User talk:Vivin/Archive 5
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Renaming Nair
Hello Vivin. I have found that it is Wikipedia policy to have the correct transliteration of a name, rather than the most popular one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_%28people_of_India_and_Sri_Lanka%29#Naming_and_transliteration Also note that Bombay is more common than Mumbai in daily usage, but the article is named as Mumbai because it is the correct term. "Nair" spelling makes no sense (how "ai" could correspond to "aya"). Nayar is also commonly used as a surname (though maybe not as commonly as Nair)Hijjins (talk) 07:29, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
- Vivin, please explain to me why Bombay, being the most commonly used term, is replaced with Mumbai in the article? Nayar is a caste and "Nair" is just one of the many surnames associated with that caste, although it may be the most common. The title of the article is to do with the caste of "Nayar", not the name surname "Nair". It doesn't matter if the NSS had other variations of the name, "Naer", "Nayiar", "Nair", "Neyar", but the proper term is still "Nayar" (Madras University and Madras High Court is still in existence although the place is now Chennai). It is a matter of Wikipedia policy and there are many precedents on Wikipedia (Asiagh is a Jatt clan although Siyag and Sewag are the most common variations, Khatri although Khetri is common, etc.)Hijjins (talk) 23:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thankyou for taking time to consider my proposal. NSS although representing Nairs is by no means the official governing body of the Nairs (no such body exists, such as the Namboothiri Yogakshema Sabha, etc). Secondly, although I appreciate your attempt to try and proove your point, google search is a very unreliable source. Terms such as "Mira Nair" (a Punjabi) and other famous Nairs came up several times, and Nayar is related to a Punjabi name as well (the results could mean that there are more prominent people with "Nair" rather than "Nayar", and not that 79% of sources, as you say, have Nair rather than Nayar). The google search result was 79%, which is an ambiguous result, so I don't think we're clear of the 75% mark (if it was 95% then it would be more certain). Therefore I don't think we can go by the rule of "Primary transliteration", so we must go by the rule of "Simple transliteration", that is "Nayar". I admit, Nair is more commonly used, but Nayar is also widespread, and you will find that much of the historical evidence related to the caste uses the term "Nayar". Remember this article is about the caste, not a surname (hence castes like Chakkala Nair is not included in the article because they are not Nayar, although they have the same surname). If it was about the surname, I would agree, "Nair" is most prominent, so it should be used, but not here.Hijjins (talk) 07:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- What I'm saying is that we can't go by the "primary transliteration" because we are unsure about whether Nair is 75% more common than Nayar (your rough calculation came up with 79% which is too close to know). Therefore we should go with the "simple translation", "Nayar", which is the fixed, permanent name for the caste.Hijjins (talk) 01:19, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thankyou for taking time to consider my proposal. NSS although representing Nairs is by no means the official governing body of the Nairs (no such body exists, such as the Namboothiri Yogakshema Sabha, etc). Secondly, although I appreciate your attempt to try and proove your point, google search is a very unreliable source. Terms such as "Mira Nair" (a Punjabi) and other famous Nairs came up several times, and Nayar is related to a Punjabi name as well (the results could mean that there are more prominent people with "Nair" rather than "Nayar", and not that 79% of sources, as you say, have Nair rather than Nayar). The google search result was 79%, which is an ambiguous result, so I don't think we're clear of the 75% mark (if it was 95% then it would be more certain). Therefore I don't think we can go by the rule of "Primary transliteration", so we must go by the rule of "Simple transliteration", that is "Nayar". I admit, Nair is more commonly used, but Nayar is also widespread, and you will find that much of the historical evidence related to the caste uses the term "Nayar". Remember this article is about the caste, not a surname (hence castes like Chakkala Nair is not included in the article because they are not Nayar, although they have the same surname). If it was about the surname, I would agree, "Nair" is most prominent, so it should be used, but not here.Hijjins (talk) 07:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
I reverted your redirection of the above-captioned article to Asian American. Your cited reason of WP:NOTABILITY fails to convince me; the term is widely and non-trivially discussed in a number of sources, including those mentioned in the article's References and Further Reading section, as well as many others: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. If you would like to propose a less general merge target, please use Wikipedia:Proposed mergers or discuss it at Talk:American-Born Confused Desi. Thanks, cab (talk) 00:24, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Navneet Singh Khadian, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? UtherSRG (talk) 12:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Re: Thanks
That was an error on my part -- no article should be re-prodded, and I failed to check if it had been prodded before. I have removed my proposed deletion. I suggest AFD. Powers T 20:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Avoid targeting others, Read WP:5P
