User:Icestorm815/Archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

Contents

RfA tally

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Lquilter&diff=186269135&oldid=186268702 - Please see Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship#Proposal:_Relocate_tally. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 05:13, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

SKN St. Pölten

I was actually getting to the references when you put the tag - I'm still writing the article :) - Milk's Favorite Cookie 19:16, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, no problem! Icestorm815 (talk) 19:14, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Tasmanian cricket captains

Hey, whatever you just did deleted about half an hour's worth of typing I just did on that article?!? Rac fleming (talk) 20:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, please disregard. There was an edit conflit, or something. Rac fleming (talk) 20:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
OK, then. Icestorm815 (talk) 20:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. Malinaccier (talk) 00:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

db tag on cheetah-gazelle

Hi Icestorm 815,

Yes, technically that isn't patently incoherent, but it obviously isn't going to be an article. What would you suggest; db-vandalism? I'm using a little bit of IAR there, and that certainly fits the spirit of nonsense if not the letter. --barneca (talk) 21:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I see you added db-vandalism; i re-read the G3 descrition and you're right, that one's better. --barneca (talk) 21:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Well thank you, wasn't expecting anything for it, but one little comment and all of a sudden phone calls are being made...LOL. Seriously though, thanks for the barnstar, I'm surprised no one reported it sooner honestly. Wildthing61476 (talk) 21:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz is now an Administrator

My RfA was successful, and closed with 44 Supports, 6 Opposes, and 1 Neutral. For your support, you have my thanks - I fully intend to live up to the lofty yet not-a-big-deal responsibility you have granted me. For those who opposed my candidacy, I value your input and advice, and hope that I may prove worthy of your trust. Special thanks to both Rudget and bibliomaniac15 for their expert coaching and guidance. I look forward to serving the project, my fellow editors, the pursuit of higher knowledge, et cetera, et cetera. Again, you have my thanks. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 01:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


Fixed warnings

I hope I have cleared up the problem with Pay Per Play. I accidently deleted the tag (then replaced it) when I was removing a portion of the article that was causing an advertisement warning. I'm am seriously committed to trying to write the article appropriately, so please help me, so it does not get deleted. Thanks.

CohibAA (talk) 18:41, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

First Aerial Victory expansion

It has bee expanded--see Stephen W. Thompson.

             Bobby Jim (talk) 21:13, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

American Medical News

Why did you tag American Medical News with a {{noreferences}} flag? There is, indeed, a reference; click on the "[1]" in the article. NCdave (talk) 07:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Whoops, didn't see that reference there. I added a reflist at the bottom for ya. Happy editing! Icestorm815 (talk) 20:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! NCdave (talk) 22:05, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Archiving

Hi, thanks for the help with the rename pages. Could you down a little on the archiving though - its usually a good idea for requests to hang around for a day or two so people can check the outcome easily (especially if they're declined). Generally VoABot is quite good at doing the archiving (though its making a couple of mistakes at the moment that I've pointed out to Voice of All) so it shouldn't be something you need to worry about too much. WjBscribe 00:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: Are you a new user?

Hi, thanks for your welcome. I have done a limited amount of editing without a user account, but the past view days I have been working on local articles so I decided to create an account. This type of code is very similar to message boards, which I have a fairly extensive background with. I did not have much experience with Wikipedia until a few days ago, but I have an editor friend who has helped me the complex issues such as citing copyrights, etc. From there i have just been exploring the Wikipedian world and have found a bunch of interesting areas, including AFD. I will take changing my user name under advisement. Cheers! Taxman214 03:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Help

Hello Icestorm815 there people is being rude to me now on the action website. im not destroy that website I just want put new information about new bus route 300.

People being rude to me because people is keep delete my new information. which is really unfair to me.

I know i got poor english skill I cant do not anything about me Please help me Icestorm815

please help me Icestorm815

from Josh710

please please help me Icestorm815 From Josh710 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.180.50 (talk) 11:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I posted a message at Talk:ACTION. Icestorm815 • Talk 19:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. You're work isn't unappreciated. Burner0718 02:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Icestorm815 • Talk 02:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
No problem, my userpage is semi-protected indef. I wonder why? :D Burner0718 02:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

help

can you please help me set up a user page? I'd be soooo thankful.(as I'm really bad with computers!!) thanks so much.05:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)~Emmybear26

I'll give it a shot. Icestorm815 • Talk 20:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Oversight

On that last vandalism page creation, oversight isn't really necessary, since it's a deleted article that won't get re-created, and there was no difficult-to-expunge edit summary. Acroterion (talk) 03:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


From fellow student who is too cool to sign on :)

Told you the Macbook Air sucks (read the comments, not the article)

http://mobile.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/14/1239212&from=rss

—71.148.24.170 (talk) 01:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

eh, you can still pay the extra 1K, just like the ThinkPad, and you can get the same stuff with a cooler, sleeker laptop. Icestorm815 • Talk 03:19, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Hello, Icestorm815. You have new messages at Chetblong's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} template.

Reply

Hello, Icestorm815. You have new messages at Chetblong's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} template.

RfA

thanks Dlohcierekim Deleted? 16:35, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Icestorm815 • Talk 16:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

RFA

Hello, I recently saw that you posted a comment on my RFA, saying that I have mostly contributed in the last 3-4 months. As the edit count [1] shows, I have been contributing actively for the past 6 months. Although I have been contributing more these past four months, I beg to differ that the 1450 edits in the first two months are not a small amount. Cheers, Icestorm815 • Talk 16:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Icestorm815 • Talk please do not take my remark in a disparaging way! It certainly was not meant in that fashion. Regarding your edits, I just pointed out that a vast majority were done in just the last three to four months. For me, personally to support your Rfa, I would like to see more contributions in the editing aspect rather than just vandal patrol. In addition, to be honest, that will come in time, if you choose to continue to edit here at Wikipedia. Regarding your Rfa, if it is not successful this time around, please reapply in 6 months or so. If you continue to support Wikipedia in the same dedicated manner you have shown over the last three to four months you will have an additional Support opinion, Mine, to count on. Good Luck to you and happy editing. Shoessss |  Chat  16:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
LOL - though I noticed I did not belabor the point :-). Shoessss |  Chat  00:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

RFA Card

My RFA →→→

follow up question

see you RFA under question 10. Thanks! Spevw (talk) 00:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, I've answered it. Icestorm815 • Talk 14:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Username / Change

Thanks... sorry, I was confused by what I needed to do move memeticcomputing to stevenweb. Also, I am confused by what is happening with my first entry. I thought creating an entry for a new journal I am involved with would be a good way to start contributing. I tried to model the entry as neutral as possible, like the many other journal entries. In any case, the account is blocked and the entry is blocked/deleted. Oh well. StevenWeb (talk) 17:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

User pages

Thank you for unblanking my user pages. :) —an odd name 18:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Icestorm815 • Talk 18:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you/Arigato

Just a brief note of thanks for the time and attention you invested in the name-change process which converted User:Ooperhoofd to User:Tenmei. --Tenmei (talk) 18:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem! Icestorm815 • Talk 19:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Madison

It was probably just created before the logs existed. Andre (talk) 21:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Icestorm815 • Talk 21:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:AFC Backlog Drive

WikiProject Articles for creation needs your help!
WikiProject Articles for creation has done a tremendous job in working at WP:AFC over the past 7½ months. Thank you all for your hard work and dedication! Together, we've made the submission process easier and more streamlined, developed tools to make the process go faster for reviewers, and cut the backlog down to a mere fraction of what it once was. Well done!

As you all are aware, however, our work is not quite yet done. The project still has 10 archive pages left to complete, which include over half a month's worth of submissions, many of which have not been completely reviewed. We need your help to finish looking over these neglected submissions so that we can finally remove the backlog notice from the page, and put an end to the more than two year old backlog that has been a thorn in our side for ages! Participants will receive an AFC Barnstar, so hurry up and help out while there's still work to be done! Make sure to sign in on the WikiProject's talk page so we know who is involved in what promises to be our final effort to complete this goal. Thank you for all your help!
- Happy editing as always, Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

You are receiving this letter because you are listed as a participant in the Articles for creation WikiProject at WP:WPAFC. To avoid receiving further notices, please remove your name from the list. Thanks!

Rename clerking

Thank you for your help. However, on the usurpations page, please make sure that the editor requesting usurpation qualifies himself. There is not a quantified number, but only established editors are permitted to usurp usernames. On requests like this one, the editor requesting usurpation does not qualify, as he has had no edits outside rename pages. Please be sure to note cases like this. Good luck on your RfA, btw. seresin | wasn't he just...? 23:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note! Icestorm815 • Talk 23:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thx

thank you soooo much!!!!!!!!Emmybear26 (talk) 01:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)Emmybear26

Anytime! Icestorm815 • Talk 01:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Moving requests

There's really not much point in moving this request. Blunxz song is too new an account for usurpation so the request will be turned down anyway. Probably best to leave it at WP:CHU and advise the user to just create a new account with a name that isn't taken. WjBscribe 19:45, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the reminder. I keep forgetting to check the requesting accounts contributions. Icestorm815 • Talk 19:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Clerking at Wikipedia:Changing username

When clerking at WP:CHU, please use Template:CHU and its parser functions to leave basic clerk notes, as you didn't in one of your earlier clerk notes. It makes it easier for bureaucrats to see, at a glance, that there maybe a problem with the request. As well as this, it saves having to write out the clerk note in full. Cheers, and thanks for your clerking there. Qst (talk) 20:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, cool I wasn't aware that there were templates! Icestorm815 • Talk 21:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

AFC Backlog is GONE

The Articles for Creation Barnstar
For your help in finally putting an end to the monstrous backlog at Articles for creation, I, Hersfold (t/a/c), hereby award you the Articles for Creation Barnstar! Well done, and thank you for your dedication to the project! Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you! Icestorm815 • Talk 22:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

You are now an administrator

Enjoy the mop and bucket.
Enjoy the mop and bucket.

Congratulations, I have just closed your RfA as successful and made you an administrator. Take a look at the administrators' how-to guide and the administrators' reading list if you haven't read those already. Also, the practice exercises at the new admin school may be useful. If you have any questions, get in touch on my talk page. WjBscribe 00:27, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations. Those practice sessions are very helpful. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations – and best of luck. Shoessss |  Chat  00:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks everyone, I really appreciate it! Off to admin school! Icestorm815 • Talk 01:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations!   jj137 (talk) 01:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations. seresin | wasn't he just...? 01:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Congrats! Go easy at first, but I'm sure you'll prove the opposers wrong :) Majorly (talk) 01:41, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Congrats. You might want to remove the "this user is not an admin..." userbox. ;) Nousernamesleftcopper, not wood 01:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
D'oh! Well, thankspam is over, so I'll do that! Icestorm815 • Talk 01:44, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Adminfied. Dlohcierekim 01:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Congrats! You'll do good! SpencerT♦C 01:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

About your RfA

The admins' T-shirt. Acalamari 02:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
The admins' T-shirt. Acalamari 02:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I am glad you passed, and you are welcome for the support. For information on using your new tools, see the school for new admins; you will find it very useful. Good luck! Acalamari 02:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! Tiptoety talk 02:45, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Congrats on getting a mop! ChetblongT C 02:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Congradulations! Basketball110 hello 03:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome, congrats! Happy editing! Burner0718 JibbaJabba! 03:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks guys! Icestorm815 • Talk 03:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC) Congrats! All that's left is to head on over this a way. :) Jmlk17 06:01, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Well done, despite my reservations I'm sure you'll do fine - take it slow and enjoy the new responsibilities! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 07:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations ... didn't notice you were standing or I would have voiced my support! MSGJ (talk) 10:25, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

RE:WP:RFPP

Hey Icestorm815, congrats on the new admin bit! I just wanted to let you know that when filling out requests over at WP:RFPP, that when you use the {{RFPP}} template that you have to indent the template, so a response would look like :{{RFPP|nea}} or *{{RFPP|nea}} making sure to indent the template with a : or a * or the bot will not realize the request has been filled. Keep up the good work and if you have any questions feel free to ask. Congrats again. – Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 05:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I went back and changed it so it would look similar to the other ones. (Not even knowing it had anything to do with the bot!) Icestorm815 • Talk 05:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Haha yeah I noticed. You know bots, they can be picky sometimes :P – Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 05:38, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Randomness

Just to say thanks for semi-protecting randomness. Regards, Qwfp (talk) 18:27, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

No, prob. Glad to help stop vandals. Icestorm815 • Talk 18:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Research on the RFA process

Hello, I am an anthropology student researching the Wikipedia Requests for adminship procedure. As you recently completed this process, I was wondering if you would be willing to answer a few quick questions.

  • Do you believe that the current RFA process is an effective way of selecting admins?
  • Do you notice a difference between users who are nominated vs selfnoms?
  • Is a week an appropriate length for process? Should it perhaps be longer or shorter?
  • Do you think the user's status in the community changes while the user is undergoing the RFA process? How about after the RFA process is over?

If you are willing, please leave your answers on my talk page or e-mail them to me.

This research will not be published academically, as this research is primarily to demonstrate the feasibility of doing online ethnography in online only communities such as Wikipedia, though I intend to make my findings available on Wiki. Your name will not be associated with any information you provide in any published work. If you have any questions please let me know. Thank you. --Cspurrier (talk) 18:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Boris Pribich

The article was deleted here for lack of notability and other reasons. Flash94 (talk) 23:26, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

It was speedy'd as an attack page. The article now differs greatly from the one back in 2006. Icestorm815 • Talk 23:30, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

U.S. Route 50 in California

I've unprotected this page. I've warned the two users to stop reverting (which should be attempted before protection). - Rjd0060 (talk) 02:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, no problem with that. Thanks for the advice as well! Icestorm815 • Talk 03:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Update to Ralph Nader

Icestrom815, Thank you for your insights. The comments I added are the widely held conclusions of the impact of Mr. Nader political style (and perhaps his narcissism I left that to others to discuss). I believe the total article discusses the his reasons and delves deeply in minutiae of electoral post-mortem; however, the larger consequences are not otherwise brought out for the reader to see the larger implications and why Mr. Nader has engendered such strong reaction over his career and even during this"Harold Stassen" phase of his life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bensonrt (talk • contribs) 19:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

{{CUU}}

Since you reverted what I was doing I thought I would tell you that I fixed it and its working fine now. I just thought that if there is a case where it might be up to crat discretion they should know about the log entries too. Alexfusco5 20:04, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, that's cool. Glad to see that you fixed it! Icestorm815 • Talk 20:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Sandbox

Hello. I was trying to make sure I had the correct template. I see now that I must of put it on the talk page for the sandbox, and not the sandbox, which I assume looked a little silly. Thanks! Beach drifter (talk) 02:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Eh, don't worry about it. We all make mistakes. Icestorm815 • Talk 02:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Inaccuracies and falsehoods mentioned in the page on Satyashraya - Western Chalukya King

