh (vaarta) 04:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
dhanyavaad anunaad ji :-)
suprabhaat gauravaji,
  1. blaaaig ke vishay mein aapki baat sahi hai. ye meri glati hai. kintu blaaaig mein di gayi jaankaari sarvatha glat hi hoti hai aisa bhi naheen hai.
  2. akhbaar vishvasaneeya aur maanya sandarbh mein gina jaata hai.
  3. aapne vikipeediya maanya sandarbh naheen hai aisa bataaya vah vikibuks ke liye naheen hai. kyonki books ka prakaashan vikipeediyaane naheen kisi aur ne kiya hai aur books ki ginti maanya sandarbh mein hoti hai. yahaaain pe sandarbh vah book hai.
  4. yahaaain par prabha saakshi pe Dr. jubaida haashim mulla ka lekh jismein muda number-4 mein ye lipi vaigyaanik hai aisa spasht likha hai.
  5. abhivyakti.oaaraji par vijyakumaar malhotra ka lekh jismein spasht likha hai ki devanaagari vaigyaanik hai aur computer ke liye sabse sateek hai.
  6. hindi media.in par daaai° Amrish sinha ka lekh
  7. E duniya par po° gireeshvar mishr ka lekh jees mein likha hai ki devanaagari adhik vaigyaanik hai.
  8. hindi jeeke treek par lekh

-yogesh kaveeshvar (vaarta)

@anunaad Singh: ji, aapne sahi kaha. hamein charcha ko keindrit karna chaahiye.

  • mujhe "lipi ki vaijnyaaanikta" sheershak betuka lagta hai. usaka kaaran yeh ho sakta hai ki ham donon vigyaan shabd ki alag paribhaasha prayog kar rahe hon. krupaya spasht karein ke aapke anusaar vigyaan ka arth science hai (science aur scientific method ki ek unambiguous paribhaasha hai) ya jo yogesh kaveeshvar ji ne kaha.
  • is lekh ke sheershak ye ho sakte hain:
  1. Linguistic analysis of Devnagari script,
  2. Scientific analysis of Devnagari script,
  3. Devnagari script is scientific,
  4. The scientificness of Devnagari script.
    mujhe pehle do sheershakon se koi aapatti naheen hai. par mujhe teesara aur chautha sheershak arthaheen lagta hai. krupaya in sheershakon ke baare mein apni rai dein. agar matabhed ismein hai to charcha is par keindrit kar sakte hain.

not: meri aapatti keval devanaagari se naheen hai. main "roman lipi ki vaijnyaaanikta" par bhi yahi aapatti udhaaunga.
@YmKavishwar: ji, anunaad Singh ji ka javaab aane ke baad aapko javaab deta hooain. charcha karne se pehle moolabhoot baatein spasht hona jaruri hai. dhanyavaad. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 13:40, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

oopar hui charcha padhne ke baad mere man mein bhi pehla sanshaya yahi hai ki kya bhaasha vigyaan mein koi aise anusandhaan hue hain jinmein kisi lipi ko vaigyaanik (scientific) athva avaijnyaaanik; ya ek doosare ki tulana mein adhik vaigyaanik aur kam vaigyaanik saabit karne ki baat ki gayi ho. jahaaain tak meri jaankaari hai bhaasha vigyaan vaale kuchh aadhaaron par lipi ke achhi hone athva kharaabiyon se yukt hone ki baat karte hain parantu ve iske liye "vaigyaanik" aur "sabse adhik vaigyaanik" jaise shabdon ka istemaal karte hai athva naheen, yeh mujhe naheen maaloom. agar bhaasha vigyaan ke anusandhaanon ke sroton se kuchh aise sandarbh mil sakein jahaaain kisi lipi ke vaigyaanik (scientific) hone ki baat ki gayi ho to krupaya unhein uddhrut karein. --styam mishr baatcheet 16:15, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
@satyam mishr: dhanyavaad satyam mishr ji. aapne mere man ki baat kah di. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 16:24, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
@YmKavishwar:, @anunaad Singh: aur @satyam mishr: ji, main ek aur baat kehna chaahooainga. yeh samajhna bahut jaruri hai ki vaigyaanik daavon ke liye kin sroton ko bharosemand maana ja sakta hai. iske liye vikipeediya ke ye dishaanirdesh padhiye: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (natural sciences) --gaurav sood (vaarta) 17:17, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
main gaurav ji se sahamat hooain. yahaaain ham akhbaar ya blog jaise sandarbhon par aashrit hokar sahi faisala naheen kar sakte. hamaare sandarbhon koisase zyaada majboot hona chaahiye. agar kisi bhaashiki ke journal ya pustak ityaadi ka sandarbh naheen hai to ham is tarah ki klem par yakeen naheen kar sakte.--styam mishr baatcheet 18:43, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
@satyam mishr: ji, upar maine jo sandarbh diye hai usamein pustak aur bhaashaavid ke sandarbh bhi hai. gugal parinaam bhi yahi bataate hai ki devanaagari lipi vaigyaanik hai aise anek gugal parinaam mil rahe hai.
@Gauravsood0289: ji, mera virodh prushth hataane se hai aur ye prushth bhi hahech charcha ke liye hai. aapne jis vishay par charcha kendrit ki hai ye prakaar ki charcha ke liye lekh ke vaarta prushth par charcha kar sakte hai. anunaad ji ko charcha mein avashya saamil kare. unka ye vishay mein gyaan ham sab se adhik hai.-yogesh kaveeshvar (vaarta) 02:44, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
gaurav ji, yahaaain Science par charcha naheen ho rahi hai. Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (natural sciences) sirf Science ke liye hai.-yogesh kaveeshvar (vaarta)
@Gauravsood0289, anunaad Singh, aur satyam mishr: ji, bhaashaavijnyaaan vishay bhaasha aur lipi ki vaijnyaaanikta tay karne ka vishay hai. bhaashaavijnyaaan ka astitv hi bhaasha ki vaijnyaaanikta hoti hai ye baat ka pramaan hai. apitu ye sab charcha arthaheen hai. main charcha samaapt karta hooain.-yogesh kaveeshvar (vaarta) 03:49, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
yogesh kaveeshvar ji charcha lekh hataane ke baare mein hi ho rahi hai aur gaurav ji ka prashn (aur mera sanshaya bhi) lekh ke moolabhoot vishay par hi hai ki kya aisi koi cheej hoti bhi hai? aapne jo sandarbh diye -
  • 1 mein "is lipi ko lipi vijnyaon aur bhaasha vaigyaaniko ne sansaar ki sarvaadhik vaigyaanik lipi maana hai." agar aisa hai to un lipi vidon ke vaktavya bhi to kaheen maujood honge?
  • 2 mein do vaakya hain - "yeh lipi apne yug ki sarvaadhik vaigyaanik aur aadarsh lipi thi." aur ""naasa" (NASA) ke prasiddh Amreeki vaigyaanik rik brigj ki yeh dhaarana hai ki devanaagari lipi mein likhi jaane waali sanskrut bhaasha computer program ki drushti se aadarsh bhaasha hai. iska kaaran kadaachit yahi hai ki yeh atyant sootrabaddh (codified) bhaasha hai." pata naheen ye bhaashaavid hain ya naheen aur lipi ke baare mein baat kar rahe hain athva bhaasha ke.
  • 3 - sheershak "kaheen chalan na ban jaae roman lipi mein hindi ka likha jaana" hi bata raha hai ki lekh tatasth hokar naheen likha gaya hai.
  • 4 - pehle do vaakya padhiye -"hindi ko roman lipi mein apnaane ka prastaav ek bade shadyantr ka hissa hai. iska pratikaar aavashyak hai." yeh academic lekhan ki bhaasha naheen hai.
  • 5 kisi bhaasha vid ne naheen likha anyatha ve "bhaarateeya bhaashaaon ke kisi bhi shabd ya dhvani ko devanaagari lipi mein jyon ka tyon likha ja sakta hai" jaisi galati na karte.
aapki aakhiri baat ke liye ek udaaharan dena chaahooainga: gurutvaakarshan ka niyam seb ke ped se tootakar jameen par girne ki "vaigyaanik vyaakhya" upalabdh karaata hai, is aadhaar par ham yeh naheen kah sakte seb ka ped se tootakar jameen par girna ek "vaigyaanik ghatna" hai. --styam mishr baatcheet 06:58, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
@YmKavishwar: ji, kailiforniya vishvavidyaalaya, loss enjeles ki website par bhaashaavijnyaaan ki yeh paribhaasha dekhiye. iska anuvaad hai "bhaashaavijnyaaan bhaasha ke vaigyaanik adhyayan ko kehte hain". yahaaain adhyayan ko vaigyaanik kaha ja raha hai, bhaasha ko naheen. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 09:17, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
@satyam mishr:, @YmKavishwar: yogesh ji ke saath moolabhoot matabhed vigyaan ki paribhaasha ke baare mein hai. ye kah rahe hain ki hindi shabd vigyaan ka arth science naheen hai, unke anusaar vigyaan ka arth "anubhav se mila gyaan" hai . isliye unke anusaar vigyaan shabd ka prayog Science shabd ki vyaakhya jitna simit naheen hai. krupaya iske baare mein apni rai dein. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 09:59, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
mujhe naheen pata hindi mein vigyaan ka aisa koi arth hota hai athva naheen. aamtaur par "science" ke arth mein hi "vigyaan" shabd ka prayog hote dekha hai; haaain darshan wala "vigyaan" avashya ek alag arth mein prayukt hota hai. lekh padhne wala paathak bhi mujhe lagta hai yahaaain prayukt vigyaan shabd ko science ka hi samaanaarthi samajhega. vaise bhi is lekh ke pehle vaakya mein hi is "vaijnyaaanikta" ko "bhaasha vigyaan" par aadhaarit bataaya gaya hai. kam se kam meri jaankaari mein hamaare yahaaain "bhaasha vigyaan" to kisi alag arth mein naheen hi viksit ho paaya hai.
mainne jitna prayaas kiya usamein mujhe kisi "lipi ki vaijnyaaanikta" jaisa koi vishvasaneeya pramaan naheen mila. agar is lekh ko bachaane ke liye koi aur sadasya aise srot naheen upalabdh karaate to mera samarthan ise hataane ke liye hai.--styam mishr baatcheet 19:11, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
gaurav sood ji ne oopar maana hai ki hamein is lekh ko hataane ke oopar naheen balki sheershak ki sateekata par kendrit karna chaahiye. isaliye main isi par apne vichaar likh raha hooain.
bhaasha mein prayog karte samay 'vigyaan' aur 'vaijnyaaanikta' ka prayog kaafi unmukt bhaav se hota hai. mote taur par kisi science (aur vigyaan ) ka arth kisi vishay ke kramabaddh (sistemaitik) adhyayan se liya jaata hai. samaajavijnyaaan, praakrutik vigyaan, aayurvigyaan, bhaashaavijnyaaan, aadi shabd iske udaaharan hain. ek doosare arth mein un sabhi 'baaton' ko vigyaan kaha jaata hai kise koi bhi, kaheen bhi, kabhi bhi kare to vahi parinaam mile. udaaharan ke roop mein 'jal shoonya degree celcius par thos ban jaata hai.' - yeh ek vaigyaanik kathan hai kyonki koi bhi jal ka taapamaan ghataayega to use shoonya degree par hi jal thos hote hue milega, 15 degree celcius par naheen.
ab baat 'devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta' par. is lekh mein devanaagari ka 'vaigyaanik adhyayan' to kiya hi gaya hai, yeh dikhaane ki bhi koshish ki gayi hai ki devanaagari ki design ya kramavikaas (ivolooshan) 'vijnyaaanasammat' rahi hai. yahaaain 'saundaryashaastreeya' (esthetik) nirnaya naheen diye gaye hain jaisa ki gaurav sood ji dvaara diye gaye sandarbhon mein aaya hai.(kutte ka muainh aadmi ke munh se sundar hota hai - yeh esthetik kathan hai ; kintu kutte ka muainh choohe ke muainh se bada hota hai- yeh tathyaatmak kathan hai.) yahaaain bhi adhikaansh cheejein tathyaatmak hain. jab kaha jaata hai ki 'roman sankhya-paddhati, bhaarateeyon dvaara viksit sankhya paddhati ke saamane pangu saabit hui' - to ismein bhaarateeya sankhyaapaddhati ki 'vaijnyaaanikta' ki hi baat ki jaati hai. jab koi kehta hai ki pul-k aur pul kh mein samaan maatra mein saamagri lagi hai kintu pul-kh, pul-k se das guna adhik bhaar le sakta hai to vah pul-kh ki 'vijnyaaanasammat' design ki hi baat kar raha hota hai, bhale hi is kathan mein 'vigyaan' shabd na aaya ho.
mere kehne ka saaraansh yeh hai ki yahaaain 'vaijnyaaanikta' ko sankeern arth mein na liya jaaya. paathak bhi use vistrut arth mein hi leinge (jaisa ki satyam mishr ji ne kaha bhi hai.)--anunaad Singh (vaarta) 04:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
@anunaad Singh: ji, kya aap vikipeediya ke in dishaanirdeshon ke tahat koi sandharbh de sakte hain jismein kisi lipi ki vaijnyaaanikta ke baare mein baat ki gayi ho (krupaya dhyaan rakhein ki yahi shabd prayog kiye gaye hon). agar ham aisa koi sandharbh naheen dhoondh sakte, to "devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta" vaakyaansh ka prayog karna ek mool shodh hai (koi to kaaran hoga ki bhaashaavijnyaaani iska prayog naheen kar rahe hain). --gaurav sood (vaarta) 09:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
@anunaad Singh: ji, mujhe lekh ke sheershak hi naheen, saamagri se bhi aapatti hai. ismein likhi bahut si baaton par mujhe vishvaas naheen hota. agar aap inhein vikipeediya ke in dishaanirdeshon ke tahat sandarbhit kar dete hain, to main naamaankan vaapis le loonga. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 10:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
@Gauravsood0289: |gaurav sood ji, lagta hai aap tay naheen kar pa rahe hain ki aapko kis baat par aapatti hai. aise mein charcha varshon tak chalegi aur kabhi samaapt naheen ho sakti. aapne jin dishaanirdeshon ke tahat sandarbh maange hain usase lagta hai ki aap lipi ke is prashn ko 'nechural saainses' ke andar maanate hain. lekin main naheen maanata. unhone shuroo mein hi bade spasht shabdon mein likha hai ki us prusht par likhi baaton ka sambandh keval praakrutik vijnyaaanon tak hi seemit hai. jahaaain tak aapko ismein likhi bahut si baaton par vishvaas na hone ki baat hai, agar kisi bhi baat par kisi ko aapatti hai to vah uske liye sandarbh maang sakta hai, us baat ke viruddh sandarbh de sakta hai, uske shabdon mein parivartan kar sakta hai. aap sandarbh maangiye aur milega, kintu yeh kehna theek naheen hoga ki sandarbh naheen hai isaliye is lekh ko hata diya jaaya.
kya is lekh ke sheershak mein prayukt 'vaijnyaaanikta' par ab bhi aapko aapatti hai? --anunaad Singh (vaarta) 12:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
@anunaad Singh: ji,
1) main maanata hooain ki ye nechural science naheen hai, aur ye bhi maanata hooain ki vigyaan ki anya shaakhaaon ki tulana mein nechural science jyaada rigorous hoti hai, aur anya shaakhaaon mein itni rigorous verification ki jarurat naheen hoti. par fir bhi, vigyaan ke har vishay mein kuchh Academic journal to hote hi hain, jo original research aur review articles prakaashit karte hain. main inheen se sandarbh maang raha hooain (vikhyaat journal mein prakaashit review articles behtar raheinge).
2) krupaya sheershak mein prayukt 'vaijnyaaanikta' ke liye bhi kisi aise hi journal se sandarbh dein (main bas yeh sunishchit karna chaahata hooain ki kisi academic journal mein bhi "devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta" ke baare mein baat ki gayi hai).
3) main lekh mein inline tags jod deta hooain. iske liye kuchh samay dein. chooainki hindi vikipeediya mein angreji vikipeediya ke sabhi inline tags import naheen kiye gaye hain, mujhe "is prushth" par diye gaye kuchh tags ko import karne padeinge. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 14:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
4)aapne kaha "aap sandarbh maangiye aur milega, kintu yeh kehna theek naheen hoga ki sandarbh naheen hai isaliye is lekh ko hata diya jaaya." iske uttar mein main satyam ji ki ye tippani uddhrut karooainga "charcha lekh hataane ke baare mein hi ho rahi hai aur gaurav ji ka prashn (aur mera sanshaya bhi) lekh ke moolabhoot vishay par hi hai ki kya aisi koi cheej hoti bhi hai?" --gaurav sood (vaarta) 14:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
@Gauravsood0289: gaurav sood ji, main Bhaarat mein prasaarit kam se ek patrika (lipi vishyak patrika) ke pachaason lekhon mein 'devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta' par bhaashaavaijnyaaanikon ke vichaar padha hooain aur usaka uddharan de sakta hooain. kintu mujhe pata hai ki aap use 'ripyooted journal' naheen maaneinge. to aapse hi jaanana chaahata hooain ki aap lipi ke kshetr mein prachalit kinhi do jarnalon ke naam bataayein aur yeh bhi bataayein ki ve 'ripyooted' kyon hain? ya unako ripyuted hone ka certificate kisne diya hai.
aapne mujhe jahaaain bheja tha, aap bhi maanate hain vah sahi jagah naheen hai. yadi unako ek hi laathi se sabko haankana hota to itni spashtata se naheen kehte ki is lekh ka skop yeh-yeh hai. at: aap fir se sahi jagah bataaiye jahaaain jaakar dekha ja sake.
yahaaain par prayukt 'vaijnyaaanikta' par yadi aap ab bhi santusht naheen hain to is par alag se charcha kar li jaaya. --anunaad Singh (vaarta) 16:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
@anunaad Singh: ji,
1) kya aap jaante hain ki duniya ki 27 pratishat fake scientific journals Bhaarat mein prakaashit hoti hain. iske liye yeh, yeh, yeh aur yeh padhiye.
2) isliye journal kam se kam antararaashtreeya to honi hi chaahiye. agar daava sach hai, to use antararaashtreeya journal mein chhapavaane mein kya samasya hai.
3) kisi journal ki reputeshan ke liye aam taur par jarnals ke impact factors ki tulana ki jaati hai. Times Higher Education par impact factors par aadhaarit yeh ek soochi hai. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 17:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
@anunaad Singh: ji, ek aur baat. Distinguishing Scholarly from Non-Scholarly Periodicals: A Checklist of Criteria lekh padhiye. iska bhi dhyaan rakhana jaruri hai ki srot Scholarly (peer-reviewed) hon. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 19:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
@anunaad Singh: ji, aapne mujhe is sheershak mein prayukt 'vaijnyaaanikta' par alag sthaan par charcha karne ke liye aamantrit kiya hai. mujhe lagta hai ki hamaara mool matabhed yeh naheen hai. hamaara mool matabhed sandarbhon ki vishvasaneeyata ke baare mein hai. isliye agar alag sthaan par charcha karni hai, to sandarbhon ki vishvasaneeyata ke baare mein karni chaahiye. main iska svaagat karta hooain.
main is shanivaar shaam tak thoda vyast rahooainga. ye nai charcha uske baad kar sakte hain. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 00:25, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
27 pratishat jaali journal Bhaarat ke hain to baaki 63 pratishat jaali journal to 'antararaashtreeya' hi hain jismein American journal bhi hain. khair pehle aap aap kinheen do 'ripyuted antararaashtreeya peear reevyood jarnals' ke naam bataayein jo lipi ke kshetr mein aartikls chhaapatein hain. 'vaijnyaaanikta' ke baare mein main yeh jaanana chaahata tha ki aapke dvaara baar-baar yahaaain 'vaigyaanik vidhi' ka jikr karna kitna praasangik hai. aapko to pata hi hoga ki vigyaan ke naam par paulitiks bhi khoob hoti hai. --anunaad Singh (vaarta) 05:22, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
yeh bhi bataayein ki aap jin prushthon ko padhne ki salaah de rahe hain (jaise, yeh lekh) unke sandarbh kya hain. unhein kisne likha hai? ve kiske vichaar hain? unhein kis aadhaar par 'maanak' maan liya jaaya? isi tarah, times haayar ejookeshan ne jo impaikt factor chhaapa hai, usaka aadhaar kya hai? unhone kitne jarnalon (aur, kis-kis desh ke jarnalon) ko adhyayan mein sthaan diya hai?)--anunaad Singh (vaarta) 05:38, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
itni saari charcha ke baad aap kah rahe hain ki 'apna mool matabhed sandarbhon ki vishvasaneeyata ke baare mein hai.' aap kin sandarbhon ki baat kar rahe hain? aapne jab ise hataane ke liye naamaankit kiya tha tab ismein koi sandarbh hi naheen the. (ab bhi naheen hain). --anunaad Singh (vaarta) 05:43, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
@anunaad Singh: ji,
1) mere kathan "hamaara mool matabhed sandarbhon ki vishvasaneeyata ke baare mein hai" ka arth tha ki "hamaara mool matabhed is par hai ki kaun si journal reputed hai aur kaun si naheen". agar main arth spasht naheen kar paaya to maafi chaahata hooain. agar aap iske baare mein kaheen aur charcha chaahate hain, to main taiyaar hooain.
2) krupaya impact factor ke baare mein padh lein. academic samudaaya mein ise jarnals ka relative importance tay karne ke liye prayog kiya jaata hai. Times Higher Education mein chhapi ranking impact factor par aadhaarit hai. agar aapko lagta hai ki impact factor ek achha measure naheen hai, to aap apni is Original Research ko pehle kaheen aur chhapvaaie. agar academic samudaaya impact factor ka prayog karna chhod deta hai, to ham bhi ise prayog naheen kareinge.
3) mainne yeh lekh Academic Peer Review, Scholarly journals aur Non-Scholarly journals ke baare mein samajhaane ke liye diya tha. aap in cheejon ke baare mein kaheen aur bhi padh sakte hain. agar aapko lagta hai ki Academic Peer Review ka prayog naheen kiya jaana chaahiye, to is Original Research ko pehle kaheen aur chhapvaaie. agar academic samudaaya Academic Peer Review ka prayog karna chhod deta hai, to main bhi peer reviewed journal se sandarbh naheen maangoonga.
4) main maanata hooain ki mujhe yahaaain "scientific method" ke baare mein baat naheen karni chaahiye thi. par aap kisi achhe impact factor vaale peer reviewed linguistics journal ka sandarbh to de sakte hain.
5) aapne kaha "27 pratishat jaali journal Bhaarat ke hain to baaki 73 pratishat jaali journal to 'antararaashtreeya' hi hain jismein American journal bhi hain." Bhaarat mein amareeka ki tulana mein bahut hi kam jarnals prakaashit hoti hai, par fake journals ke maamale mein Bhaarat number 1 par hai. ek desh ke liye 27% pratishat bahut bada ank hota hai. main naheen kah raha hooain ki kisi antararaashtreeya journal par aaainkh band karke vishvaas kar lo (adhiktam fake journals ke naam mein international shabd hota hai). main bas kah raha hooain ki journals ki reputation dekhi jaae. isliye mainne impact factor par aadhaarit jarnals ki ek soochi di hai.
6) vikipeediya ye nirnaya naheen le sakti ki koi lekh politics ki vajah se achhe impact factor waali journal mein prakaashit naheen ho paaya, ya iska koi anya kaaran tha. agar aapko lagta hai ki kaaran politics tha, to aapko koi reputed srot dena padega jo kehta ho ki 'ye' lekh politics ki vajah se achhe impact factor waali journal mein prakaashit naheen ho paaya. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 08:39, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
7) main shanivaar shaam tak thoda vyast hooain. agar aap "academic journals ki reputation" ke baare mein chaupaal par vaarta karna chaahate hain, to krupaya shanivaar shaam tak ruk jaaie. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 09:15, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
@Gauravsood0289: gaurav sood ji, aap ne pehle kaha ki is lekh ka sheershak atpata hai. ab us par baat naheen kar rahe hain aur ab maan rahe hain ki aapko 'scientific methad' ke baare mein baat naheen karni chaahiye thi. jab maine poochh diya ki jis sanstha ne 'impaikt factor' prakaashit kiya hai uske rifreinses kahaaain hain, usane inko ikattha karne aur prakaashit karte samay 'vaigyaanik vidhi' ka kitna khayaal rakha to aap kah baithe ki kaheen bhi likha ho to padh leejiye. ye kya hai? aapka kuchh lokas-staindi hai ya 'ap vent poosi kait, daaun kem hi' waali sthiti mein hi charcha chalti rahegi? maine to aapse yeh bhi kaha hai ki aap us kathan ko pin-pauint kariye jis par aapko rifreins chaahiye. haaain, gaaya ghaas khaati hai aur sher maans khaata hai - is tarah ke kathanon ke liye international rifreins mat maangiyega.
aapne abhi tak 'antararaashtreeya, ripyuted, haai impaikt factor' vaale koi do journal ke naam naheen bataaye hain jo lipi sambandhi lekh chhaapate hain.
aap khud kah rahe hain ki Bhaarat mein bahut kam journal chhapate hain. (America mein bahut chhapate hain). to 'bahut' ka 'bahut pratishat' bhi 'bahut-bahut' hota hai! aapke hi tark se arth to yeh nikla ki aapke 'antararaashtreeya jarnals' ka bhi koi bharosa naheen hai.--anunaad Singh (vaarta) 10:09, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
aur haaain, charcha fokasd (sukendrit) ho iske liye aapse anurodh hai ki aap fir se likhein ki aap is lekh ko hataana chaahate hain, iska sheershak badalna chaahate hain, iski saamagri ka sandarbh lagavaana chaahate hain, ya kuchh aur chaahate hain. yadi ise hataana chaahate hain to usaka kaaran bhi deejiye kyonki mujhe yeh bhi samajh naheen aaya ki aapne 'devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta' ka Google khoj vahaaain (sabse oopar) kyon daala? kya khoj ke nateeje apne aap kehte hain ki is lekh ko hata dena chaahiye?--anunaad Singh (vaarta) 10:22, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
@anunaad Singh: ji,
1) charcha ko keindrit kar raha hooain. main lekh ko hatavaana chaahata hooain kyonki mujhe is lekh ka mool vishay aur ismein likhi adhiktam baatein sach naheen lagti hain. mainne lekh mein kuchh inline tags daal diye hain. agar aapko lagta hai ki ye baatein sach hain to krupaya in baaton ke liye achhe impact factor waali kisi peer reviewed journal mein chhapa koi lekh sandarbhit keejiye (krupaya apne vichaar ya mool shodh na dein). Point (5) mein mainne aisi do journals leest ki hain. unhein dekh lein.
2) Google khoj ka link mainne naheen joda hai. vo apne aap jud jaata hai.
3) aapne kaha "aap khud kah rahe hain ki Bhaarat mein bahut kam journal chhapate hain. (America mein bahut chhapate hain). to 'bahut' ka 'bahut pratishat' bhi 'bahut-bahut' hota hai!" mainne kaha tha ki "duniya ki 27 pratishat fake scientific journals Bhaarat mein prakaashit hoti hain." mainne ye naheen kaha tha ki "Bhaarat mein prakaashit 27 pratishat scientific journals fake hain." in donon baaton mein bahut antar hai. iske baare mein thoda sochiye. aapko khud hi samajh aa jaaega ki aapke tark mein kya galati hai.
4) aap impact factor ke baare mein ek baar padh lein. isko koi sanstha prakaashit naheen karti hai. iski paribhaasha ye hai : "In any given year, the impact factor of a journal is the average number of citations received per paper published in that journal during the two preceding years". isko aap bhi calculate kar sakte hain. agar aapko impact factor ki paribhaasha sahi naheen lagti to apni research kaheen prakaashit keejiye. Academic community mein filhaal to yahi prayog kiya jaata hai.
5) mainne aapko sabse jyaada impact factor waali linguistics journals ki soochi ka link pehle bhi diya tha. ab yahaaain likh deta hooain : (a) Linguistic Inquiry (Impact Factor: 1.711), (b) Applied Linguistics (Impact factor: 1.453). lipi se sambandhi shodh bhi Linguistics ki journal mein hi prakaashit honge. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 12:59, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
@satyam mishr: anunaad ji ne mere baare mein ye tippani ki hai: "aapka kuchh lokas-staindi hai ya 'ap vent poosi kait, daaun kem hi' waali sthiti mein hi charcha chalti rahegi?" kya aapko bhi lagta hai ki main is prakaar charcha kar raha hooain. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 13:33, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

2

mool prashn lekh ka vishay hai. "devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta", "arabi ki vaijnyaaanikta" ityaadi jaisa kuchh hota hai ya naheen ? is baat ke liye bhaasha vigyaan ke vishvasaneeya sandarbh dene ka aagrah hai ki '(kisi bhi) lipi ki vaijnyaaanikta' jaisi koi cheej bhaasha vigyaan mein vyavahrut hoti hai athva naheen. jo sandarbh diye gaye unke baare mein sakaaran bata chuka hooain ki ve kyon vishvasneeya naheen hain. sandarbho ki gunavatta par aam charcha krupaya yahaaain na karein. main khoj kar dekh chuka mujhe jo parinaam praapt ho rahe ve kisi bhaasha vigyaan ke pratishthit journal, pustak, paathya pustak ityaadi ke naheen hain. at: mujhe naheen lagta ki ham ek chhadm aur astitvaheen vishay par lekh rakhein. mera is lekh ko hataane hetu samarthan hai. --styam mishr baatcheet 16:55, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

omneeglaut par devanaagari ke baare mein yeh lekh padhiye- devanaagari . iski aarambhik chaar-paaainch baatein hi kaafi hain. isi mein aapko iska bhi uttar mil jaayega ki 'devanaagari ki vaijnyaaanikta' jaisa kuchh hota hai ya naheen. aur dekhiye ye ye kya kehte hain- Colloquial Hindi : The Complete Course for Beginners , lekhak- tej Kumar Bhatia (Hindi Writing System and Pronounciation ke antargat dekhiye)--anunaad Singh (vaarta) 04:19, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
anunaad ji! uparokt sandarbh bhi shaayad mere dvaara vyakt paksh ki hi pushti kar rahe hain. pehle mein ek haubi ke taur par bhaashiki ke adhyayan karne vaale vyakti dvaara bhi devanaagari keliye most impressive aur beautiful ka prayog kiya ja raha hai aur doosare mein hindi vyaakaran ki praarambhik pustak likhne vaale mahodaya ise most scientific likh rahe hain. jabki mool vigyaan (bhaashiki ya bhaasha vigyaan) ke koi sandarbh abhi bhi naheen mil rahe ki lipiyon ki vaijnyaaanikta jaisi koi avadhaarana maujood hai, athva koi maanadand niyat kiye gaye hain (mainne apni bilkul pehli tippani mein bhi yahi likha tha) jin par most scientific, more scientific, less scientific jaisi klems ko jaaaincha ja sake. mool vigyaan mein aisi avadhaarana ka na milna aur hindi/devanaagari vishay par likhe blog/akhbaar ke lekh/ hindi sikhaane waali pustak mein aisi klems ka hona (oopar yogesh ji dvaara diye gaye sandarbh bhi jod lein) hi ise chhadm ya shaayad hoax jaisa saabit kar raha.--styam mishr baatcheet 14:37, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
ji haaain, ab aapki baat ko koi naheen kaat sakta. is lekh ko turant mita deejiye.--anunaad Singh (vaarta) 03:49, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
  1. science shabd ke aadhaar par vigyaan aur vaijnyaaanikta shabd par koi bhi daava, vyaakhya evam sandarbh maanya naheen hai.
  1. vigyaan sanskrut shabd hai aur saayans ke alaava aur kai artho mein ye shabd ka prayog tab se hota hai jab se Science ka janm bhi naheen hua tha. shreemad Bhagwad geeta mein 7ve adhyaaya ka naam gyaan vigyaan yog hai. aatmajnyaaan ki vidya ko bhi vigyaan kaha jaata hai jeenaka Science ke saath koi lena-dena naheen hai.
  2. lekh mein esa koi deva naheen hai ki falaane journal ke hisaab se ye vaigyaanik hai. aisi sthiti mein journal ka pramaan na milne par moolashodh kah sakte hai. yaha par mool shodh bhaasha ki vaijnyaaanikta vishay hone na hone par honi chaahiye to aneko sandarbh se ye pratipaadit kar diya gaya hai ki ye vishay hai.-yogesh kaveeshvar (vaarta) 05:12, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
@YmKavishwar: ji, shabdon ke arth samay ke saath badalate hain. krupaya koi vishvasaneeya srot deejiye jo kehta ho ki vigyaan shabd ka arth aaj bhi vahi hai jo aap kah rahe hain, taaki yeh spasht ho jaae ki paathak ise science shabd ka paryaayavaachi naheen samjheinge. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 21:21, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
@satyam mishr: ji, is charcha mein aakhiri tippani aae hue kaafi din ho chuke hain. krupaya kuchh faisala lekar charcha ko samaapt keejiye. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 23:13, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
@sanjeev Kumar: ji, satyam mishr ji bahut din se viki-avakaash par hain, isliye uttar naheen de rahe hain. krupaya kuchh faisala lekar is charcha ko band keejiye. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 09:34, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
@Gauravsood0289: gaurav ji ise mere alaava koi anya prabandhak athva varishth sadasya hi samaapt ghoshit kar sakta hai kyonki main khud is charcha ka hissa hooain. nirnaya oopar hui charcha ke aalok mein tatasth vyakti ko karna hota hai, bina apni rai ko istemaal karte hue. aap ek sandesh prabandhak soochanaapat par bhi chhod dein. --styam mishr baatcheet 18:35, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
@satyam mishr: soochana ke liye dhanyavaad satyam ji. krupaya aap apna mat de deejiye. kya mujhe (yaani naamaankanakarta) ko bhi apna mat dena hoga, ya vo apne aap gin liya jaaega? --gaurav sood (vaarta) 18:44, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
@Gauravsood0289: yahaaain charcha ho rahi hai. vikipeediya demokresi naheen hai. is charcha ka samaapan maton ki ginti naheen balki charcha mein prastut tarkon sandarbhon aur taarkikta ke aadhaar par hona hai. kehne ka aashay yeh hai ki nirnayakarane vaale vyakti ko oopar hui charcha mein diye gaye tarkon ko taulana hai. tatasth hokar.--styam mishr baatcheet 19:06, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
dhanyavaad satyam ji. main prabandhak soochanaapat par sandesh chhod deta hooain. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 19:14, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

@YmKavishwar:, @anunaad Singh: ji, mainne prabandhak soochanaapat par is charcha ke baare mein ek sandesh chhoda hai. --gaurav sood (vaarta) 19:51, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

@Hunnjazal, hindusthaan vaasi, Mala chaubey, aur Manojkhurana: agar samay mile to apni rai deejiye. dhanyavaad --gaurav (vaarta) 10:35, 14 May 2016 (UTC)