It is noted that you had a targeting attitude of my edits. Your latest reverts of 1, doesn’t make any sense. You just added a ‘and’ (say minor grammer mistake) and your edit summary was I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say with the sentence, but I've edited it. What are you actually looking for? Moreover your recent reversion of Nair was a blind revert and POV pushing (you did not add a proper edit summary here. Your next edit of Gigi Mon Mathew shows that you are not much aware of our basic policies like WP:N, WP:RS and WP:V etc. This shows that you are a NotNotableGuru per WP:JNN. I advise you to take off some time and read WP:5P and WP:AGF etc or make use of adopt-a-user program. Hope this helps. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 05:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Stop wikilawyering. I'm not targeting you, and I'm sorry you feel that way. Your addition to "Muzzle" didn't entirely make any sense. If you want to split hair, it was an incomplete and grammatically incorrect sentence. I assumed you were trying to say that attachments such as silencers are affixed to the muzzle of the weapon, and I edited it that way. Finally, it shows that you are not entirely familiar with edit histories and reading them. If you will look here, you will see that I completely rewrote your sentence. My edit to Nair wasn't a blind revert in any sense. If you have an issue, discuss it in the talk page. Just because "established editors" (I'm not even sure what you mean by that) have changed the article, it is no reason for you to do so. Have you even outlined your points or your reasons for reverting said article? As far as an edit summary, I said rvv. Has your research into wikipedia policies told you what that means? I'm more than familiar with Wikipedia policies. Just quoting policies doesn't mean that you know anything about them. Your quoting of JNN is inaccurate. I'm familiar with notability guidelines and I'm not afraid to admit when I've made a mistake. In the case of your article about Hema Sinha, there are simply not enough facts to make her notable. You'll notice that another editor added the prod template to the Gigi Mon Mathew article, and then reverted it for the simple reason that you cannot re-add a prod. I'm going to try and flesh out that article if I can find more sources. Otherwise, it's going to AFD. Don't take it personally.--vi5in[talk] 05:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- You are lying. The evidences I’d given in your talk page shows that your WP:ABF targeting my edits. ;Wikilawyering’ is the term I called you because of your bad faith attitude. If you had known that ‘Silencers are affixed to the muzzle of the weapon’ why did you revert it? What was the reason for adding inappropriate edit summary and unconstructive targets? Your edit to Nair was also a blind pov fork pushing. It has been reverted by established users like Relata refero and others. It is noted that you and Nambiar is pushing pov’s onto the article. Gigi Mon Mathew, better you take to AFD and lets watch what would happen. I challenge you and I’m sure that it would survive in its nature otherwise we editors shouldn’t create any biography’s with references. You GO ahead WP:INSPECTOR. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 06:00, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- First, I'm not lying. Your "evidence" is not evidence in the least. As far as silencers go, that is what I assumed you were trying to say. I couldn't tell initially what you were saying. There wasn't any sort of misleading edit summary. Also, if you're going to accuse me of doing something, then make sure you figure out exactly what it is that I am doing wrong. "POV fork pushing" doesn't mean anything. Are you saying I am trying to make a POV fork of the article, or are you saying that I am pushing POV? I am doing neither. I'm not challenging you to anything. Your gratuitous use of WP policy links show that you're the one wikilawyering, and not assuming good-faith. Please don't try to intimidate me, or assume I'm challenging you. I'm not. I'm not going to bother continuing this discussion anymore since it's obvious no headway is going to be made. --vi5in[talk] 06:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- replied in my talk pg (courtesy to other readers) POV fork is term used for your blind adding on Nair which is unconstructive. It is noted that you and Nambiar is pushing the same. The recent Nambiar’s push and your support is really unconstructive. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 06:24, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- First, I'm not lying. Your "evidence" is not evidence in the least. As far as silencers go, that is what I assumed you were trying to say. I couldn't tell initially what you were saying. There wasn't any sort of misleading edit summary. Also, if you're going to accuse me of doing something, then make sure you figure out exactly what it is that I am doing wrong. "POV fork pushing" doesn't mean anything. Are you saying I am trying to make a POV fork of the article, or are you saying that I am pushing POV? I am doing neither. I'm not challenging you to anything. Your gratuitous use of WP policy links show that you're the one wikilawyering, and not assuming good-faith. Please don't try to intimidate me, or assume I'm challenging you. I'm not. I'm not going to bother continuing this discussion anymore since it's obvious no headway is going to be made. --vi5in[talk] 06:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- You are lying. The evidences I’d given in your talk page shows that your WP:ABF targeting my edits. ;Wikilawyering’ is the term I called you because of your bad faith attitude. If you had known that ‘Silencers are affixed to the muzzle of the weapon’ why did you revert it? What was the reason for adding inappropriate edit summary and unconstructive targets? Your edit to Nair was also a blind pov fork pushing. It has been reverted by established users like Relata refero and others. It is noted that you and Nambiar is pushing pov’s onto the article. Gigi Mon Mathew, better you take to AFD and lets watch what would happen. I challenge you and I’m sure that it would survive in its nature otherwise we editors shouldn’t create any biography’s with references. You GO ahead WP:INSPECTOR. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 06:00, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Please see the time
I think my revert was correct. I just had come across it & reverted, if false you may revert it. --Avinesh Jose T 08:07, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
- you can also see my comments in the archived afd discussion. --Avinesh Jose T 08:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Crazyguy
It's possible crazyguy is a sock of harjk. Based on their edit histories its not very clear though. They will lose interest in fooling around with the Nair article after some time hopefully. Trips (talk) 12:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Vivin!
