User talk:Ravichandar84/Archive 9

Wikipedia ads file info – show another – #178 Tip of the moment... The fastest way to end a conflict: walk away Edit warring is bad, especially when idea exchange has stopped and is replaced by reverting edits. Not good, as it disrupts Wikipedia and wastes resources. Wikipedia's main resource is the time and effort that you and other Wikipedians devote to contributions. Edit warring is like a game of tic-tac-toe: once you know how to play, nobody ever wins. Edit warring is worse, though, because it can go on indefinitely and can get you banned. The solution? Chill out and relax. Go edit somewhere else on Wikipedia for a few days; Wikipedia has millions of nice and quiet pages to work on. Meanwhile, you may think of a solution that everyone will be happy with which you can bring to the talk page. When you come back, stay calm and keep your involvement in the dispute on the talk page. Others who refuse to do so will answer for it eventually. Building consensus is the Wikipedia way of resolving disputes, as continued discussion brings new possibilities and positive solutions to light. Think "What if we..." Prior tip – Tips library – Next tip Read more: Wikipedia:Resolving disputes   Wikipedia:Consensus   Become a Wikipedia tipster To add this auto-randomizing template to your user page, use {{totd-random}} Your help in sorting this out!!! Hullo!!! How are you??? I've mailed you a long time back. Did you have a look at it??? You see I badly want this thing to be cleaned up. The stuff appears in search results. Your suggestion that I request User:EncMstr to remove them is pretty good. But then, you see, since I accused him of inactivity with respect to the User:NisarKand issue, I am not sure if he would oblige me by removing those messages. This is exactly the reason why I approached you. Do you have any alternate suggestions or possible means to get it cleared? I am extremely sorry if I am troubling you but then it is not my intention to do so. I hope you understand my plight. The thing gets on to me whenever I log in to Wikipedia. I haven't been contributing much of late as you might get to know from my edit count. The problem is that Wikipedia talk pages are as easily accessible as articles. If only you could help me solve this issue this time around it'll be good. I promise you that I will not get into such a mess again. -RavichandarMy coffee shop 14:35, 4 September 2008 (UTC) yes, I did start an email discussion with EncMstr and and wondering whether he has decided to end it so I asked another arbitrator what they thought of it. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC) I discussed the matter with a couple of admins on gchat and one of them unilaterally tôk it upon himself to blank it. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC) Message from Harish Subramaniam Hi Ravi, I am not against the article , the references you have quoted may be all there, but can you provide evidence that the reference material contains terms such as "colonizers". Is there sufficient proof to this. Ajith being Iyer?. There is again no citation for this. Remember that you dont control this site, I appreciate your good work to bring this article to GA, but dont use incorrect statements. Then again can you provide proof for the above statements that Brahacharanam and ashtasahasram are more saivite. I am a vadama, and I know for a fact that my particular lineage did not show any interest in Vishnu worship or performing ellaborate rituals in worship of Vishnu, anything more than the normal rituals followed by any other member of Iyer community. On teh contrary they were ardent devotees of Shiva. In general interest , I would like to say that these statements are too general and provide a wrong perspective even if they may been lifted off from the book of a foreigner of those times. I neither have the time to verify the exact statements in the book nor the time for looking out for books which mention things to the contrary. But you should surely be knowing enough on this subject. Give up your ego and work towards a really better article. If you look back I have made significant contributions myself to this article,many years back, and the article retains many of my contributions. I have the right to point out misleading statements even though somebody passed it through GA. "Brahmin Colonizers" - when did this term ever become neutral???????????? --Harishpsubramanian (talk) 06:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC) Hi! Have as look at the definition of "colonizers" from the Free Online Dictionary:http://www.thefreedictionary.com/colonizer "col·o·nize (kl-nz) v. col·o·nized, col·o·niz·ing, col·o·niz·es v.tr. 1. To form or establish a colony or colonies in. 2. To migrate to and settle in; occupy as a colony. 3. To resettle or confine (persons) in or as if in a colony. 4. To subjugate (a population) to or as if to a colonial government. v.intr. 1. To form or establish a colony. 2. To settle in a colony or colonies. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- colo·nizer n." Of course, there is nothing objectionable if you are to interpret them in the first three ways. I don't understand how it contitutes WP:NPOV. The usage of the word "colonizers", in fact, appeared more relevant to me because Brahmins who migrated were often provided with grants of land in which they established their own colonies called "agraharams". Nevetheless, how does a single word affect the neutrality of a whole article. As for your other accusations, I have given you my reply in the talk page of the article. Your accusations that I am indulging in "mischief" and that I am "ignorant" etc. give wrong signals. Also see WP:CIVIL. Regards -RavichandarMy coffee shop 17:41, 6 September 2008 (UTC) On Colonies ... There are many interpretations to this term colonizers. The agraharams were really set up under the supervision of kings, so even though they lived in commuynity villages called agraharams - they did not rule even their own village. They had at best ownership to pieces of land within than area. They had no control or freedom to rule,or for that matter even hunt animals. The agraharamas were streets surrounded by paddy fields where the peasants lived. The peasant worked under the brahmins but were really subordinate only to the local chieftens. So the word colonizers cannot be made applicapable here especially considering the fact that in present day times the word colonizers is frequently used to describe imperialists. We would be fuelling wild speculation in later times Vadama and Vaishnavism Agreed that the Book mentions vadamas following vaishnavaite practices. But I have now provided references to reliable sources which proves beyond doubt that there were vadamas who worked to establish the supremacy of shiva as opposed to Vishnu. So based on this equally significant evidence I have made suitable amendments. --Harishpsubramanian (talk) 11:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC) Portrayal of Iyers I apologise for the delay in my reply to your message of the 6th ultimo. Although I am not very familiar with the subject, I am certain that some material can be uncovered, particularly with regard to books, by perusing the more socially oriented books of Kalki Krishnamurthy and Thevan, which many a time have Iyer characters as protagonists, such as Justice Jagannathan and Thuppariyyum Chambu, two of Thevan's classics. R. K. Narayan is also an important source of neutral if not positive portrayals of Iyers in several of his books. As for plays, I can think of none other than the original Vietnam Veedu, which was adapted to the screen later. Coming to movies, I am entirely at a loss for positive depiction, particularly since the Madras Presidency, Madras State and Tamil Nadu, have been in the grip of the Anti-Brahmin Movement right from the dawn of the Era of Talking Pictures. Nevertheless I shall try. Coming to other matters, I have noticed that a few new statements have cropped up on the page on Vadama, which could be gladly accepted, could they come with references. I have marked the same and solicit your assistance concerning it. I also feel the deletion of the NPOV disputes tag is called for since both sides to the immigration question are quite fairly depicted now. I would like to learn of your opinion in this regard. I have also included the name of Sir S. Subramanya Aiyer, who was one of my ancestors, and the first Judge to introduce references to American Jurisprudence in Indian Court proceedings, while also being the second Indian Judge of the Madras High Court. I am unaware of any published references that name him to be of the Vadama community and would gladly welcome any help you could provide concerning the same. Voltigeur (talk) 17:14, 8 September 2008 (UTC) Currently I am busy with FAC of SL Tamils, once it is done I can help with your projects. Now that I have gone through an FA, Iyer article needs a through copy edit for MOS, style and prose. it would take someone with good knowledge of English. There are few volunteers you may want to approach.Taprobanus (talk) Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 2008. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 4, Issue 35 25 August 2008 About the Signpost WikiWorld: "George P. Burdell" News and notes: Arbitrator resigns, milestones  Wikipedia in the News Dispatches: Interview with Mav  Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News  The Report on Lengthy Litigation Volume 4, Issue 36 8 September 2008 About the Signpost Wikimedia UK disbands, but may form again WikiWorld: "Helicopter parent"  News and notes: Wikipedian dies, milestones Wikipedia in the News  Dispatches: Featured topics Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes, August  Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News  The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 21:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC) Mischief Well I didnt use the word mischief against any particular individual. It was said in the context of the word "Colonizers". This word would be more satisfying to people propagating anti brahminism. With regard to your latest edits I still do not accept your linking of chidambaram temple issue to appointment of non brahmin in temple issue. These are two different issues. Do they deserve a mention. Answer yes , because they are burning issues affecting real iyers in the time we now live in.It is not a historical incident, though it has abackground in the past. So please make amends which clearly identify the issue. This would not be a deviation as we are specifying the different manners in which iyers get politically involved. In the Political issues section, I am plannning to include the Kanchi arrest. One another instance of political confrontation of Iyers with Government. --Harishpsubramanian (talk) 10:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC) Article being finished?? Well I dont want to comment on that right away though you might have observed that I dont modify the article left and right. An article which talks about a modern day community and talks about contemporary issues as well cannot be stable. There are lots of gaps and lot of changes which might come in future - take the genetic origin. I have not touched it because somehow I feel its messy. I dont want to touch it unless we have some concrete genetic Information on Iyers. Iyers even though pretend to be a single community these days have lot of genetic differences within themselves. Within Vadama community, I have seen genetic differences between one group and another. I dont want to touch this section but I am hoping to find a more detailed reference to the genetic