| Revision as of 08:25, 27 February 2008 editAmarrg (talk | contribs)6,322 edits →Stop adding tags: Plain rubbish← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:34, 27 February 2008 edit undoAmarrg (talk | contribs)6,322 edits →Stop adding tags: More...Next edit → | ||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 528: | Line 528: | ||
| :Its you who are twisting things to suit your needs. It is YOU who are thinking that the tags are relevant and there are OTHERS who think they are irrelevant. Since you are the one who started the whole thing by tagging, the onus lies on you to prove that the tags are relevant. Your argument is equivalent to you saying: ''"I am gonna hit you but if you hit me back, you have to explain to me why you hit me back"'', which is plain nonsense. Take your rubbish arguments elsewhere... -- ]<sup><small>]/]</small></sup> 08:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC) | :Its you who are twisting things to suit your needs. It is YOU who are thinking that the tags are relevant and there are OTHERS who think they are irrelevant. Since you are the one who started the whole thing by tagging, the onus lies on you to prove that the tags are relevant. Your argument is equivalent to you saying: ''"I am gonna hit you but if you hit me back, you have to explain to me why you hit me back"'', which is plain nonsense. Take your rubbish arguments elsewhere... -- ]<sup><small>]/]</small></sup> 08:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC) | ||
| ::Oh, by the way, I see that you are not new to irrational taggings as I see , and have even gone to the extent of threatening people with . You don't seem to have learnt much from your previous acts. With such a checkered past including a , you sure have the nerve to advice others on civility. -- ]<sup><small>]/]</small></sup> 11:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:34, 27 February 2008
Your edit to Madurai T. N. Seshagopalan
Your recent edit to Madurai T. N. Seshagopalan (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Misplaced Pages articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 16:42, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
your edit to Prof S.Ramanathan
Please do not remove content from Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Mapetite526 17:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism and violation of wikipedia's policies
See Misplaced Pages:Vandalism and WP:3RR. You have made several reverts on Carnatic Music which is against WP:3RR. Kindly desist from actions that could be considered vandalism. Persistent reverts might lead to your being banned. Thanks ॐ Kris (☎ talk | contribs) 12:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Carnatic Music. Please be careful not to remove content from Misplaced Pages without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ॐ Kris (☎ talk | contribs) 12:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Ncmvocalist 07:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Your message on User:Bharatveer's talk page
Regarding this, only Misplaced Pages administrators are eligible to block editors. If you have concerns about a particular user's edits, I recommend that you approach an admin. I would also like to request you to withdraw your comments on User:Bharatveer's talk page. Thanks - Parthi 22:12, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Muthiahbhagavathar1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Muthiahbhagavathar1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 03:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Carnatic music TOC
Hi, I think moving Important musical treatises below before the References section would be appropriate as it seems to direct readers to resources related to Carnatic music. Keeping it at the start of the article may daunt some lay users. What do you think? Thanks Parthi 00:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
please see User talk:Srkris
please see User talk:Srkris
bye Pluto.2006 10:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
User notice: temporary 3RR block
Regarding reversions made on December 18 2006 to Carnatic_music
Re your mail. If you want to report someone else for 3RR, please do it on the 3RR page. Meanwhile, please don't break the rule yourself: better still, use WP:1RR William M. Connolley 14:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Your notices on User talk:Venu62
Hi, I see that you left several templates on . I believe that these templates may not be appropriate. Vandalism refers specifically to edits that are not made in good faith, or with the intent of harming the project. I think you should assume that User:Venu62 is making edits in good faith, believing them to be positive contributions. With regards to NPOV, it is not apparent to me that Venu62's edits violate NPOV. So, I will be removing the tags. Please feel free to discuss this with me further if you disagree. Sincerely, --BostonMA 01:22, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- I have responded to your message on my talk page . --BostonMA 01:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Carnatic music discussion
Please try to answer the questions here and contribute to useful discussions. Thanks Parthi 00:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Venu62
Usually complains to WP:AN/3RR work only if there are clearily 4 reverts. It was not the case that time. Looking into the history of Carnatic music I could see an edit war between you and Venu62. Since noone else participate in the discussion and since I know nothing about the carnatic music I could only block both of you. I am not sure it is the way to go.
Try to involve more people into the editing of the article. Maybe it is worth to start an article WP:RfC or apply for some sort of WP:DRV. I cannot see any other ways to settle your dispute. Alex Bakharev 07:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Muruganpamalai.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Muruganpamalai.JPG. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Misplaced Pages and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 21:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your interest in Carnatic mustic
We desperately need some help in shaping up the article and providing it with verifiable and reliable citations. It seems that you have a good knowledge of the subject, so maybe you could help us out. We are seeking to make it a quality article as the subject matter deserves. Please contact me with any ideas you have. Thanking you in advance! Sincerely, --Mattisse 02:38, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry that I seem to have affronted you. I have spent considerable time trying to find reference sources for the article unsuccessfully. I do not engage in edit wars so you have no need to fear that. I will not touch the article again. My interest in the article was that I am working on a Feature Article candidate that has a link to this article, so I tried to fix up the article enough for us to emphasis the topic in our article. Now I see that is not possible so we simply deemphasised the topic in our article. We ended up putting what we needed about Carnatic music with proper references in our own article, so we do not need this one. Thanks for your reply and good luck with the Carnatic music article. Sincerely, --Mattisse 13:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume II, Issue 1 - January 2007
|
|
|
WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume II, Issue 2 - March 2007
|
|
){kind=link}
|
Indian collaboration of the week news
As mentioned in Wikiproject India newsletter of March 2007, the weekly collaboration of the Indian wikiproject has fallen from its once high feats. This message is to request the users to visit the collaboration page and help rejuvenate it.
The present collaboration of the week is Religion in India. Please go through the talk page of the article to see the proposed changes in the article. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Reply
Your message on my talk page here.
- Thank you for your message on my talk page: I was honestly touched. Unfortunately, I will have extremely limited/no internet access from the fourth week of September onwards for an indefinite period, so I will probably not be able to get 2007 South Asian floods up to WP:GA status. I can revise the Bangladesh and Nepal maps to show more detail (in their present date they show all the areas as flooded which, while it's close to the truth, is uninformative) and start the peer-review process, but more than that I can't promise. I hope to be back on the internet late 2007/early 2008 but I can't guarantee it. Should I return, I will revisit the article then. Regards, Anameofmyveryown 01:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Carnatic Music
Can I ask you why you are repeatedly removing cited content about patronage for Carnatic music under Kingdom of Mysore? Gnanapiti 20:29, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- I just saw that you are already discussing the removal in Talk page. You may ignore this message and continue discussions there. Gnanapiti 20:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I cant see why you're angry with me. I am as frustrated at the state of the article as you seem to be. I've always held the view that you're one of the sensible editors editing this article unlike some others like 'you know who'. And just so you know, you have violated 3rr on the article. I suggest that you revert yourself. Thanks. Sarvagnya 21:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- I stopped editing it because I intend to rewrite the whole article when I find the time. In the meanwhile, I only try to make sure that potentially useful edits dont get lost forever. Like I said, if you want to break it up and weave it into the article in a better way, feel free to do it. I'll be the last one to stop you. But dont just blank potentially useful and constructive content wholesale, just because it doesnt fit the 'flow'. Talking of 'flow', the article doesnt have any 'flow' worth mentioning. Sourcing for the most part, is below par. As for Muthutandavar etc., I've written reams about my views on it... and just to point out, Muthutandavar's, m pillai etc., compositions are not rendered by everybody. It is mostly done only by Tamil artists. As for the 'certain other things', well.. I was referring to the 'pann' part. Sources are being misrepresented and it still is being presented as if Carnatic music borrowed the concept of Ragas from panns - which is nonsense. There may be a 'resemblance' between panns and ragas, that doesnt mean ragas were born out of panns! There are other problems also.. but like I said, I'll deal with them when I rewrite the article. And I intend to rewrite it purely from scholarly sources and not from any random website that will pops up on the first page of a google search. And just fyi, you are still in violation of 3rr. You have atleast 5 reverts on the article and if i were to count that ip(thats you, I'm assuming) you probably have 6 reverts. And why were you removing a picture of the trinity from the article? They surely belong somewhere in the article. Dont they? Sarvagnya 22:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Replied here. Sarvagnya 07:02, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Ayyaazhi article
Ok friend, I'll go through and let you know if any status gained by the article; and thanks for the informations. - white dot...!!! 20:18, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Your rv on 'Night Angle' M S Subbulakshmi
Cool work dude! Noticed the vandalism (?) but could not figure out how to revert the article alongwith the talk page of the article. Tnx for the good work. Antariki Vandanamu 10:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thank you for your warm welcome! Also, I appreciate your inputs on my assessment as and when suitable. I hope to gain on my quality of assessment as time goes on.
Now, I did some re-work on Anand. I wasn't sure if this is good enough for a B-class. I've added suitable references and re-designed the sections. Would there be any further words/comments/suggestions on this? Since, I've already put in so much effort, I'd like to take this further up on quality.
Mspraveen 07:45, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tip! I've asked him already for the review. :) Regards Mspraveen 04:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Comments on Anand (2004)
Firstly, thank you very much for the detail in commenting on the article. I certainly do appreciate that. I've made a few changes here and there keeping your words in mind. Any further comments, please do let me know.
I feel some of your comments are a bit tough on the article. I mean, if one looks at so many other Start-class articles and this one, there will be a whale of difference between them. Wouldn't there be? :) However, I wish to contribute in quality as well. So, please feel free to critique it as much as you can! Mspraveen 14:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the very prompt reply :) I've re-organized the structure of the Production section. I hope there is a sense of structure. If you think I'm asking for a lot from you by more comments, I'll just stop here.
- When you speak of credible references, since it is a Tollywood movie, I'm afraid its going to pretty tough to get some credible references. I agree that Lage Raho Munna Bhai has got credible references because of its worldwide publicity. This can get it a whole load of references. But, it really demands the article (Anand) a lot if credible references are required. In fact, I was looking for a reference for the certification for the movie. IMDB happened to be the closest I could get to :) There were similar instances on other references too, but, over the past three days, the ones referenced were the closest I could get to.
- Anyways, I thank you for your honest comments. You don't need to apologize. Now, I hope its evident to you why I wrote that your comments tough on the article. Thanks once again Mspraveen 16:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your encouraging assistance. I really appreciate you taking out time in critiquing the article.
- With regards to your comments on the sequence, I followed the sequence that was there in A Beautiful Mind which is an FA in itself. I agreed with this sequencing because the movie starts with the production details and then the plot and the rest. Maybe you will reconsider this.
- I've added references to the soundtrack and DVD. If there is anything else that needs to be addressed, just let me know. It is hard for me to notice any minor aspects because I've been working on it since like a week now. :) Thanks again for your co-operation. Mspraveen 14:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- Oops! I missed out on that. It is/was a FA nominee. Anyways, I agree with your thoughts about the article you referred to as it is a part of Wikiproject India.
- I just rearranged the sections accordingly, added a few more to some and ofcourse found a few more newspaper references which should be considered as credible. Any further thoughts on what it still needs to ascend in quality? :-? Mspraveen 14:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reassessment! I suppose you know the sense of satisfaction ones gets when they nurture an article up in quality, don't you? :) I guess, I'll go ahead with improving articles of similar nature now that I have a picture of how I should go about. It was better that I learnt the hard way. Just gives me an indication of how much is needed for a good encyclopedic article. Thanks!
- Next task on this article is to go further up. I read someone that the article's importance will not hinder on its quality, isn't it? Hoping so, I'll keep my eyes open for more content on it.Mspraveen 15:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- About your further comments, here are my thoughts...
- Regarding soundtrack, I found it really tough to get hold of a credible reference. However, I hope to find one e-store. Alternatively, IMDB should serve the purpose, I believe. I contributed to these missing details in IMDB. That review will be in a month or so. Maybe, I could use that as the reference. DVD details are shuffled to the top of the section.
- In the awards section, the whole final para attempts to convey the essential elements of the film that contributed to its success. I felt, it will add on and support the success claims and awards. Thoughts?
- About the critical acclaim, I felt the content was much lesser than in Lage Raho Munna Bhai. In that article, there are plenty of reviews given. I could have done the same here, but I felt it would over-do the essence. Your thoughts?
- In the misc section, Anand is a movie title.... - Has been sorted out.
- Some references re: cast would be good - imdb might help for names, while descriptions may need to be referenced from some other places. - Couldn't gather much on your intent. Can you rephrase this?
- I'm sure parts of the story can also be sourced from summaries given elsewhere. I've summarized the article to about 766 words as against 1000+. This is to go as per the plot summary norms.
- The introduction is excellent - but note to mention something about it being a release available as a dvd and soundtrack towards the end .... - Thanks! But, None of the featured articles I noticed contain any mention of the DVD and soundtrack in the lead section. Can you please clarify on this?
- Once the above are sorted out, I shall get it peer reviewed. Thanks a ton again! :) Mspraveen 06:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- I am sincerely amazed at your reviewing abilities and of course your tremendous patience to write!!! :) Many many thanks to you!!
- I did consider most of your comments and suggestions and reworded some portions of the article. Thanks again from the beginning!!
- On a personal note, did you watch the movie? Mspraveen 17:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Iyer
Thank you very much for rating my article. :-) I have examined the list of necessary changes that you have mentioned and I promise to carry them out.
Do have a look at my views about the assessment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Iyer/Comments
Sir, I would like to mention that the article had been previously rated 'B' on the Assessment scale.
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Iyer&diff=153396646&oldid=153376157
Since then, it has undergone dramatic changes and extensive modifications have been done.Thanks!! - Ravichandar84 08:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thank You! :-) I've improved the article and added more references. - Ravichandar84 10:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
BetacommandBot
Hi, could you please link to files that BCBot has incorrectly tagged please. I also note that the bot isn't operational at the moment, and you should be aware that the bot does not delete any images, it simply brings them to the attention of administrators who exercise their own judgement on whether an image should be deleted or not. Nick 13:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, firstly, I have to say, administrative action never counts as "edit warring", non free images that are unused must be deleted, there is a little leeway for images uploaded for use in an article currently being written, but there is no leeway for images uploaded for an article that already exists, but are unused. I would urge you to read our Non free content policy before making any further edits to images. I must also ask that you ensure your own images have a detailed fair use rationale that justifies every single instance of use, or these images are likely to be marked for deletion by BCBot. Nick 14:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Great work!
Hi Ncmvocalist, Thanks for maintaining the assessment and peer review departments. Really appreciate it. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 15:41, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the support
Bommarillu GA on Hold
Hello, thanks again for your kind assistance for this issue. I really appreciate it. I've made the necessary changes in the article as desired by the concerned user as well as you. Please find my comments here. Best regards, Mspraveen 17:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
P.S.: Maybe you should consider an awards page clearing up space for discussion here. What say?
- I have addressed the points you raised about the issues I had with the article. Again, I will apologize here, as I was not threatening the article, but wanted it to be improved. If you disagree with the statements there, let me know, and I'll be happy to talk to you about it. Good job on helping with the article and keep up the good work. --Nehrams2020 06:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for getting back to me, and I do agree with what you said for the most part. I still think the use of the word "rave" could be replaced with something more neutral, but I don't think it is enough to limit the article in any way, so if it remains, fine by me. For the FA consideration, I wouldn't be able to help that much since I'm still not too familiar with the FA process, although I'll be nominating an article of my own in the next few months. Again, thanks for the response and keep up the good work on Misplaced Pages. --Nehrams2020 19:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
refernce to melodic
The first line of wiki page on "Melodic" music reads as follows: Melodic music is a term that covers various genres of non-classical music which are primarily characterised by the dominance of a single strong melody line.
In my opinion that does not cover carnatic music, and it would be incorrect to reference it in carnatic music page. I am sure the definitions and interpretations differ on some terms like "classical", "melodic", etc, and it is evolving. Hence someone wrote a book classifying carnatic music as melodic does not mean that we can conclude that every fellows definition of "melodic" applies to carnatic music.
I believe that it is highly inappropriate to classify "carnatic music" as "melodic" as described in the melodic wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maandookya (talk • contribs) 17:40, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Parineeta
Dear NCM,
How've you been doing? Hope I can call you NCM. I was hoping to hear about your comments on Parineeta. Would time elude you or is there comprehensive commenting expected from you? I was hoping to get it to GA status and I really believe that this can be worked into atleast an A-class if not FA.
Regards, Mspraveen 09:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. However, I'd wait for your comments before going ahead with any further nomination for the article. With me in travel for a month, I wonder if I can contribute much during this period. So is the case with the assessment department as I might not be of assistance to you. Hope to be back soon. Regards, Mspraveen 04:18, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
- Dear Vocalist, How've you been doing? It has been a while since I was active on Wiki. Finally, I can get to some editing here. I was wondering if you had a chance to review Parineeta again and add some comments on it so that I can go on with an FA nomination. It'd be great if it gets grilled before the final surge. :) Thanks! Regards, Mspraveen 15:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Dear Vocalist, I was being impatient and hence I have nominated Parineeta for a GA first. I'm sure the present quality is good enough for a GA. Once this is through, I'm sure other comments useful for an A-class/FA will come across during the review. I can further improve on these after the GA. Mspraveen (talk • contribs) 04:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Dear Vocalist, thank you for the review. I've been editing the article till a while ago. I hope I've addressed most of the issues pointed out. Thanks once again. Regards, Mspraveen (talk) 15:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Many thanks for your patient reviews and assessments. I appreciate your candid assessment that has helped me improve this article to a GA. Thank you, Ncmvocalist! With best regards, Mspraveen (talk) 13:37, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Re:Templates
Templates are stored in a seperate namespace. To edit, access them with the Template tag, Template:carnatic and Template:Indian Music. For more info, see Misplaced Pages:Template namespace and Help:Template. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 06:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
S. Sowmya
Is there anything more about this that would establish why this particular singer is notable/important. Thanks for creating the article, however I'm unable to see from reading it why its of any importance. Whatever the assertion of importance is, it ought to be cited to a reputable source. Cheers! —— Eagle101 04:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'll also ask about Priya Sisters - Shanmughapriya & Haripriya. Something to establish importance would be useful, otherwise I'm tempted to delete as lacking a demonstration of importance. Thanks. —— Eagle101 04:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not saying the site is down. I'm asking what makes these singers notable? All these articles say is they are singers... so what? What have they done in the context of history or current times that makes them important? I as a casual reader don't know what these guys have done. I'm not trying to be annoying, if I were I'd just template you with one of those silly templates >.>, I'm just more or less curious. I mean you took the time to write up these one sentence articles... what makes these particular singers worth the effort? :) Cheers! —— Eagle101 09:33, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Alright, might be a good idea to put some links and references to what you note, just so some trigger happy admin does not happen to delete them for being not important/notable. (WP:CSD#A7 I think :) ). I personally was just a tad confused as to what the heck they did! I can sing myself... but as I'm deaf, certainly not worth an article! (my singing is somewhere between horrible and I'll kill myself to make it stop! ;) ). Do carry on and help expand this great encyclopedia! :D —— Eagle101 10:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- My hands are tied for the this week with other work (outside of Misplaced Pages) so I can't work on it immediately, but will do it soon for sure. :D You're awfully hard on yourself about your singing, and though I haven't heard it, I'm sure it can't be half that bad ;)
- Alright, might be a good idea to put some links and references to what you note, just so some trigger happy admin does not happen to delete them for being not important/notable. (WP:CSD#A7 I think :) ). I personally was just a tad confused as to what the heck they did! I can sing myself... but as I'm deaf, certainly not worth an article! (my singing is somewhere between horrible and I'll kill myself to make it stop! ;) ). Do carry on and help expand this great encyclopedia! :D —— Eagle101 10:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not saying the site is down. I'm asking what makes these singers notable? All these articles say is they are singers... so what? What have they done in the context of history or current times that makes them important? I as a casual reader don't know what these guys have done. I'm not trying to be annoying, if I were I'd just template you with one of those silly templates >.>, I'm just more or less curious. I mean you took the time to write up these one sentence articles... what makes these particular singers worth the effort? :) Cheers! —— Eagle101 09:33, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- I was annoyed to notice that Priya Sisters - Shanmughapriya & Haripriya page was deleted by User: Doc glasgow, not for notability, but for something else (CSD#R1) - which in this case doesn't seem relevant. To add insult to injury, there was no discussion whatsoever. With the exception of you :) , it's really very frustrating that there are admins who keep deleting pages like this without giving editors an opportunity to fix their stuff up - applying the speedy criterion inflexibly is just grossly careless on their part and more effective measures need to be put forward so pages aren't deleted so immediately and irreversibly like this for trivial reasons. If there is something that really needs to be deleted, chances are that it will be reported to the admins anyway. There was no dire need to delete this page, or several other pages in other cases. It's really off-putting that I can't do anything about it now. :( Hope I/we can push for some sort of change or modification to the guideline sometime later if you understand and agree with what I'm saying to some extent.
- Anyway, cheers for hearing (i mean seeing) my rant of frustration, and again for the feedback. :) Ncmvocalist (talk) 11:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah that was what I was afraid of. What happened was someone moved that page to a shorter title, and following that someone deleted the moved page... which meant that the original title (now a redirect) was a redlink. That makes it a speedy criteria. What you need to keep in mind when creating articles is to assert why you spent the time to make it. What did those people do to merit the article? As there was not that much information on the one that got deleted, I'd just wait 'till you have the time to write 3-4 sentences on the topic. I really doubt that anyone has anything against these singers, but without adequate information, its very difficult to tell the difference between these singers and say... the latest garage band! If you would like me to undelete the article. (for the one sentence), just ping me a message, otherwise just wait till you have the time and do it then. As I said, when making articles, try to put in the article text somewhere why the article is important/notable/worthy of keeping. Why exactly did you take the time to make that article, what did this person do? If you have questions or need me to help you in any way, feel free to ask.
- P.S. Don't expect convos like this for every article you create, sadly we use templates too often :(. Its a byproduct of how many crap articles we get per minute. (I think its upwards of 20 or 30 a minute, higher in peak times). Me personally, I do much more programming then new pages patrol, and I just simply did it one day to see what others were doing and also to see how we could miss so many articles on User:Eagle 101/potential crap 2. That list is basically a list of articles that folks on RC missed. So as aggressive as you think they are, they are still missing tons of pages. (that list is 5,000 pages long, and probably about 70% or so need to be cleaned up/deleted. Best of luck though! —— Eagle101 16:22, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Anyway, cheers for hearing (i mean seeing) my rant of frustration, and again for the feedback. :) Ncmvocalist (talk) 11:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Papanasamsivan.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Papanasamsivan.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
The Jeremy Kyle Show
Please do not fail GAC articles that have been put on hold by other editors, particularly when those editors are actively involved in helping improve the article. Your review did not outline the problems with the article in any detail - icons do not help other editors understand the problems that they need to fix with their articles. Thanks. Awadewit | talk 08:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Ridiculous though. Do you think, being an official/contracted wiki editor you have the right to remove what I included under "current carnatic vocalists"? Of course you do have choice to do that, but only by compromising the conditions of discrimination. Dr. Balamuralikrishna and Dr.K.J.Yesudas are two prominent (and current) carnatic vocalists, any argument? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.47.121.203 (]) 21:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
About assessment
Hey, i wanted to know how i can assess an article and suggest my ratings on any particular article. The instructions dont seem to help. sriks8 (talk) 06:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
re. GAreview of Flag of Singapore
Thanks heaps for the review here. I took a quick look at your review, and it all seems OK and reasonable. When the stuff is done, it'll be a race to see who can pass the article first :P Also, if you haven't already, could you leave a note at GAC stating that you added the second opinion? Thanks, — Dihydrogen Monoxide 09:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- Jacklee has tried to address your concerns. Could you check whether the article meets the GA criteria now? If so, the nomination should be passed; otherwise, please extend the hold and provide further comments. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 13:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Question on references
Is it bad for an article to have multiple references from only one source, say Rediff.com? This is an issue I faced while developing the Lagaan article. Throwing some light on this will just be great! Maybe you have some thoughts to share after a cursory glance on the Developments section?
How are the last few days of the New Year coming along? Seasonal greetings! Best regards, Mspraveen (talk) 15:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Papanasamsivankrithis.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Papanasamsivankrithis.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Muruganpamalai.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Muruganpamalai.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Sivaji
Hello there! It has been a while since I last heard from you. You busy in real life? Hope all is well.
If you are around, I was hoping if you can have a cursory glance at the Sivaji article. I've been working on this since quite a while and now, I believe that it is good for a GA status. If there are any comments that you might have, please feel free to list them out.
With best regards, Mspraveen (talk) 06:06, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Good to see you back! Hope all is well. Regards, Mspraveen (talk) 07:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
- I've also worked on Lagaan as well, which is also with a GA nomination. I believe that this along with Parineeta have been my best pitched efforts. It'd be great if you can spare some time for this as well! Thanks much and best regards! Mspraveen (talk) 14:13, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hey there, good to see you back with the review. Now, do I understand that you still are yet to complete the review? Because, additional notes on the review would help a great deal on its improvement.
- Btw, Lagaan made it to a GA and I will work on it a bit more and with the wealth of reliable sources available for the article, I guess it would really mean more of breadth to it that is needed. Also, I just began with my first GA assessment and first DYK. Fresh waters for me :)
- How's everything with you? You seem busy in real life? Regards, Mspraveen (talk) 06:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Knataka/Realindian
Yeah, they're the same. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
The Place of Srivaishnava Community in Karnatic Music
As an addition, I suggest that the names of the following famous Carnatic musicians of Karnataka be also added under a seperate heading since thier contribution to carnatic music has been immense
1. Royal court musician Belakvady Srinivsas Iyengar (1888-1936)of Belakavady 2. B.S.Raja Iyengar (1900-1980)of Arasikee 3. Thitte Krishna Iyengar (1902-1997) 4. Belakvady Srinivsas Iyengar (1911-2002)of Belakavady 5. Belakvady Varadaraja Iyengar (1912-1988)of Belakavady 6. M.S.Selvapillai Iyengar (1915-1993) of Melakote 7. M.S. Narasimhachar (1919-2004) of Mysore 8. Belakvady Rangasamy Iyengar (1928)of Belakavady 9. Mysore. S. Kishna Iyengar (20th century) 10. Dr. K.Vageesh (1954)of Mysore 11. Dr. K Varadarajan (1958), of Gorur 12. Dr. P.S.Muralidhar,(1956) of Mysore
A reference book to add to the text of your article would be "The Place of Srivaishnava Community in Karnatic Music" by Dr.V.S.Samapthkumaracharya of Mysore published by Vedantha Charities, 1397, 4th Cross, Krishnamurthy Puram, Mysore -570004, Karnataka, India.--Nvvchar (talk) 09:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Ayyavazhi
Re-rating of article. The two terms in particular referred to, Poovandanthoppe and Vaikundar are both names. There is no getting around this even if they are non-English phrases. Poovandanthoppe is the name of a village now called Swamithoppe. Vaikundar is the name of a person who was born as Mudisoodum Perumal and later called Vaikundar. The other terms can be re-explained in English terms when necessary, but not the two specifically chosen. SriMesh | talk 01:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
PLEASE STOP UNDOs
Please stop vandalizing by undoing valid changes on Music of Karnataka. They are disruptive and POV based undos. Blocking will be requested if it is continuedNaadapriya (talk) 17:03, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Mr. and Mrs. Iyer
Hello Ncmvocalist! Been a while, isn't it? How've you been? Hope you are keeping well and relaxing in the weekend. Well, I have fully developed the Mr. and Mrs. Iyer article to my ability. If you can spare some time in having a look at it, I'd really appreciate it! Many thanks and regards, Mspraveen (talk) 09:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking out time in addressing! I've responded to your GA assessment. Thanks again. Regards, Mspraveen (talk) 18:05, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Mahabharata
I personally do not think that the article is FA (the BEST of WP) yet and may be a GA IMO. So i nominated it for GA. I noticed you are GA reviewer yourself. If you have any suggestions to improve the article, please leave a note on my/article talk page. Regards. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
please stop
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did to Carnatic music, you will be blocked from editing. Carnatica.net, despite being a website, is a source that does not have a poor reputation for fact-checking so there is no validity in removing this information.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Carnatic music and ATM
The sentence in question is the most cited sentence in the whole of the Carnatic music article. Sarvagnya et al are simply doing what they have been doing for the past several months - using the Kannada tag teams to push their POV. This is quite frustrating and one of the reasons why so many good contributors of Tamil origin have left the project. - Parthi 19:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Flag of Singapore currently on peer review
In your most recent comment on Talk:Flag of Singapore, you mentioned that you would point out other issues with the article. However, you did not do so. Could you point out the issues at the article's ongoing peer review? By the way, the ArticleHistory template erroneously shows three failed GA nominations, instead of two. If you are familiar with the syntax, please remove the entry dated 20 January 2008. Thank you. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 14:45, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Sarvagnya
Well you know how I feel about it. The sheer number of complaints about him should be enough to block him but isn't. Nobody seems to be concerned about editors such as this which are making this site a misery for many people. Then you get the ususal group of editors turning up to support him. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ 17:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Seems like something is not right. I was looking around and I found this. Maybe the first few links are of use to you in your Rfc, if you already have not noticed this before? Regards, Mspraveen (talk) 04:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
RfC
According to the rules at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment#Request comment on users, there has to be evidence that at least two editors have contacted the editor to be discussed, in this case Sarvagnaya, and tried to resolve a dispute. I'm not sure myself whether that threshold has been met, because I haven't myself seen all the evidence, although the links to the previous AN/I case might be useful there. Also, I believe that at least one editor, User:Blofeld of SPECTRE, has expressed similar qualms about that individual, and you might be interested in contacting him directly regarding the matter. If you can't produce the two required individuals, then requesting a Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette alerts, which might be indicated here, or Misplaced Pages:Third opinion might be in order, if for no other reason than to establish the presence of a second editor who has tried to reason with the subject.
