User talk:Praveen pillay

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Praveen pillay, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! 

Contents

[edit] Just a note

Hi Praveen, I see that you are a new user on WP. I also appreciate your interest in the Kaveri article. But please do not blank content en masse like you did today without obtaining the consensus of other editors. It is considered vandalism on WP. See WP:VAND.

I usually dont like to use warning templates on new users. Also please DONT consider this a warning. I am sure you were'nt aware of certain rules, thats all. Thanks. Sarvagnya 23:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for refraining from reverting again. Very quickly, just fyi - those "Snapshot of the numbers" is NOT my POV or from Ktaka govt., website. It is from various neutral websites like rediff, some govt., of india websites and even from "The Hindu". Just wait till I add the references. And even if it is from a Govt. of Karnataka website, it still is a valid and reliable source according to wikipedia policies. See WP:RS. In such cases, you are free to bring info from Govt., of TN websites and add info. If there is disagreement between the two figures, we can try to find a neutral source(like say a Govt of India site) and if we cant find a neutral source, we can surely mention both figures and let the reader decide for themselves. As for your other concerns, I am sure that I didnt make it up myself. I am fairly certain that I got it from a Govt. of India website. So just wait till I put in the references.
Ya.. and btw, please dont lose any sleep over Belgaum. I havent been editing that article in months. But last heard, the guys who was opposing me, one of them ran away from WP[1] and another there got banned for 4 months from Wikipedia. So just chill out and have fun. Thanks again for your cooperation. :) Sarvagnya 03:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
These kannada gang are vandalizing every other article. A bunch of hooligans are also supported by seniors. Pity on wikipedia. user:sarvabhaum

[edit] Kaveri crisis article

  • I think we can wait for a reply from Sarvagnya untill we make drastic changes in the main article. Moreover I feel that if we start changing the main article straight from the bloom we would have to encounter edit wars. So if a few of the editors start discussing within ourself and come to a consensus on what we put there (mostly we may need to correct whats on there already), the article would be fine with the NPOV. Wikiality123 08:22, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vijayanagara Architecture

Hi. I saw your tag on this page. Since I created this page, I want to answer you tag. The idiom is considered unique because it is a combination of 4 styles, (Hoysala, Chalukya, Pandya and Chola). It looks like older Tamil temples because of the Gopura style that the empire inherited from around 1450 CE. That does not make it a Tamil temple and non-unique. Even a combination of styles, which this is, is unique in its own way. Percy Brown calls it "Supreme and Passionate flowering" of Dravidian art. Again the term "Dravidian" does not imply Tamil temple architecture alone. But then we know how loosely people/historians use the term for different topics. I have changed the wording and removed the tag.thanks.Dineshkannambadi 18:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Dinesh, the new wording seems to be perfect. Thanks a lot. Praveen 15:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cricket

Hi. Your spell checker seems to be an American one. The word spelled "center" in American English is spelled "centre" in British English. You might care to take a look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English, where it says, "Articles that focus on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country should generally conform to the usage and spelling of that country." JH (talk page) 18:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. "Centres" is fine in British English. JH (talk page) 20:35, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disco dance

Replied to your nonsense. Sarvagnya 03:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it looks like Yagshagana seems to be directly related to disco dance. Now, I understand why you like it. Good. Keep practicing.

Praveen 13:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar of Diligence Award

The Barnstar of Diligence
I award you this barnstar for your constant support, vigilance, and speaking up against POV. Wiki Raja 01:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] hindu nationalist

I was refering to LTTE, and specifically to Prabhakaran and Balasingam. Some random user thought the LTTE was a Hindu nationalist group, I reverted him many times. The arguments wiki raja and kathanar bring to the page are irrelevant and tangential to the issue of "Is the LTTE Hindu Nationalist?". Do reply on the article talk page if you think they are or arent.Bakaman 16:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moved your barnstar to your userpage

Hi,

I have moved your barnstar to your userpage. Wiki Raja 05:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for the nice stars. They make my userpage look a lot less sparse. I have been inactive for some time now, but if my doctor allows me I hope to return to more active writing soon. -- Ponnampalam 16:09, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Concerns about Bharatanatyam article

Hi Praveen, if you have concenrs about certain users' intentions, you may request an admin to protect the article until disputes are resolved and request arbitration between the four of you. I would strongly recomment posting a request on WP:AN. Thanks Parthi talk/contribs 21:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Praveen, the article is in a bad shape and full of misinformation. It is an important article and it is sad that it is so clearly abused. The same with Carnatic music page. Parthi and I and several others tried to improve the carnatic music page and it is still in a bad shape. Let me read some of the comments and changes made and see whether I can add anything useful. --Aadal 21:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Praveen, I'm slowly limping back to editing and may not be available enough to intervene in the Bharathanatyam dispute. As for the verify tag, if your cited source is an easily verifiable one, you can ask an admin to remove the tag. To help verification, you can cite online references or upload scanned copies of referred pages. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 07:42, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kannada

Thanks for self reverting your "verify credibility" tags. when we start doubting established and well known historians, we only create an unwarranted and unwanted edit/verify war that is nonconstructive to everyone.Dineshkannambadi 01:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I saw your comment on the Talk:Kannada page about the inline citations. May be you are not aware of this but citations are best provided in this format, "Kamath (2001), p10" with the reference section listing the full name of the book referenced. Hope this helps.Dineshkannambadi 01:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure what according to you is a third party considering the historian quoted is a very reputed one. If I find another scholars opinion on this, I shall surely add it, though this in no way credits or discredits the opinion of Kamath, the cited author.Dineshkannambadi 13:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
I have provided the "3rd party" citations. Sometimes, all the info is right there, but can often unnoticed.Dineshkannambadi 14:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anon vandal

Thanks for repairing the vandalism to my user page! PubliusFL 23:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome Praveen 14:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

I just saw you on a particular page [2] and wanted to share a quote with your: [3]. --Bhadani (talk) 17:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tags

I have removed most of your hasty tags and explained why. Citations are valid unless proven wrong. If you think the citation is false, go for arbitration. Dont tag just because it does not suit you. Also written tradtion is not just literature, it also includes inscriptions. People dont sing inscriptions, they write it.I will provide one additional citation though about the 30000 inscriptions.Dineshkannambadi 20:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Replied herePraveen 20:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Sources dont become unreliable based on one wikipedians opinion. You will have to prove the sources (scholars) are unreliable first. The two articles presented clearly "indicate" the 2000 year antiquity. Regarding the Kamath citation, others have tried to discredit him in the past and failed. Normally, discreditation of a scholar is a last desperate step, which normally fails.Dineshkannambadi 20:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
So, he has a history. Thats expected. Anyways, the 3rd source failed verification. Do not resort to gang reverting and please address the issue. You can either remove that citation or prove that your claim was indeed in the citation. Please do not add multiple citations which have nothing to do with statement that you are referring to. 2nd source is a website and not most of the time not reliable (see guide lines) Praveen 20:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Everyone has a history. How did you decide the verification failed. Was it your wisdom that advice you to decide so? Prove the source is invalid conclusively or keep out of trouble.Dineshkannambadi 20:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
So, he has a history. - do you realise that when dinesh said others have tried to discredit him in the past, he was referring to acknowledged trolls and puppet masters like Users:mahawiki, aryarajya mahrshtra, sarvabhaum et al.. all of whom have been banned. Now you're also trying to discredit him. "Thats expected". Sarvagnya 20:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I expected another misguided troll. I was not disappointed. Praveen 20:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Read the article carefully. Dont be in a hurry. The article in the Hindu says,

Mahadevan has brought to light in this work the influence of Old Kannada on Tamil-Br-ahm-i inscriptions from a period (Second Century B.C. to Fourth Century A.D.) anterior to the earliest Kannada inscriptions and literature. This is a very interesting observation he has made on the basis of lexical and grammatical usages showing the influence of Old Kannada. Dineshkannambadi 20:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

It is not a quote reproduced from a book/journal. Its just an observation (that too vague at that). You can not use News paper interviews as primary source for establishing antiquity of Kannada. Anyways my 3R are done for today. Praveen 20:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Irrespective of Wiki policy on newspaper citations, Just the Kamath citation is more than enough under any circumstance. There is nothing you can do other than create an edit war from which You have nothing to gain.Dineshkannambadi 20:55, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
You can at least remove the other citations. I didn't say remove the sentence itself, Did I? (I may if every citation is proved wrong) Praveen 20:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

IM is an acknowledged expert in the field(and a Tamilian) and Hindu is an acknowledged reliable source. Hindu is reporting what IM has studied and concluded. we are using the Hindu report in addition to other refs. there is nothing in wiki-laws that prohibits this. if there is, show me. Sarvagnya 21:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

do u even know where to use those verify tags? even if i were to cite the book itself, you could still add a verify tag saying "this is only what has been reported by iravatham mahadevan. somebody please take a look at the brahmi inscription and tell me". Sarvagnya 21:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
It was his speculation; It was not a reproduction of a paper. Do you really know why verify tags exist and when to use? And again, you are writing some hypothetical theories such as what i would do! I didn't know omniscients came down to earth. Good to meet you Praveen 21:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I have provided one more citation from Harvard univeristy press regarding the influence of old Kannada on Tamil inscriptions from the same book by IM.Dineshkannambadi 21:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki Raja

I blocked Wiki Raja as it was obvious that he was Indrancroos who had been evading his 3 month block. Hence I indef-blocked WR and reset the 3 month block on Indrancroos. - Aksi_great (talk) 08:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kannada

I do note that you made four reverts here in the space of a few hours. Please keep in mind the WP:3RR policy which you have broken. I have locked the page in the mean time. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:20, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I have not 'reverted' 4 times. My 3 reverts were [4], [5], [6]. You were probably confused about this edit which is not a revert since dinesh's contribution was different. How did you come to know about the edit war? Is it in your watch list? Or did somebody contact you? Anyways, good job in stopping further escalation of conflict. :) BTW: If a edit war is on progress and if I report that to you, would you be kind enough to protect the article? Praveen 17:31, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I do have the article on my watchlist. Actually the other edit was also a a revert, because you had already added those tags on the Greek stuff the day before - [7]. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I asked a few basic questions, and I'm surprised to receive totally irrelevant responses. Perhaps the Kannada users/readers there don't have an answer. Take a look at this--Aadal 19:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hi Praveen. Thanks for your message. You are right. We should continue to keep our focus to value add to the project. Regards. --Bhadani (talk) 09:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Praveen. sorry that I had to revert your latest edit to Tamil language as it broke the ref syntax badly. Please see my edit summary about "mediaeval" spelling. Please redo the other copyediting. Thanks. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 14:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Happy New Year

Hi Praveen, though belated, sincere best wishes for a Happy Tamil New Year. Thanks for your kind greetings!--Aadal 18:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review

An article that you had shown interest in the past has been tagged to be peer reviewed. Your input will be appreciatedRaveenS

Nanri, Ungalukkum Inniya poothandu valthukalRaveenS 12:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rashtrakuta

Hi. You have altered the meaning of citation #23 based on your own conjectures from earlier citations. Each citation is independent. Earlier citations on ethnic controversy is regarding 6th century Rashtrakutas. The citation #23 pertains to 8th-10th century Rashtrakutas. You cant draw your own conclusions and modify cited sentences. The sentence will be changed back to what it was, unless you do it yourself.Thanks.Dineshkannambadi 16:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

My apologies. This sentence was not added by me. It was added by another user (now banned) and he had not put in the link that you put in. This helps the citation greatly. Some Vandals have been trying to derail this FAC and that kind of go me on the edge. Thanks for your contribution.Dineshkannambadi 17:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I have removed the redundant citation.Dineshkannambadi 17:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Do not label content disputes as vandalism

With regards to your comments on Carnatic music: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