factors in Iyer community, if that comes I would be among the first to change this section. The statement that Iyers are somewhat different from others seems to be very amateurish. Some? What is that? Who everyone? or are they only some? What about those who come from communities like issai vellar and devadasis- how about affinity to them. The tone of this paragrpah is such that there are two sections - brahmins who are different and non brahmins who are different from them. If we examine the genitic features of each and every community in tamil nad you are likely to find some closer in genetic affinity to some brahmin community than to other non brahmins itself. Do we have that analyzed and presented in the article? There needs to be some better focus on the lifestyle of traditional members of Iyers in modern times - I am referring to those people who belong to the vadhiyar community, who have also modernized like others but oddly still different from others and this difference is not captured. They also like the other Iyers no longer follow many of the antiquated customs. Do we capture the exact difference between sandhyandana and other vedic rituals of Iyers and other brahmins including Iyengars? Starting from abhivadanam there are differences. These differences never get captured.We dont have modern life style of rural brahmins, the gurukkals and all. We mention the sectarian differences in Iyers but do we really give a picture that there is a natural evolution and merging of subsects? Nope. This is not presented either. The life of a typical Iyer boy in a modern day veda pathashala? There are lot of gaps and I do agree its just an article which should end somewhere, and thats why I appreciate your job, consolidating stuff,removing things - difficult to do. I knew things would get difficult with a long article. Thats why more than 2 years back I moved the whole list of iyers to a different article altogether called Distinguished Iyers. The other thing which I wanted to mention is that your book Thurston seems to be considerable but it has its own holes and somebody at a later stage might want to edit references to choose more better source of reference and may change texts as suitable.Being smartha has nothing to do with saivism of some vadamas because there are lot of vadamas who are traditionally saivaite and have even tried to advocate principles different from advaita more trying to prove saivism as the highest goal. I will be removing the term "being smartha" in the context of vadama. Most Iyers are smarthas anyway. --Harishpsubramanian (talk) 11:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC) Lots of Overlap of Iyer artcile with Iyengar article I would suggest that the editor retain only that part which is specific to Iyers and move the overlapping section to a different aricle. Many of the statements apply to Iyengars as well. ----Harishpsubramanian (talk) 12:00, 11 September 2008 (UTC) # Parithimar Kalaignar On 11 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article # Parithimar Kalaignar, 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. --Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:50, 11 September 2008 (UTC) Image:TNBarnstar.png listed for deletion An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:TNBarnstar.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. RavichandarMy coffee shop 03:09, 12 September 2008 (UTC) 9/13/08 DYK On 13 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Coja Petrus Uscan, 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. Thank you for your contributions! -- RyRy (talk) 08:46, 13 September 2008 (UTC) Image copyright problem with Image:Haridas 3years.jpg Thanks for uploading Image:Haridas 3years.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in. That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page. This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 11:39, 14 September 2008 (UTC) Indic text User:Vadakkan has helped me in the past in Indic text. Taprobanus (talk) 12:22, 14 September 2008 (UTC) Number of problems with left aligining images. This has to be fixed Taprobanus (talk) 13:13, 14 September 2008 (UTC) Radhakrishnan? Radhakrishnan was a telugu person. Could he be classified as a tamilian especially when he spoke telugu at home? Further I have heard that members in his family looked for aliances with other andhra based telugu families but not with an Iyer family. Could he be classified as an Iyer,considering all this? --Harishpsubramanian (talk) 08:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC) Being slow Hi again Ravi! I was thinking about what you said about lack of Tamil related articles on DYK and yeah you are right. I do accept that I should have tried a bit more. Will get back to business asap. Thanks for kicking my butt! :D Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 10:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC) DYK notification for Iyothee Thass On 15 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Iyothee Thass, 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. --Congratulations! Alansohn (talk) 20:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC) DYK medal The 25 DYK Medal A medal which had been due for a while now for you to have crossed 25 DYKs. Excellent work mate Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 20:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC) Image without license Unspecified source/license for Image:Ananda Ranga Pillai.JPG Thanks for uploading Image:Ananda Ranga Pillai.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well. For more information on using images, see the following pages: Wikipedia:Image use policy Wikipedia:Image copyright tags This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 01:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC) Unspecified source/license for Image:RKNarayan modified.jpg Thanks for uploading Image:RKNarayan modified.