Regarding help filing a user RfC, if it ever comes to that, I'm not sure what help I could be. The two editors who had tried to contact the editor would be the ones to create such a request. However, I do think that much of what you had written earlier would probably be acceptable, with the additional input of the other editor. John Carter (talk) 01:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Templating the Regulars
In the light of your recent encounter with User:Dineshkannambadi, and your placement of tags in other established users' talk page, I suggest you to read this guideline: Misplaced Pages:Don't template the regulars. Thanks - KNM 02:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Please note that the page linked to is not in fact a "guideline", as that party had erroneously indicated, but simply an "essay", which specifically states "editors are not obliged to follow it" and thus has no particular "weight" behind it per se. Having said that, the other party in this dispute has indicated that you may have earlier given him a warning which may not have necessarily been completely justified, when you said that a website which did not have a bad reputation should be considered a reliable source, or words to that effect. Unfortunately, that isn't necessarily sufficient to establish that it is a reliable source. I have advised that party to stop templating you himself, and I think under the circumstances it might be appropriate if you try to not template him in the future as well. I did advise that editor that it would probably be best for both of you, and potentially any other involved parties, to discuss on the talk page of the article in question whether the sources provided can be established to meet WP:RS standards. I have myself put the page on my watchlist, and I would be happy to offer any input regarding the matter, although I do not in any way cast myself as being an expert or even knowledgable about the matter in question. The two of you, and, based on the edit above, possibly a few others, do not seem to have established a particularly good relationship. Calmly and rationally discussing the dispute, without any more "templating" from either side than is probably the best way to go. John Carter (talk) 02:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well, it isn't official, but it's generally better to not template the regulars. Among the community in general most people consider it a little discourteous and not in the best taste to give an establisher contributor a machine warning. (however, for image problems, it is considered ok). From my experience using a template on an established contributor usually generates a bad reaction so it is better to take an extra minute to write a personal message. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 05:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Please use discussions
Dear Ncmvocalist, in the future, please remember that discussions carry lot more meaning and content than templates. Your recent actions in throwing templates dont help in creating an atmosphere conducive to discussions. Also, keep the discussions preferably to the talk page of the article in concern. This way, you gain experience how to have discussions with established users. Thank you.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- I think you are missing the point. No user should throw a template because another user reverted a edit. Henceforth keep your discussions to article talk pages and I will do the same.thank youDineshkannambadi (talk) 11:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
DraftRfc
I see that you have created a DraftRFC on User:Sarvagnya here. I would like to bring to your notice the first paragraph there:
In order to remain listed at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 16:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: 02:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC).
While it is still not listed at WP:RfC, not much headway has been made in the DraftRfc either. If you do have a case against User:Sarvagnya, may I ask you to build the case as early as possible and get it done with. If you do not have a case, then just ask an admin to delete the page. It is not prudent to create a page indicating a user as a guilty party and then just let it lying there without providing info on what the case is all about. It's a week since the page has been created and there is nothing much in it. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛ 03:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Assessment
Hi Ncmvocalist!
I left you a message in a comments page last October and realised that I haven't heard back. Can you leave your reply there please. Especially because it would be nice to get feed backs on to improving the article. Cheers Wiki San Roze 09:06, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- I also have concerns on your assessment on the Dravidian Parties entry. As you can see from the examples quoted in assessment Jammu and Kashmir article of October version which is a B-class and also Real analysis which was a start-class, it can be pretty obvious that the Dravidian Parties entry is not a start class, at least as far as I can see. Hope you dont think that I am being rude. If I'm giving such an impression, I really do appologise. Cheers Wiki San Roze 11:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hi. I was raising my concern on your assessment on Dravidian Parties article! Cheers Wiki San Roze 14:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Sarvagnaya
Unfortunately, your warnings to Sarvagnaya were probably a long way from being necessarily acceptable themselves. Unless you are an uninvolved party who is thus able to issue such a block it is more than a bit presumptuous to say that the person will be blocked for further actions. Again, try to avoid making such "warnings" to others, as it hardly helps in creating reasonable discussion. I have reverted the reversions, and told the party in question that all that is required is that he indicate on the talk page why he believes the sources are sufficient. But, in your own interests, it really is far from being a good idea to continue to issue such "warnings" to people when you are not yourself in a position to act upon them. In the future, when you do such things, the best course of action would be to indicate in your edit summary why you are doing it, or, alternately, saying something like "see talk page" and go into greater detail there. Both of you in this case seem to be acting in some regard as if you WP:OWN parts of the content, and that is certain to annoy the other party. Try to discuss it reasonably first. Then, only if such discussion fails, is it a good idea to issue formal warnings. John Carter (talk) 02:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Stop adding tags
A discussion has been opened on Talk:Vijayanagara_musicological_nonet. Discuss why you want to add tags, before adding them. I have reverted your tagging. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛ 07:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Its you who are twisting things to suit your needs. It is YOU who are thinking that the tags are relevant and there are OTHERS who think they are irrelevant. Since you are the one who started the whole thing by tagging, the onus lies on you to prove that the tags are relevant. Your argument is equivalent to you saying: "I am gonna hit you but if you hit me back, you have to explain to me why you hit me back", which is plain nonsense. Take your rubbish arguments elsewhere... -- ¿Amar៛ 08:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, by the way, I see that you are not new to irrational taggings as I see here, and have even gone to the extent of threatening people with non-existent blocks. You don't seem to have learnt much from your previous acts. With such a checkered past including a block, you sure have the nerve to advice others on civility. -- ¿Amar៛ 11:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)