Do not label content issues as vandalism as you did in your recent edit summary. This is also not the first time you're doing it. I've spent excruciating hours on the talk page fighting the nonsense you've been pushing. Just because I dont watch a page for some time doesnt mean I approve of the nonsense you or somebody else sneaks back into the article. Sarvagnya 17:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Replied to your BS in my talk page ::here. Praveen 20:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
This is not the first time that you have resorted to BS pushing & removed cited facts either. Remember these? [8][9] Praveen 20:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Let me warn you once again that you are in breach of WP:NPA. Labelling a warning that you received for your breach of WP guidelines and policies is also incivil. I have not removed any sourced information. I have only removed information that has been added in spite of there being opposition and lack of consensus about it.
For details read the talk page and the archived sections on Carnatic music. I didnt spend several hours there explaining myself only for you or Venu to unilaterally sneak back the nonsense into the articles. For the nth time neither silapp., nor manimekalai nor tolkappiyam has anything to do with music or dance. Even lesser with Carnatic music and Bharatanatyam. If there are any mentions of music or dance in the two 'novels', it is only incidental and it doesnt become a musical or dance 'treatise'. As for tolkappiyam, I think its time that some tamils like you decided what the hell it is really about. Grammar or music or dance or geography, nature, sexology, zoology, botany, medicene, science or something else?!! I've seen it being claimed as a text dealing with all of these and some more depending on the context. Amazing, I should say, that you manage to make things as disparate as grammar and sexology meet! So decide first and go with it. You just cant have tolk mutate many times a day to suit your conveniences.
As for CM and BN, what do you want to dump in those articles next? Saagara Sangamam, Shankarabharanam and Sindhu Bhairavi. Or maybe Malayamarutha and Sanadi Appanna?? Or perhaps S.L. Bhyrappa's Mandra?? Get this clear. Natyashastra is a treatise on the fine arts. Sangita Ratnakara is a treatise on sangita. So are several of the other texts mentioned in the article. silapp., and manimekhalai are love stories in the realm of literature and fiction. Sarvagnya 22:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Sarvagnya removed passages from Carnatic music that have been supported by numerous references by reputed scholars. I can't help but think this is purely due to an overwhelming anti-Tamil bias. Parthi talk/contribs 22:44, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
You cant add 'well sourced info' about something totally unrelated to any random article and cry hoarse when somebody removes it. Silappadikaram is, after all, a tale of an anklet filled with jewels and gems etc.,. Right? Why dont you go add it to Jewellery or something?! Or perhaps Tolkappiyam to Sexology! And see how long it lasts there. Sarvagnya 22:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Sarvagnya, how many times should I tell you. Is it that hard to comprehend. We don't give a bull about your opinion. We have not added anything unrelated. The reference given clearly states that there is a relationship between sillapathikaram & bharathanatyam & CM. If you feel so distressed, please take a break and practice record dance. I mean yagshagna (whatever hell that is) :) Praveen 23:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

It is really a pity that Sarvagnya and one or two other users don't see the need to write something fair. Where strongly differing views are present, it is not difficult to reflect both (or multiple sides) views in a decent prose. The facts in CM and Bharatanatyam are so clear and yet some of these users are so against Tamil. The hard fact is CM really evolved from Tamil Music (Sangam paaNars, then Bhakti period and then pre-trinity musicians and of course trinity etc. ). It is not some POV. For sure, there were contributions from Purandaradasa and haridasa movement etc. but even the Haridasa movement was actually inspired by the Tamil Bhakti movement. Based on the history of numerous wiki articles and the discussion in the talk pages, it is appears that there is a strong Anti-Tamil bias and hatred in some quarters and that is blinding some people. Kannadaigas are fellow dravidians and they ought to see and understand better - not feel so jealous and destructive. Parthi spent so much time in trying to arrive at something reasonable! I withdrew after sometime, literally spent hundreds of hours providing details. May be they think and imagine that they are building an empire and 'fighting' the mind space?! --Aadal 23:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps the real life is too stressful :) Praveen 00:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carnatic music

Just a reminder to pay attention the three revert rule. You're currently very close to breaking it on this article. ··coelacan 06:41, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Be aware that the 3RR rule is not a license to make three reverts every day, and you may still be blocked for that. Since it seems several different editors are reverting you, you do not appear to have consensus for the changes you want to make. Please take up discussion at talk:Carnatic music, and if you are not satisfied with the results of that discussion, use dispute resolution, such as a request for comment. Slow motion edit warring that does not break WP:3RR can still get you blocked. ··coelacan 19:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not threatening to block you. But I am trying to let you know that edit warring is disruptive, regardless, and you may find yourself blocked if you keep up the revert war. You may be "right" about the content. In that case you should be all the more open to an RFC. Please try to build consensus. ··coelacan 20:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Praveen, thanks indeed for awarding me a star! My first!--Aadal 06:26, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request

Not that you don't already know this, but if I may kindly request you, please don't get embroiled with Sarvagnya and a few of his friends in Carnatic music and other pages. It would probably be better to seek an RFC or some other dispute resolution mechanism. And it is not just carnatic music page, there is a whole host of pages related to Tamil and Kannada and south indian cultural themes. There is absolutely no need for them to be so abrasive and contentious, but in trying to counter their unfair statements and positions, one shouldn't lose peace and purpose of collective contribution. You can see in the archives in Carnatic music, how many editors came in and tried to point out a better path. I had spent hundreds of hours and it had all been nullified there (at least for now!). --Aadal 04:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Strategy versus Emotion

Please read up on WP:ATTACK, WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA. WP:AGF these are the rules that POV pushers, drive by editors, those who belong to a cabal usually break in order to silence Neutral point of view. Once you know them by heart then you quote then everywhere ad nauseam when ever they breach it. It should read as following. Please refrain from attacking your fellow Wikipedian in breach of this particular rule (you have to quote the rule). Please assume good faith (quote the rule) and even the relevant section. Always never ever loose your cool. Then once you have say about 10 incidents of violations which the other moron has been very nicely warned but not adhered to, you take it to ANI or even a neutral Admin. The admin has to warn the individual and try to resolve the behavioral issue. You do this twice that is with two different admins over a 3 month period. Then you will know what to do next to banish the offending party out of Wikipedia temporarily or permanently. It is that easy. Always strategy wins over emotion. Just my two cents because we are in it to create content in an encyclopedic manner jointly not to have conflict. Those who create negative conflict (positive is good) use it as just another usenet forum to get off and they don’t belong here. If they do it in an office environment, they will be fired. If they do it with their family members they will be isolated and rejected. But they do it here because anonymity gives them the guts that they really don’t have in real life. But Wikipedia community too can get rid of them if they don’t repent and changeTaprobanus 13:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hold on

See my message on Aadal's talk page. I request you to put my edits back by reverting yourself and discuss on the talk page. If you want to add refs for women poet, the phoneme table etc., do it. Or I will put them back myself. But revert the rest of your reverts. Thanks. Sarvagnya 23:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Replied here Praveen 23:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
If that is all that you are concerned about, have the courtesy to discuss it on the talk page before reverting and then replying on my talk page. Also btw, I havent said that Tamil lit., is only 1000 years old. I have said that it is over 1000 years old. And stop fixating on Tieken alone. He is only one of the multiple scholars I've cited. And in any case, we should be discussing all this on the article talk page. And we will do that once you revert yourself. Sarvagnya 23:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for your hard work!

The Working Man's Barnstar
In recognition of your hard work in countering systematic anti-tamil POV from Sarvagna 'Pompous' Parthi talk/contribs 22:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


This award was for changing this to this.

[edit] Re trolls

Praveen, the trolls will eventually lose interest and go away. I have seen that in the past. If one simple exists in the WP project to belittle other cultures and to troll in talk pages, their energy will not lost long. Our aim should be to write good articles backed with reliable sources. Don't worry about the trolling and vandalism in the Tamil related articles. They can be fixed during the course of time. Parthi talk/contribs 22:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Political history of medieval Karnataka

Thanks for the input. I had that info there earlier but was removed in continuous copy edits to reduce content. However we will retain your edits. Please add the full name of the book and details to the "Reference" section in case someone asks. My books also have the same info which is universally known.ThanksDineshkannambadi 15:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the links

Praveen, Thanks for the links about the Wikipedia etiquette. I think I may have violated the 3RR rule, but at least now that I know about it, I'll be careful in the future. I'm amazed at the animosity shown in these pages... mostly from Kannadiga guys like Sarvagna and few others. It's clear that jealousy is plaguing their judgement. In any case, I see that you and another user Aadal have been patiently trying counter their baseless claims with citations. Good job on that ! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lotlil (talk • contribs) 20:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC).


[edit] Watch your words

With regards to your comments on Tamil language: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Read up on WP:VANDAL before calling other people vandals as you did here Sarvagnya 17:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Re Praveen 17:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Re. Sarvagnya 17:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Re Praveen 17:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RFC

Thanks Praveen. I'll participate in the RFC in any way I can. Parthi talk/contribs 20:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tagging

Praveen, quick question regarding the neutrality tag. In the Tamil language article, since you have started a rfc about two issues, is that grounds for adding the neutrality tag ? Lotlil 16:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Praveen, nice to have you back. Hope you had a good vacation. I wasn't too sure about the policies regarding the tagging and from whatever little I could read up, it was clear that all those tags on the article where clearly unwarranted, esp. since he hadn't started a discussion specifically on the tags. In any case, now that you are back, let's make sure we follow the guidelines and address these issues. Thanks. Lotlil 14:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification

Nice to see your contributions regarding Tamilnadu related articles.

Regarding Tamil language article.I wish to understand what we are trying to say by following statement.

Unlike most of the other Indian languages[citation needed], metalanguage of Tamil[unclear], the language used to describe the technical linguistic terms of the language and its structure, is also Tamil.--Indianstar 04:03, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Escalate

Praveen, how do we escalate the issue of vandalism in the Tamil language article to the admins ? Are there specific admins assigned to look at TN or India related articles ? Thanks. Lotlil 17:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Praveen, I will probably not be able to do much for the next day or so. May be tomorrow, I will try and read the citation on the "Tamil influence" part. I was also thinking since that seems to be the biggest issue now, why don't we remove that part from the article for the time being and then discuss the citation in the talk page to arrive at a consensus ? What do you think ? Lotlil 22:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh, one more thing: Is there a way to figure out the IP of a registered user ? Or is that information restricted to admins only ? Lotlil 22:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] thanks

Thank you Praveen, for your kind words. If you ever need anything, don't hesitate to lemme know. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 18:18, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Operation Poomalai

You removed an infobox from Operation Poomalai with an incomprehensible (to me) edit summary. I put it back, because I could see nothing wrong with it. If there is something wrong, please let me know. Novalis 15:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I am an idiot. That infobox wasn't what I thought it was. You were right, and I reverted to your version. Novalis 15:48, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

It's alright. Don't worry about it. Praveen 15:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, I fixed the template itself, so this should now be fixed on all pages. It took me a while to figure out how to do that. It turns out that templates live inside the template namespace. So if you go to Template:Campaignbox Sri Lanka massacres, you can see the edits. I'm going to put the infobox back on all pages where it's appropriate (which I think it wasn't on Poomalai, since it wasn't a massacre). Novalis 16:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

... which I guess isn't anywhere, since you didn't remove it anywhere else ... Novalis 16:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Note

It is so good that they are going after gang raped and killed women, it shows the caliber to the rest of the world and many partisans did not even vote in the related AFD that shows they had a sence of morality in them that I really need to appreciate. But in general the sober amongst them realized that it worked in the favor of getting this nasty information out which was not there before. Also in wikipedia people were scared to write about raped women in general except when I started. Then this AFD opened the gates so well that I can write a few more with or without Tamilnet. Now this edit war over Tamilnet, it is like someone scripted it, I say jump and they ask me how high :)) The point has been made about unilateral editing without consensus as the talk pages often requested. It is evidence for user conduct. Thanks

[edit] Western Chalukyas

A piece of advice. Keep your smart comments to yourself. The citation has been provided.Dineshkannambadi 23:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Give your unwanted advice to your 'group'. Nothing in my edit summary is unfounded. He did suicide, didn't he? I hope there are not many 'brave' people like him in the world. Praveen 00:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tiruvalluvar

That was quite funny :) Lotlil 18:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Original Barnstar
For your hard work on Tamil and now Sri Lanka related articlesTaprobanus 21:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thiruvalluvar

Hey Praveen, I see that you are about to move Tiruvalluvar to Thiruvalluvar. I think the easiest way to do this is load the current page Tiruvalluvar and hit the "move" tab on top of the main page. In the subsequent move page that comes up give the new name as "Thiruvalluvar". This should take care of the move, in most cases (I've had a problem once where this move didn't move the talk page). Lotlil 13:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Exasperation

Mr Praveen, I am totally fed up with a gang of vandals and quacks who insist that all south Indian history is Kannada history, Telugu script is derived from Kannada script, Karnataka expansion spread up to Bihar, Rashtrakutas and Yadavas were Kannadigas etc. They collude among themselves and take turns to revert my edits without giving any reason. They need evidences from me but they quote some Bangalore historian and locally published books as the most authoritative sources of history. I requested a few administrators to protect my edits. They took no action. I wonder how to deal with them!!Kumarrao 11:56, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Makeover for WikiProject Dravidian Civilizations!

Hi,

Thought you would be interested in checking out the makevover for WikiProject Dravidian civilizations. I could not get the Malayalam font to work. We would have to work on that. Enjoy!

Wiki Raja 23:12, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Results for AfD on Dravidian civilizations article

Hi,

Here is the outcome of the final decision for AfD on the Dravidian civilizations article:

“ The result was no consensus to delete; defaulting to keep. This is most certainly not a 'hoax'; there are plenty of sources to show that this is a valid concept. However, the views of the Community were split down the middle with strong opinions on both sides. What is clear is that there are significant parts of the article that are disputed and the way forward is for those concerned editors to initiate a thorough-going rewrite. TerriersFan 20:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC) ”

ReWiki Raja 21:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Our new banner!

Image:Qxz-ad96.gif


Wiki Raja 23:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:INDIA Tagging with TinucherianBot for WikiProject Tamil Nadu

FYI- Your attention and help is requested .You are receiving this note as you are the member of the project -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 09:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)