Sir,

There are several intended and deliberate inaccuracies in the page on Satyashraya which are excerpted as under:

The next king Satyashraya is again described as having won victories against Rajendra and Raja Raja I. Let me inform you that NEVER in the history of the Chalukya and Chola Empire was a war between these two sides EVER FOUGHT IN CHOLA TERRITORY. WARS WERE ALWAYS FOUGHT IN DESTINATIONS LIKE KOPPAL, KUDALA SANGAMA, VIJAYAWADA (PART OF EASTERN CHALUKYA TERRITORY) AND OTHER PARTS OF KARNATAKA, BUT NEVER WITHIN ANY AREA CONTROLLED BY THE CHOLAS. With that being the case, what is the proof that Satyashraya defeated both Rajendra Chola and Raja Raja Chola I? It is also a fact in Chola history that after becoming the Yuvaraja Rajendra Chola was the one who participated in all wars for the Cholas with Raja Raja I only deputing his son to wars. That is the reason the statement of Satyashraya defeating Raja Raja I and Rajendra Chola I is absolutely concocted and false.

You can consult any number of historians and they will all tell you Raja Raja I, Rajendra I, Ashoka, Samudra Gupta and Narasimha Varman never lost any wars in their life.

Also in the page on Satyashraya, how shamelessly the Cholas have been described: See for yourself:

Rajendra marched up to Donur near Kudalasangama and Unakal near Hubli and plundered the entire county, slaughtering women, men and children and threatening the Chalukya capital Manyakheta. Satyasrya was thus compelled to withdraw from Vengi and retreat to his kingdom in the western Deccan.

LET ME SAY IN CLEAR TERMS: NEVER IN HISTORY HAVE RAJA RAJA, RAJENDRA CHOLA I EVER BEEN KNOWN TO ATTACK WOMEN AND CHILDREN, AND THE ONLY MEN THEY ATTACKED were soldiers and their adversaries. WHILE I SHARE YOUR DESIRE THAT ONLY THE CORRECT INFORMATION ABOUT CHALUKYAS SHOULD BE WRITTEN, IT DOES NOT GIVE ANYONE THE RIGHT TO ALSO WRITE ABOUT THEIR RIVALS OR ENEMIES ALSO IN DESPICABLY DEROGATORY TERMS. Please take time and read about the Chola country and society given in your own Wikipedia pages, including status of women etc. which will prove how wrong is their description of attacking women and children. I am sure you will advice the concerned to delete those remarks against Chola Kings also.

In a blatant and desperate attempt to cloud actual facts with fiction It is described that Rajendra marched up to Donur, Unakal and Kudala Sangama while at the same time trying to show the brave Cholas in poor light by showing the leader of their army, crown prince Rajendra I as one who slaughtered women, men and children. But the same biased historians committed a mistake side by side. They added further that Rajendra threatened their capital Manyakheta.

Sir, I would like to ask you only one question: How could a killer and slaughterer of men, women and children also have the capacity threaten the Chalukyan capital, especially when their King Satyashraya was supposed to have carried forward the aggressive policies of his father Tailapa-II? That means not only he was an aggressive King but his army was equally valorous. Then how come the Cholas led by Rajendra would march all the way from their then capital Tanjore and reach Manyakheta through Kudala Sangama and Hubli in middle and South Karnataka through the Ganga country. Did the Chola army massacre children, men and women on the way too in Ganga country? Was the extremely valorous Chalukya army merely watching like innocent bystanders when the so-called massacre of innocents was being committed by the Chola army? Sir, in the absence of any light being thrown on these aspects, it would be patently wrong to allow continuation of this article in this form and hence the lines describing Rajendra I and his army as murderer of men, women and children should be deleted immediately, mainly because there are many, many facts pointing to the contrary.

In fact, Sir, you can physically verify that during the more than 100 year rule of the Cholas over the Karnataka provinces of Nulambavadi, Gangavadi, Kadambavadi etc. many Dravidian temples were built from the times of Raja Raja I, Rajendra, Rajadhiraja, Rajendra II, Vira Rajendra, Kulothunga I and his son Vikrama Chola which can be verified with the Archaeological Survey of India.That being the case, the areas of Karnataka till the time they were under Chola occupation were never known for their disturbance or rebellions or quelling of the same, as was the case with Pandya territories under Chola rule which saw consistent rebellions and many quellings right up to the time of Kulothunga-II and Kulothunga-III also. These cultural achievements could not have been possible had the Cholas been murderers of men, women and children as is sought out to be made out in these pages with the aim of portraying Chalukya kings as great while making out the Cholas and portraying them as looters and killers. (It is of course, relevant to point out here - though the same is not relevant to the topic on Satyashraya - that one of the later Kings Somesvara I - again eulogized as a great Chalukya King who got repeatedly routed and humiliated by the Cholas and whose only achievement was that in a war his forces killed Rajadhiraja - son of Rajendra I - but the army of Cholas immediately identified their new leader, Prince Rajendra II on the war-field, who galvanized the Chola forces and defeated the Chalukya armies of Somesvara I - turning imminent defeat into victory- in fact encouraged his son Vikramaditya VI to sack Kanchi and the then Chola capital Gangaikondacholapuram - but was routed and chased all the way from the Chola capital to Kanchi, to Kudalasangama all the way up to Manyakheta - later the same Vikramaditya VI also got routed by Vira Rajendra - who showed compassion on the defeated Chalukya king by giving the hand of his daughter to the vanquished - who was more than eager to become son in law of a more powerful emperor which proves that it is not the Cholas who were raiders and looters but this quality actually belonged to the Chalukya kings who without trying to confront the valour of the Chola Kings tried to win them over by making unannounced attacks on their territory and capital only to be humiliated time after time - you can read your own wikipedia history pages of Satyashraya, Jayasimha, Vinayaditya, Somesvara-I and Vikramaditya VI for absolute clarity on the character of the Cholas and the Chalukyas.

The lack of character of the Chalukyas was borne out further by the fact that Somesvara I challenged Vira Rajendra for a war at Kudala Sangama but later could not muster up the much-needed courage to march up to the designated place and face the Cholas. This shameful episode is backed up in the page on Somesvara I with the lame excuse that Somesvara I was indisposed and hence could not take the field. Could he even not have intimated his adversaries on this and fixed another day for war???? There are no answers or enquiries with regard to this aspect. In all probability Somesvara I was shamed by his own subjects including his wife which caused him to commit suicide on the banks of a river(which goes completely against description of Somesvara I as one who consolidated his empire and safeguarded it against the Cholas - (not that the Cholas were overkeen to occupy Western Chalukya territories, with the main cause of conflict between the Western Chalukyas and Cholas being that the marital alliance betweent he Eastern Chalukyas and the Cholas was always resented by the WEstern Chalukyas who constantly interfered in the affiars in Vengi by trying to install their own puppet in Eastern Chalukya kingdom. This was the basic reason of war between the Cholas and Western Chalukyas).

To sum it up, Sir, the fact that Rajendra I stood at the gates of Manyakheta (threatening the Chalukya capital) was because he was a brave, valorous and able commander of men and armies and by backing his ability he overcame all opposition in war and marched freely inside the enemy territory. This simple fact cannot be digested by some historians with malice, regional outlook and complete prejudice towards the Cholas vis-a-vis the Chalukyas, their favoured rulers and have therefore, gone on by completely bull-dozing over actual facts and replacing them with absolute lies, innuendos and false information and that too with complete impunity.

I would like to add Sir, that it was purely on the strength of their valour, capacity for waging a war and that too successfully, that the Cholas repeatedly marched up to the Chalukyan capital, that is an unmistakeable conclusion one would reach after reading and absorbing the fact of Rajendra I reaching deep into the Chalukya country with his army and threatening the Chalukyan capital,Manyakheta.

The above episode clearly proves the capacity of both Rajendra and the Chola army to penetrate deep into enemy territory. How many attacks did Chalukya Kings lead into Chola territory. They have nothing except the night attack and looting of Gangaikondacholapuram by Vikramaditya VI on the orders of Somesvara I during the time of Virarajendra, for which the Chola army not only routed them from their territories but also led the battle right in the heart of the Chalukya territory. No doubt the jingoists, not wanting to digest what actually is the truth are resorting to such cowardly and manipulative tactics as describing the greatest Chola kings as looters and killers of women and children.

Therefore, I request that those objectionable, unfounded lies about Rajendra I killing men and children in Chalukya territory be deleted. I eagerly await your positive reply upholding the cause of truth and impartiality.

Srirangam99 (talk) 08:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I placed a comment on your talk page. Icestorm815 • Talk 20:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Usurption request

Icestorm815,

I just wanted to clarify something I have been wondering about. When I see it written on the usurption pages that 'Editors with GFDL significant edits cannot have their accounts usurped', does that count for talk page edits as well? Fusionmix and I are the same account (as you saw), and the reason I filed for usurption was because I do not want an account hanging around that may get me accused of sockpuppetry, and because I was not sure that talk page edits were GFDL significant. If it does turn out that talk page edits are significant, I will remove my request, and file for a name change instead. RedZionX 13:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I left a message on your talk page. Icestorm815 • Talk 20:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks much for the explanation. RedZionX 21:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Template_talk:Cite_book#name_anchor

Why did you disable the request without making the changes to the template? Cuñado ☼ - Talk 06:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I removed the template as the edit was not done by Happy‑melon. Once the concerns are addressed you can re-add the {{editprotected}} template. Icestorm815 • Talk 21:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Response to name usurption request

Hello. I am not really looking to argue, just for clarification. Even if a user has a single action, one that is not complete, and that hasn't been touched in over a year cannot be exempt? If so, thank you for your comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daisuke88 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


Wow, thank you very much. You rock. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daisuke88 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I am not vandalizing!

I am simply informing readers that the article contains bias, and is guilty of the straw-man fallacy. I am not being destructive or improper. I am doing the right thing-which is informing people! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Apologian (talk • contribs) 21:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

If you feel that the article is bias, please express your concerns on the talk page and provide examples so a consensus can be formed. Icestorm815 • Talk 21:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

RE:WP:RFPP

Yeah I got like 5 straight edit conflicts. I explained on RFPP, thanks for the heads-up tho. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 22:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

No prob! Icestorm815 • Talk 22:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Addbot ← Shorebot

Hi there. I am the "owner" of the account shorebot. My plan is to eventually turn it into a bot but i need to start with a new user name so that i can get the api working first. I am an established user. I hope this improves my chances. ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 22:39, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Will that sig on the request do? ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 22:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
No problem. I can do that ^^. ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 22:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Just wondering. How long do requests normally take? I was hoping to try to get some work in on it tonight. ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 22:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Ahh thats good news. So if i make for instance [User:Shorebot/Run] it will change to [User:Addbot/Run] when the / if the username changes? Thanks for your help ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 22:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Kyle Kellkamp

The article was deleted due to the subject lacking notability. I however would like to dispute this. While Kyle Hellkamp may not be world renowned, he is very notable in a certain region. I would compare his notability to that of Punch Sport Drink (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punch_sport_drink) which is not a world-wide beverage but is well known to the students and alumni of the United States Naval Academy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Like2bsailing (talk • contribs) 01:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

fifaworld07 RFA

Hi Icestorm, could you take a look at Requests for adminship/fifaworld07. It looks like a malformed request for adminship and probably just needs to be deleted. Thank you. MSGJ (talk) 19:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Y Done Icestorm815 • Talk 19:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:Infobox actor

Your edit broke the template, fix or undo please?.--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 22:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I undid your edit. Please test template changes in a sandbox before go-live. This template is transcluded all over the place. Thanks, Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 22:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


Tailapa-II - Chalukya Dynasty -Corrections required through deletion of inaccurate and unverified information/claim given in this page

Sir,

Many thanks for your feedback on my efforts to rectify errors and inaccurate bits of information on some of the pages devoted to Chalukya Kings. At the outset, I would like to make it clear that I have no brief or prejudice either towards or against the Chalukyas or Cholas or any other empire or kingdom. While your feedback on how to edit or invite historians or other participants for discussion was commendable, there were a couple of things that I couldn't understand and with frequent visits to the site I hope to learn more.

I had written comments on two chapters (for the present) devoted to Chalukya Kings, mainly Tailapa-II and his son and successor Satyashraya. Perhaps my method was wrong and so those comments got deleted, but being a new member (though it isn't my right) at least I could have been guided on which section to approach for initiating a debate or discussion etc. for pointing out inaccuracies and contribute to either correction of that page or be corrected myself.

Regarding the page on Tailapa-II, let me start this way. There are two pages, one on Tailapa-II and the other on his contemporary Chola King, Raja Raja Chola I.

In the page on Raja Raja I the following is attributed to him (let us remember that Raja Raja I took over as king or got coronated in the year 985 AD):

The southern kingdoms of Pandyas, Cheras and the Sinhalas were often allied against the Cholas.[5] It was the case when Rajaraja came to the throne. Rajaraja's initial campaigns were against the combined Pandya and Chera armies. There is no evidence of any military campaign undertaken by Rajaraja until the eighth year of his reign. During this period he was engaged in organising and augumenting his army and in preparing for military expeditions.

In contrast, the page on Tailapa-II states the following, inaccurately in my view: In 992. Raja Raja Chola was vanquished and the Chalukya monarch secured one hundred and fifty elephants

Here there is no question of either of these two kings having fought each other and hence, neither of this won over or got defeated by the other king. Further evidence corresponds as under (from wikipedia's own pages, which may also not be shorn of evidence)..

[edit] Kandalur Salai The very first military achievement of Rajaraja’s reign was the campaign in the Kerala country c 994 C.E.. Rajaraja’s early inscriptions use the descriptive ‘Kandalur salai kalamarutta’ (காந்தளுர் சாலைக் களமறுத்த). In this campaign Rajaraja is said to have destroyed a fleet in the port of Kandalur, which appears to have been situated in the dominions of the Chera King Bhaskara Ravi Varman Thiruvadi (c. 978 – 1036 C.E.).[8][9] Inscriptions found around Thanjavur show that frequent references are made to the conquest of the Chera king and the Pandyas in Malai-nadu (the west coast of South India). Kandalur-Salai, which later inscriptions claim to have belonged to the Chera king, was probably held by the Pandyas when it was conquered by Rajaraja.[10] Some years' fighting apparently was necessary before the conquest could be completed and the conquered country could be sufficiently settled for its administration could be properly organised.

Sir, through the above example, I further want to state (I leave it to you to decide whether it is a 'proof' or not by verifying yourself from the relevant wikipedia pages) that not just prior to 993 (which was the 8th year of Raja Raja I's reign - considering that for a period of 8 years from the day of his accession, Raja Raja I did not fight any war, which means he neither defeated or get defeated by anyone in war. Not just this Sir, after 993 i.e. during the years 994-997 he was busy in the conquest of three kingdoms as per the Kandalur inscriptions, i.e. the Chera, Pandya and Sri Lanka and not just that he spent 'Some Years' (as per the above para) before the said conquests could be completed and the conquered countries sufficiently brought under Chola control.

The above para again proves that even during the period 993-998 there was no occasion for Tailapa-II to fight Raja Raja I. In any case as Tailapa-II page would show, Tailapa-II was succeeded by his son Satyashraya in the year 997.

Now let us see what inscriptions favouring Tailapa-II himself have to speak off by way of his relations or adversarial attitude towards the Cholas. These inscriptions come from District Chitradurga, Karnataka and I request you to pls. see the following link:

http://www.visitchitradurga.com/linkfiles/historyfiles/rechalukya.php

In these pages lines are devoted to Kings of various dynasties that ruled and controlled what is now known as Chitradurga in modern Karnataka. The specific inscription with regard to Tailapa-II and his animosity to the Cholas is as under:

Tailapa

To return to the Chalukyas, Taila or Tailapa, who not only regained all the territories of his forefathers but even extended them in all directions, must have been an active and ambitious ruler and has been aptly described in the inscriptions as full of desire to fight with the Chola king and as being a destroying fire to the Cholas. It may be remarked at the very outset that if the early Chalukyas had been largely occupied in the South in wars against the Pallavas, the later Chalukyas had to engage them­selves in that quarter in struggles with the Cholas.

Sir, the above lines speak of his keenness to fight the Chola kings and of being a destroying fire to the Cholas. This and the subsequent inscriptions do not speak of his engagement in any war with the Cholas, especially of a victory he might have won against the Cholas, who during the periods 950-1070 were the most powerful empire in South India. Especially Tailapa-II would have proudly announced his 'vanquishing' Raja Raja I in most parts of the Kingdom and filled this news with various inscriptions? Do we have such proofs? No, Sir because we have in Chitradurga, one inscription in the year 992 itself which speaks as under:

We have one inscription in this district, from Vasana in Davangere taluk, dated 992, referring to the reign of Taila II (973-997) under his title Ahavamalla. At that time, Kadambalige was under one Jatarasa, a Sinda chief.

At least in the above inscription with all fanfare the news of Tailapa-II as Ahavamalla defeating Raja Raja I Chola could or should have occured but it doesn't. In addition, Sir, I have enclosed excerpts from the wikipedia page on Raja Raja I which says that he spent a few years from 994 onwards winning over not one but three provinces i.e. Sri Lanka, Chera and Pandya Kingdoms. With Raja Raja I concentrating on provinces to the South of the Chola Kingdom and with Tailapa-II consolidating in North Karnataka in the Manyakheta/Malkhed region fighting with the Paramaras and Gujarat and South Maharashtra Kingdoms, there was absolutely no occasion for Tailapa-II to fight a war with Raja Raja I, let alone either defeating or losing to him.

This much is my contention based on which, I humbly request to kindly remove the inaccurate line attributing a victory of Tailapa-II over Raja Raja I in 992 be deleted.

I keenly look forward to your feeback.

Thanks

Srirangam99 (talk) 05:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Further information on Tailapa-II - request for deletion of inaccurate and unverified information

Sir,

As further proof on whether or not Tailapa-II (Chalukya Kingdom - Later Chalukyas) went to war with Raja Raja Chola I in AD 992, I request you to visit this link also:

http://www.whatisindia.com/inscriptions/south_indian_inscriptions/volume_9/chalukyas_of_kalyani.html

In fact the excerpts relevant to my current discussion with you are also produced herein for an impartial view and consequent review, thirty party examination and further discussion with fellow historians for taking a final view as to whether or not the lines mentioning (falsely in my view, Sir) a victory for Tailapa-II over Raja Raja Chola I in 992 should be deleted. The relevant extracts are placed below (which you can yourself see by visiting the above site):

No. 75.

(A. R. No. 81 of 1904.)

ON THE THIRD SLAB SET UP ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE KALLESVARA TEMPLE AT BAGALI, HARAPANAHALLI TALUK, SAME DISTRICT.

This is dated Saka 909, Sarvajit, Vaisakha, su. 3, Adityavara corresponding to A.D. 987 April 3, Sunday, the tithi being current for about 4 hours on the next day. It refers itself to the reign of the Chalukya king Ahavamalladeva and states that while his Mahasamanta Aytavarma was ruling Kisukalu (du) seventy and Kogali five-hundred, the fifty (Mahajanas) of Balguli made a gift of a garden for the service of the god Adityadeva consecrated by Duggimayya.

No. 76.

(A. R. No.101 of 1904.)

ON THE 17TH SLAB SET UP ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SAME TEMPLE

This is dated Saka 913, Khara, Magha, su. 5, Mangalvara, corresponding to A.D. 991 January 12 Tuesday and states that, at the five-hundred, the Chalukya king Ahavamalladeva confirmed the toll contribution on betle leaves formrly fixed by the illustrious Kannaradeva (of the Rashtrakuta family). Adityavarmarasa is said to have been ruling Kogali five-hundred. The fifty and the thousand are also said to have made a gift of some tolls to a certain Barik-Echa. Chandoja engraved this.

No. 77.

(A. R. No. 36 of 1904.)

ON A SLAB SET UP TO THE EAST OF THE MANDAPA IN FRONT OF THE BASTI AT KOGALI, HADAGALLI TALUK, SAME DISTRICT.

This is dated Saka 914, Nandana, Pushya, ba. 12, Sukravara, Uttarayana-samkranti corresponding to A.D. 992 December 23 Friday and belongs to the reign of the Chalukya king Ahavamalladeva who was ruling from Rodda. His feudatory Adityavarmarasa of the Kadamba family, which was noted for ten horse sacrifices, was ruling Kogali five-hundred and Sundavatti twelve. The king is stated to have granted manya lands to the Brahmans, Settis, Gavundas and the five Mathas headed by the sthanadhipati Ganadharadeva and fixed the rate of taxes payable on other lands. It also specifies the fines to be imposed on those who violate customs or commit adultery and other offences. The nose of the woman guilty of adultery is to be cut off and the adulterer put to death. A theif also is to be put to death. Causing wounds and blood by beating is punished by a fine of 8 panas. The Mahajanas, the Gavundas and the five Mathas are exempted from bitti (compulsory labour) in the king’s service.

In the above inscription Sir, what is significant is that both the earlier Chalukya Kings like Pulakesi II, Vikramaditya II etc. have always, through their inscriptions, proudly proclaimed their victories over their contemporaries, especially the Pallavas, who were their prime adversaries before the advent of the Cholas. This practice was followed by a successor of Tailapa, i.e. King Somesvara I (also called Somesvara Ahavamalla and Trailokya Ahavamalla), who in one of his inscriptions of the period 1054-55 claims to be the 'destroyer of Rajadhiraja' (who was killed in battle with Somesvara I at Koppal, but that very war was won by the Cholas because Rajadhiraja's youngest brother Rajendra-II immediately took command of the army, re-galvanized his forces and defeated Somesvara I's army - this fact is in fact, proudly claimed in Chola inscriptions too, which is indicative of intense rivalry between both these houses).

Similarly Raja Raja Chola I too describes himself in his inscriptions as conqueror of the Chera, Pandya and Lanka kingdoms calling himself Mummudi Cholan (occupier of three kingdoms), Raja Raja I also called himself the conqueror of Rattapadi, which is an area north of Manyakheta, capital of the later Chalukyas falling both in modern North Karnataka and Southern Maharashtra.

Sir, what I seek to convey is that while and when Kings of both kingdoms did not hesitate to proclaim their victories over their rivals (including each other), what prevented Tailapa-II (who no doubt first re-claimed the Chalukya Kingdoms from his masters the Rashtrakutas and then spent the subsequent years consolidating and further occupying those territories of the Chalukyas which were in occupation of the Rashtrakutas and their friendly kingdoms)from proudly proclaiming in the above-referred Inscription No. 77what undoubtedly must have been a very famous and remarkable achievement (i.e. victory over or vanquishing of Raja Raja I ande securing 150 elephants etc. etc.) during his reign considering Tailapa-II himself was a very strong king himself and had been ruling since 973 and by 992 AD had already been ruling for 19-20 years and had thoroughly consolidated his kingdom and himself??

With these bits of information and accompanying logic and reasoning, Sir, I hope I have produced convincing evidence in support of my contention which is that it is completely incorrect to say that Raja Raja I the Chola King was defeated by Western (or Later) Chalukya King Tailapa-II in the year 992 AD. I assure you Sir, that I will keep scouring through other history pages, records and inscriptions and produce every available evidence in support of my above contention.

Thank you and I hope that the correct decision will be taken under your direction or supervision.

Thanks

Srirangam99 (talk) 11:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Error

The bot is adding article deletion tags to images [2] [3]. Icestorm815 • Talk 20:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Icestorm. The bot isn't adding deletion tags, I'm doing that by hand myself as I run across nonsense/non-noteable images while using my bot. So far maybe 10 images I've nominated for speedy deletion in the last day have been removed. Do you think the images you mentioned were incorrectly tagged? Cheers, CmdrObot (talk) 21:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

FPC

This is thanks to you userpage. Thought you should know. :0 - Milk's Favorite Cookie 21:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Cool! Icestorm815 • Talk 21:45, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Page protection

Thanks Icestorm - it really was starting to get out of hand. Hopefully this will encourage the users to attempt mediation or a higher level of dispute resolution. Cheers dude. Wisdom89 (T / C) 22:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. It sucks when people have to resort to arguments instead of discussion. Icestorm815 • Talk 22:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

user:Fiesta Bowl block

It appears as if he has created a new account, as evidenced by this diff, this lovely edit, and a similar response to a complaint on his user talk, as seen here compared to this talk page. I was unsure who to come to regarding this violation. Something longer seems to be in order. Baegis (talk) 01:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. I've blocked the sock indef for block evasion. I'll figure out what to with the other account. Icestorm815 • Talk 01:57, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Wiffle bat

 The Wiki Wiffle Bat
For resilience of character under fire in the matter of User:Fiesta bowl. FCYTravis (talk) 22:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
this WikiAward was given to Icestorm815 by FCYTravis (talk) on 22:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Icestorm815 • Talk 22:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)