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well. For more information on using images, see the following pages: Wikipedia:Image use policy Wikipedia:Image copyright tags This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 01:14, 16 September 2008 (UTC) Category of Iyengar Nuclear Scientists Why not make a section under Iyengars of Nuclear scientists belonging to our community who have been head of the nuclear establishmnets such as Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and Nuclear Power Corporation (NEC) in India? Late Dr Raja Ramanna, Iyengar from Karnataka, was the Chairman of AEC when India tested the nuclear bomb for the first time.--Nvvchar (talk) 17:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC) Australian cricket team in India Hi there, spotted the article you just created - 2008/09 Australian cricket team tour to India - and noticed it was a duplicate of Australian cricket team in India in 2008-09, which is named according to the Cricket WikiProject's naming conventions. I've redirected it accordingly. However, the other version doesn't have any text to go with it yet, so if you want to add your text to it, feel free! You can retrieve it from here. Any questions and please ask on my talk page. Regards! AllynJ (talk | contribs) 17:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC) Just so you know, the other article is tagged with future event as the tour hasn't actually started yet. As you can see from the page, it says it's about the tour that is due to start next month - which is the same one you're talking about, right? AllynJ (talk | contribs) 17:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC) I don't really see any problem with just including it on the other tour page, really. It's not going to be too long to need splitting, and I don't really see why it would need putting on a seperate page, so personally I think it'd be best just to merge them straight away... Should we ask some others in the wikiproject for their opinion? AllynJ (talk | contribs) 17:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC) Australian Cricket Removal I removed the items about the Australian Cricket tour, because generally, only the results of such tours are included, which is why I said, "Hasn't happened yet." Sorry for not providing a better edit summary. The removal has nothing to do with the state of the articles or the sourcing. I have no issues with those. It's the notability of the current items. I don't see too much notability in the Pakistan Cricket Board is trash-talking the Aussies, or saying that such a tour is not confirmed. I hope you understand my reasoning for this, SpencerT♦C 01:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC) [1] No bad feelings taken. It was a poor edit summary on my part. I just hope you understand where I'm coming from on this matter. SpencerT♦C 01:49, 18 September 2008 (UTC) Ananda Ranga Pillai On 19 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ananda Ranga Pillai, 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. --BorgQueen (talk) 06:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC) Radhakrishnan Please close this issue on Radhakrishan. I would like you to refer to wikipedia section as well as number of other sources on net which identifies his mother tongue as telugu. That apart from the fact that he is a Mulukanadu, and also from the fact that sarvepalli is his family name, unlike iyers who keep their father's name and village name in their initials, telugu brahmins keep their family name in thei initials. These are sufficient proofs by themselves not to qualify iyers. If we use a broad range of definition then tanjore marathi and saurashtrain brahmins of madurai should be qualified as iyers as well, in fact they have a greater right to be classified as tamil brahmins than radhakrishan who spoke telugu and belonged to a sect of mulukanadu of vaidika sub sect and bore the surname "Sarvepalli". With regard to dravid all fine with his ancestoral origin but he is half marathi with mother being maharashtrian , speaks and follows deshastha customs. This apart from fact that ancestors were long separated from tamil nadu makes it difficult to qualify as an Iyer. Indra Nooyi is a first generation Iyer and therefore no controversy here. Please make amendments and remove the names from article as well as the picture of Iyer . For Information on Radhakrishnan , the wikipedia article mentioning him to be a telugu is sufficient. For dravid there are more Information indicating he is maharashtrian rather than an Iyer inspite of his ancestoral origin mentioned in Vedam Jayashankar's book.His ancestors were Iyers not him. Hope that makes sense. Please rectify. You dont want the article to be later modified for this reason?, would you? --Harishpsubramanian (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC) Rahul Dravid All I am saying is that Rahul Dravid should not be included in the list of photos of Iyers. Vedam Jaishankar's biography on the other hand records his Iyer ancestory.Just to inform you by the way Vedam Jaishankar's biography gains credibility because Rahul Dravid was present during the release of the Biography! I asked you to remove dravid's photo- inspite of his likely Iyer origin from one side of his family. That all! Its upto you to remove the photo or not! I suggested ways of making the article more credible and I dont know why you should pounce on me!:) --Harishpsubramanian (talk) 15:17, 19 September 2008 (UTC) Hi dude Hey dude, how's everything? You are doing a great job. Let us work together on the areas in which we have a common interest. I am considering getting back to Wikipedia, so let's see how it goes :-) Sudharsansn (talk · contribs) 00:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC)