Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:52, 31 May 2007

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Archives

???

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

s c

DYK

On 9 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Siribhoovalaya, 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.

DYK

On 10 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Origin of Karnataka's name, 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.

DYK

On April 20, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Churumuri (blog), 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.

{{Karnataka}}

There is a discussion on Template_talk:Karnataka. Please provide your inputs. - KNM 15:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

WatchlistBot

I replied to your questions here. Ingrid 18:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Note from Veeresh

Dear Sarvagnya,

I have one suggestions, as for as hinduism is concerned mythology plays a great rule. When one can say the basava is the incarnation of Nandi why not we include mythology behind Veerashaivism, that is of course is the first part whenver there comes lingayatism thats too, arise of panchacharyas from sthavaralingas.

If you do not agree with this, then again the the god shiva himself is the mythological figure. and what we are mentioning is contradictory.

Then why do not we include mythology behind veerashaivism/Lingayatism, that is about panchacharyas as first chapte or section on this article.

Regards, Expecting constructive reply,

Veeresh Hiremath —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Veereshhiremath (talk • contribs) 17:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC).

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Karnataka/Collaboration

Please see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Karnataka/Collaboration and the discussion page. Your inputs are much appreciated. Thanks - KNM 07:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Rashtrakuta

ThanksDineshkannambadi 13:20, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Karnata and PICTURes..

Thanks for the response on the Karnataka page.. But a lot of my pictures have been misused before.. Used in calenders, sold as posters , etc.. Which is why i put the FOR WIKIPEDIA USE picture.. I thought i'd show some more of Flora and Fauna around.. I'd prefer if both watermarks remained.. I dont mind anyone using the pics as long as my watermarks remain.. So its upto you, you want to keep the pictures , keep them, else its out.. I cannot put up unwatermarked ones for the reasons i've mentioned above.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jayanths (talk • contribs) 13:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC).

The photograph is on the Churumuri site in the article on the Churumuri team meeting the Governor.

http://churumuri.wordpress.com/2006/06/27/to-the-governor-of-karnataka-from-us/

DYK

On 30 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bidriware, 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.

BGL Swamy

Try to answer this before getting busy experimenting with the warning templates. Parthi 23:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Warning templates

I noticed your warning templates on Venu62's talk page. I wanted to point out, Misplaced Pages:Don't template the regulars. Please consider discussing the issue or going to other dispute resolution routes rather than posting warning templates. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 00:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply. Sarvagnya 01:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:DTTR applies to Venu62's warnings as well. Both of you are regulars here. These warnings aren't helping much with resolving the issues. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 03:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Removal of content

I noticed that you have unilaterally removed content in Tamil language article. You removed cited content about Tamil's influence on Sanskrit here. You removed cited content about early inscriptions in Tamilnadu here Could you care to explain? Thanks Praveen 19:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Read whats already been said and what will be said on the concerned talk page. Sarvagnya 19:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Please reach a consensus in talk page. If we keep, your 1000 year claim, then it means that we give importance only to Herman's work. This will be grossly unfair to other scholars' work. Thanks Praveen 23:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

None of cited material were removed in my edits yesterday. I think it is you who should have had the courtesy to reach a consensus first before

removing cited content unilaterally. Please comment further on in the article's talk page. Thanks Praveen 23:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Personal attack

You have called the other editors (which includes me) as trolling on articles like Halmidi & Rastrakuta Dynasty in Talk page of Tamil article . If you do not either explain your uncalled personal attack or apologize for remark, I will be forced take this issue with admins (I am not using warning templates as per DTTR mentioned in above post). Thanks Praveen 13:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

My edits

My edits to Tolkappiyam weren't 'removal of cited content'. They were valid edits and rephrasings. I have provided the citations you omitted. You are welcome to provide the one missing citation. 'Pompous' Parthi 23:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Stop your vandalism

History of Tamil Nadu has gone through peer review and FAC review. Stop vandalising the article. - 'Pompous' Parthi 23:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply to the nonsense. Sarvagnya 02:01, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

removal of template

Hi Sarvagnya,

Often, when I edit articles, I do similar edits to few others, thus having to leave the same edit summary message to each one, as it can be seen in my contribution list. Thus, I write one edit summary and copy it, pasting it whenever I do a similar edit to another article. When I removed the fact template (BTW, I did not know what the fact template is; so I removed it), I pasted the same edit summary, and you took it as "sneaky" vandalism. I apologize for the inconvenience, but would mind telling me what the fact template is actually there for? Universe=atom 14:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. By the way, do you think my latest change to the India states template was wise, for I am doubtful of it? Universe=atom 14:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandal report

Hi there, thanks for reporting the IP vandalizing the India related articles. I will watch the IP, but it is not blocked as the vandalism last occurred at almost 20:00, May 5 (UTC), which is about nine hours after the edits were contributed. Blocking by administrators is a preventative measure only, so there is no immediate risk of re-occurrance. Thanks for the diligence, Teke 05:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

My talk page

You have raised many points in my talk page and my head is still formulating an answer and a method to go forward in the Tamil langauge article (although parts of it, I have already suggested in the Tamil language talk page). I will follow up with a detailed reply when time permits after month end activities at work end. Thanks Taprobanus 23:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

As you have pointed so eloquently some where else, we are here not to tell the truth but to cite verifiable information from reliable sources. That is this is a documentation project of all the truths and facts out there about a subject matter. Problem starts when most people assume that there is only one form of truth to be told and everything else has to be censored. Couple to it a total lack of process focus can make this so called harmonious effort at bringing a Ivy leaguer and person with an access to a computer in a mental asylum to collaborate on facts over whelming. To make matters worst you specifically have a charming way of feeding the trolls. This charm my friend is primarily your own making and may work to keep some trolls as well as legitimate Wikipedians at bay but all what it takes is one determined person to take you to arbcom and the charm has to come off or else. Infact the charm is in the way of you harmoniously collaborating with the Ivy Leaguer and the nut case from the asylum.

Further there is a total lack of process focus in these edits by all concerned. That is to edit a huge and politically charged article such as Tamil language and to make it neutral (for what ever it is worth) requires patience, perseverance and total and undeniable dedication to wiki process. The differences between you and the other party are not that great. You are not a creationist and them evolutionists, they are not from India and you are out of India theorists. What you are discussing is the difference between using scientific analysis and the question which one takes precedence over which. It is a question of mere 1,000 years in one of the differences. I think it is very plausible to reach a consensus that is scientifically correct in these circumstances as long as you stick to wiki process. But what you did in Tamil people article where even neutral editors such as User:Krankman and myself had to go in and remove the excessive fact tags shows either you have not read these things before or were angry because of something else but the very least it does not help the great wiki process.

I have come to understand the limitations of Misplaced Pages. It is a great place to research about neutral articles such as Mollusks and Ammonite s as I did with my daughter the other day but we need to take the information that comes out of Misplaced Pages with a pinch of salt when we come to articles such as Tamil language, Indo-Aryan migration and even Sathya Sai Baba and many others like them. If you think that you have the heart and the patience to waste (really it is a waste of time on big and controversial articles) away about 6 months of your life to make the article truly neutral please go ahead. I may or may not be able to focus on things ancient because what attracts me to write is the current examples of man ability to revert himself back to the animal stage that inspite of thousands of years of civilization has been unable to cleanse him of. I document the recent history of rapes, murders, beatings and other examples of savagery that is rendered by man on fellow man from the tear drop island that I was fated to be born in. But I can help to steer the conversation in Tamil language talk page to follow wiki process. As I had pointed out , lets start a project page and list out each and every item that is if contention and strictly follow the wiki process. If no compromise is possible then we take it all the way to mediation. In your mind there should be 1 or 2 things you want to see changed and that’s what you concentrate on. Taprobanus 15:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Gottuvadhyam

Thank you, but my computer is more than 5 years old and renders Tamil as blank boxes. So I tend to defer to editors from India when dealing with Indic-language spellings (I'm not of Indian background, though my name is similar to yours!). Badagnani 01:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll get that software. I can see other Unicode things but not the Tamil. My OS is Windows 98. Badagnani 02:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

This aint vandalism,Rashtrakutas are part of Marathi history and Yadavas of devagiri have little kannadi to write a whole para on it. Plz dont belittle other language to market kannadi.

Mohanatarangini

right. Lets wait for some more info. There are some links in the Rukmini page that can throw light.Dineshkannambadi 00:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Rk2.jpg

Hello Sarvagnya, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Rk2.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Sarvagnya/Annavru. 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 readd 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. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Rk4.jpg

Hello Sarvagnya, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Rk4.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Sarvagnya/Annavru. 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 readd 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. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Rk5.jpg

Hello Sarvagnya, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Rk5.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Sarvagnya/Annavru. 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 readd 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. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 07:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your note

Hi, Thanks for leaving me a note. First of all, if the edit in question has offended you or one of the other editors in any personal way, please accept my apologies. Having said that, I still can't understand what part of the edit is offensive. In any case, I have preceded all my edits with a discussion in the talk page, so if you have a differing source or feel that my edit isn't accurate in any way, it's better that you raise the concern in the talk page. Just reverting to an older edit, hardly tells me what's not right about my edit - which I'm sure you already knew, being the experienced user that you are. Needless to say, if you feel the article isn't accurate, feel free to make modifications. But a brief note in the talk page with pointers to your sources would go a long way in resolving the dispute. Anyway, I'm glad you took the time to drop by my page and say a few words.

BTW, on an unrelated note, I was reading a discussion elsewhere (on one of the talk pages, can't recollect which one), in which you've mentioned that your experience with your Tamil friends seemed to indicate that they carry an air of supremacy about themselves. I was surprised to see this note because that is precisely the feeling I got about a couple of Kannada friends that I interact with quite often. In fact, I was referred to this article by them - they used this write up as a source of arguing that it's been proven that Tamil literature is *only* 1000 years old. I'm glad they gave me the opportunity to participate in this discussion and set things right.

Cheers!
Lotlil 13:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply to frivolous tag

Did you read the definition first?

"Removing all or significant parts of pages, or replacing entire established pages with one's own version without first gaining consensus. Sometimes important verifiable references are deleted with no valid reason(s) given in the summary."

This is what the policy says. You removed large portion with verifiable references. That is according to this policy vandalism. So, in future before putting frivolous tags in my talk page, at least read the policy that you are referring to first. Praveen 17:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries are not even mandatory. When explanations have been given at excruciating length on the talk pages, an edit summary is not even required. Dont shoot your mouth off if you dont know the first thing about edit summaries. Thanks. Sarvagnya 17:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Unlike you, I have taken the excruciating effort in providing sensible reply to you with journal citations. I repeat once again; there was no consensus in talk page. You removed the content with verifiable references. It is vandalism according to wikipedia policy. You can refer to 'folks' if you want. Praveen 17:22, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

No consensus? :) You're being funny. If there is no consensus about mine, then there is no consensus about yours either. And giving references from journals doesnt mean anything when what you write has nothing to do with what your 'journal' says. And btw, this is NO journal. Sarvagnya 17:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you accusing me of lying? Do you have the means and patience to cross-check my citations? Be clear. Praveen 19:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

good faith

i came over to your talk page to post a note that i had suggested the article - history of tamil nadu in good faith so that the confusion of period, coverage of the article in FA review is cleared. but having landed here, i saw all the user comments and i guess, i should not have been naive to think .. anyways., disclaimer: neither am i tamilian, nor kannadiga but i work with both tamilians and kannadigas and my comment on the article was in good faith only. Kalyan 18:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

you come to my talk page for the first time, take a look at comments(replies for most of which you wouldnt find on my talk page) about issues that you have no clue whats going on and yet, have no qualms in drawing inferences and conclusions about good faith, naivety etc., ... and then claim that you're doing what you're doing in good faith. and what was that about you're neither kannadiga nor tamil? I didnt even ask you about that. It really doesnt matter to me. I cant see how you thought it'd matter to me if you've been assuming 'good faith' as you've claimed. Thanks. Sarvagnya 18:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

RFC on Tamil language

This is formal notification for the RFC on Tamil Language to you. Here is the link. Praveen 20:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Mohanatarangini

Sarvagnya, you may want to change to "most voluminous literary writing" as "work" may confuse some readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dineshkannambadi (talk • contribs)

Where? Sarvagnya 21:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

In the DYK.Dineshkannambadi 23:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Mohanatarangini

Did you know? was updated. On 18 May, 2007, a fact from the article Mohanatarangini, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

DYK Medal

		The DYK Medal
		Congratulations! We would look forward to many more creative DYKs from you!! -- P.K.Niyogi 07:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Political history of medieval Karnataka

Thanks for your support.Dineshkannambadi 11:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

please help in formatiing one of my article

I have created a article chronolgy of karnataka.please format it. Nrupatunga 06:12, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Need more info

What portions of the Tamil language article are in violation of WP:WEASEL and WP:CITE ? Please specify that in the talk page. Lotlil 22:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I tried to get information out of you, as to why the weasel and citation tags are needed. Since that doesn't seem to be forthcoming, I assume that it was added by mistake and am going to revert them.Lotlil 14:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

National Language

Are you trying to say that Hindi is not India's national language? Article 343 states that Hindi in devanagari script is the official language of India. --Indianstar 07:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Refrain from Personal Attacks

I'm surprised at having to mention this: your template on my talk page is a blatant personal attack. I called your edits as vandalism, based on WP:VANDAL policy. You should probably read the policy and look under "Abuse of tags", before you "warn" people that take the time to cleanup such acts. I had given you enough opportunity to justify the weasel and citation tags here and here. But, not only have you ignored my request for information, you have gone ahead with pasting the tags without any explanation. And, not just that, you now are threatening me with a block. If you don't stop this behavior, I'm going to have to report it to the admins. And, oh yes, I should point out that this post of mine is in line with WP:DTTR - just mentioning it because we seem to be too eager to go around warning users, don't we ? Chill out. Lotlil 19:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Even a glance at the talk page will reveal why the tags have been added

Rather than making such vague statements, why don't specify clearly what parts of the article are so bad that you had to bless it with your tagging. I've "glanced" at the talk pages enough times to know that you're tagging is totally unwarranted (other than the neutrality tag which I had left untouched).

Now since you've branded some edits as vandalism, can you point out which one/s and can you explain how it is vandalism?

I didn't realize it was so difficult, but anyway let me help you here. You added the "weasel" and "citecheck" tags and even after repeated (at least 4) requests for explanation, you've not explained yourself.

You've only just landed here, so stop shooting your mouth off about policies and guidelines without even reading or understanding them.

Since you had landed here a while back, how about actually following those policies rather than just tooting your horn at every instance ?

You'd be better advised to not dive headlong into these things and spend some time reading policies and observing people.

Yeah, well said... I've been observing you for instance and have learnt how not to behave around here.

Lotlil 01:08, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Lotlil: Let us work together to improve the article. Let us address all concerns of Sarvgnya.--Indianstar 05:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Tamil Language

I want to understand what clarification is required in the following statement mentioned in Tamil Language article.

More than 55% of epigraphical inscriptions in India were found in Tamil language

My understanding is that given ciation says that around 55000 of 100000 epigraphical inscriptions in India is found in Tamil language. Epigraphical inscriptions were used in old days. I believe this statement is inserted to emphasise ancient nature of Tamil.

Also please list down other weasel words in Tamil language article in Talk pages so that we can work together to improve the article. --Indianstar 05:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

First thing is, 55000/100000 being Tamil seems highly suspect to anyone except people who want to believe it(like PP, aadal, venu et al). I have citations to the effect that 30000 inscriptions are from Karnataka. I also have citations that most of the inscriptions in Tamil Nadu including those of the Pandyas was either purely Sanskrit or bilingual(where Tamil was relegated to secondary position. For example, the gold and silver coins of the Pandyas used to have Sanskrit markings while tamil was used only on copper coins) or purely Tamil(this was at a later stage - after around the first millenium). Also, if you add it to the 55000 from TN(its safe to assume that atleast 99% of them are in TN) then, it leaves the rest of India with only 15,000 or so inscriptions! This 15000 will have to account for inscriptions from all over India from all the rest of the languages, sanskrit and all the prakrits included!

Common sense tells me that the fantastic claim made by nameless author of The Hindu article is false. So I want know more about what you mean by the numbers. Are you counting all the inscriptions found in Tamil Nadu as Tamil and what is the nature of these inscriptions, are they stone inscriptions or copper plate or something else or what? And the so called Tamil-Brahmi cant count for much because there have been only a grand total of a few dozen or so TB inscriptions that have been found. And many of them are supposed to exhibit deep influence of Kannada. Anyway.. i could go on. But these are things that will sound very uncomfortable to the likes of POV pushers like PP and venu and aadal et al.. and I dont expect them to react sanely to anything that differs from their Tamil nationalist worldview. Until that changes, the article is probably better left to its fate. Also, a citation from a historian or a journal or something will help greatly. And oh, btw.. let me repeat that i have citations for what I wrote above, not from suspect sources like a faceless junior journalist on a 'national' newspaper, but from historians and peer reviewed research journals. Thanks. Sarvagnya 05:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I would request you to keep my name out of your rantings. You don't know what I believe in. Thanks Parthi 06:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Sarvgyna. So you are clear about the meaning of that statement. Clarify tag is not applicable in that case. You feel based on commonsense that it won't be correct. I feel all updates to article is based on citations and not based on our commonsense. If I have to use my common sense, I would have blanked out Ayyavazhi article because I have not heard about it before. So either you can contest that statement with more reliable citations or leave it as it is. Does it make sense? Can you also update other weasel statements in the article. --Indianstar 09:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I dont know what in my reply makes you think that I am 'opposing' it based on commonsense. If I was relying on commonsense alone, I'd have simply blanked the tall claim just like you'd have blanked the ayyavazhi article. That I have only chosen to tag it for a clarification means that I am not acting on my POV. I have explained to you that inscriptions can be of different types. And since we are talking about the language of the inscription, I've also told you some facts(based on citations, not commonsense). Unless you can clarify it, the tag will stay. Sarvagnya 10:03, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe citations clearly says 60000 inscriptions are found in Tamilnadu, out of which 95% in Tamil. I or anybody cannot give breakup of those inscriptions. If we give based on different articles then it will become Original research. I cannot go and findout breakup of remaining 15000 inscriptions. can you update your citations with your comments in the article's Talk page. If we cannot come to agreement on open issues then we can approach Media cabal--Indianstar 16:06, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Folk arts of Karnataka

I want to collaborate with you to improve this article. But I am not very happy with the current structuring of the article and have left my comments in the article's talk page here. Please let me your inputs on the same... -- Amarrg 06:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Mangalapuram

Pls don't remove that malayalam name from Mangalore page.

ARUNKUMAR P.R 06:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Panchapeetha and history of Lingayatism.

Dear Sarvagnya,

I have come out with following solid citations/proofs regarding Lingayatism. Please refer following evidences for existences of Veerashaivism prior to basava.

1. Allahabad high court ruling in 1920: regarding kashi jangamawadi math, says about anciency of Kashi Vishwaradhya peetha is about 6th Century AD, 600 years before basava. 2. "Shasanagalli Panchacharyaru": Ph.D Awarded to Dr|| Rajeshekhar swamy gorata by Bangalore. University
3. Pancha peethagala parampare: By A.S.Hiremath Chenna chetan prakshana Ranebennur.

You need further more clarifcation, i am always at your disposal.

Regards,

Please reply,

Veeresh Hiremath

Nrupatunga

Is having a problem with the Kadamba script he has uploaded. He needs to specify the source of his info and also how he generated this copy. Please help him with this if you have time. I have left a message for him.Dineshkannambadi 14:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC) Ok. Sarvagnya 16:20, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Karnataka Sub-divisions

Sarvagnya,

The four subdivisions of Karnataka seem to be no longer existent according to this report by the planning department. This was news to me too... We need to verify this and change the content of the Karnataka article appropriately -- Amarrg 03:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

History of India is a candidate for WP:ACID

Hi,

Did you know that the article History of India is a candidate for Misplaced Pages:Article Creation and Improvement Drive (shortened to WP:ACID)? If you want it to be the article for the week (and perhaps get it to Featured Article status), perhaps you would want to go the page and vote. Thank you. Universe=atom 14:29, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Accused of Sockpuppeteering...Again

Hi,

As you can see from the title of this comment, I am accused of being a sock, this time of two accounts: Johnsmithcba and KnowledgeHegemony. The place of the accusation is User talk:Fowler&fowler#Once_more. This is a reply of what F&F posted on User talk:Aksi great#Once_more. I want to go defend myself (BTW, I am totally innocent of any sockpuppeteering), but I do not know what to say. So, I am seeking your advice in this area. Thanks. Universe=atom 18:12, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Image

Hello,

I have applied the image for deletion.

ARUNKUMAR P.R 10:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Gangas

What you have done is correct. This is how it was an year back before someone moved it around.Dineshkannambadi 12:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

About Maps of Ganga

Thanks for flower and compliment! I added Western Ganga Dynasty map and take a look. I added double shade for feadatories area. Let me know if you want to keep it. mlpkr 00:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the double shade as requested by Dinesh now. mlpkr 00:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the fyi. You can perform as many check users on me and anyone else, and if the check users are correct all the time, they will all come out false. I have no intentions of doing that again. Too bad Nichalp wants me off Wiki, im here to stay. :) Nikkul 01:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you Chanakyathegreat 02:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar

Thanks a lot!!! -- Amarrg 06:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

State terrorism in Sri Lanka

Hello, you know I appreciate your critical comments so please look at the last version that I was involved in editing of the article and let me know whether it can be improved. Since I edited others have added stuff that doesnot belong but I have requested them to delete it. Your feedback please. Thanks Taprobanus 17:19, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I will fix the picture issue, see we have a lot of eager newbies, we slowly have to bring them along :(20:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Tamil language

Sarvagnya, I want to understand your issues with the article Tamil language. Based on the talk page discussions (some of which I've participated in, others just read), I understand that the biggest one is with "Tamil influencing Sanskrit". Like Indianstar has pointed out, I agree that we should remove those parts of the article, pending consensus. If there's no consensus, it may be better to leave those parts out. But, I want to know... what else needs to be fixed, that requires tagging the whole article ? It would help you and the rest of the contributors if you list out the issues in the talk page (like the list that Indianstar created). we worked through Indianstar's list, but I see that it's not helping much. Let's work together to keep it at FA quality. Cheers! Lotlil 00:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

cpedit

Thanks for the copy edits.Dineshkannambadi 02:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Haridasa

We should focus on providing complete citations for the above page. Easy as the job is considering the abundant literature and web sources, we have been putting this off too long.Dineshkannambadi 15:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I think we need to play down a few adjectives in the article though, great as it was..Dineshkannambadi 00:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Good for pedia

You said I may have a COI so I should refrain from editing Sri Lanka related articles. Well it is a good advice, but I want you judge me by my actions. For example Sarathambal article that you have been editing of late. Her house sits on land donated by my grand mother. The temple he father worked is built by my great grand father from a timber that be brought back from India via boat after a pilgrimage. Her uncle iofficiated in my wedding. Infact they have officiated in all our weddings. Now you tell me when someone is this close to a victim, that you could write a neutral article about person ? I am proud of the fact that it went through DYK and an AFD and all the comments from non Sri lankan editors have been that it is a neutral article. Not a single one said that I demonized the Sinhalese people in the article. Thanks Taprobanus 14:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)