I like people who tell me about books. I spent my budget a long time ago. However, once I know a book is there, it goes on a list and I find it eventually. Thanks for your work on the article and thanks again for expanding my bibliography another couple of notches. :D Alastair Haines (talk) 16:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for your kind words. When I finish my work, I think I will provide access to it at my user page. Although it needs to be about 100,000 words (and rather technical), I think I will be writing bits and pieces in more friendly text. These too I will probably link from my user page. Alastair Haines (talk) 22:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Navneet Singh Khadian, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Navneet Singh Khadian. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? UtherSRG (talk) 17:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Your sockpuppet
I strongly believe that User:Vivin i.e you is a sock of User:Tripping Nambiar. Do you have anything to comment? This is because of your similiar involvement in Nair article. And you are calling others to be socks who are fighting against vandalism in the article. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 03:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- That would be impossible seeing as I am in the United States and Nambiar is on a completely different continent. A checkuser will confirm that. I also noticed that you removed my request about listing your multiple accounts. I don't see why you are disinclined to list them if they are legitimate multipurpose accounts. --vi5in[talk] 03:52, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- Oh oh! you know everything about Nambiar then (Thinking of the time you & Nambi rv'd it). Since you did lie in several occations, I am not going to fully believe what you are commenting. Moreover, a checkuser would be unable to give solutions on meatpuppetry cases. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 18:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- I haven't lied anywhere. WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. Go away. --vi5in[talk] 20:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- I have found it very interesting that other respected wikipedia editors are blaming that you, i.e. User:Vivin and User:Tripping Nambiar are sockpuppets/meatpuppets. It appears to me that they all are correct. Regarding their other blames that you are a LIER. I strongly beleive that they all are correct because You LIED to the whole respected Wikipedia community to get Sukhdev Singh Babbar deleted. You LIED that there were no neutral references supporting his notability when following references were there in the same internet/web which you/I use: The New York Times, Amnesty International, Amnesty International,The Hindu, The Tribune, The Vancouver Sun, United Nations, Asia times, CBC News Canada, Society for the Study of Peace and Conflict, Sify, India Today, The Indian Express, The daily Excelsior. --Singh6 (talk) 20:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
FPC I'd Like Help With
Hey, I was just wondering if you wouldn't mind going to Portal:James Bond. I'd really appreciate any criticisms or support that you could provide for this Featured portal candidate. Thanks. Ultra! 13:01, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Your sock puppet case
Since you are targeting and run after my contribs, I did not feel it necessary. --Avinesh Jose T 06:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'll tell you what I am doing. Trying to cleanup articles that are written poorly and horribly. Eitherway, it looks bad on you. --vi5in[talk] 06:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- I also noticed that you deleted my original post on your talk page where I informed you that it is polite to inform users if there is a sockpuppet case on them, and that it is also a violation of WP:NPA to falsely accuse someone of sockpuppetry. This leads me to believe that you have no sincere desire to make articles better. You maintain personal vendettas and jealously and aggressively guard your own articles... major violations of WP:OWN there. At any rate, your conduct is very evident and there for all to see. --vi5in[talk] 06:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Don't simply accuse editors with your point of view. I replied at sock page. --Avinesh Jose T 06:28, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not even sure what it means to "accuse someone with your point of view". It's obvious you have WP:OWN issues if you remove cleanup tags from your article. I've given a response to your frivolous sockpuppet case on the case page. --vi5in[talk] 15:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- I removed tags after cleaned advert sort of wordings from it. But it was reverted by Uzhithiran. If an article cleanedup properly, there is no need of keeping those tags. The case was posted because of Sockpuppet/meatpuppet style of edits was done by you. If an editor supports a vandal or edits on behalf of him, it should be dealt with meat puppetry. It is clear from the contribs that you and uzhuthiran are engaged in WP:ABF by targeting my edits. It is good, if you both could contribute more in other areas also. --Avinesh Jose T 07:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- O RLY? I'm sorry to be this blunt, but quite frankly your English is not matched by your enthusiasm to create new articles. Your articles are poorly written, full of grammatical mistakes, peacock terms, and read like ads. It's not enough to make a few changes and then remove tags. Tags stay in place until articles are improved. The case was filed because YOU have WP:OWN issues and don't like anyone saying that your articles are badly written. Like I said before, for a user who has been blocked twice for sockpuppetry, you don't have a leg to stand on. --vi5in[talk] 18:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- You don’t teach me English and stay away from me now onwards. Being an edit warrior in Nair with WP:OWN issues, you don’t have any right to speak about Own issues. Your Own Nair article is flooded with peacock terms and bad grammar. First you clean it and speak about grammatical accuracy and peacock term then have a leg to stand on in WP. Which is your good article contrib.to Wikipedia? But I can proudly claim that I have created dozens of articles including Government of Kerala and editer/removed/cleanups plenty in wikipedia. Keep away from me. --Avinesh Jose T 04:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- Whoop-de-doo!!! I have no WP:OWN issues with Nair. It's true I created the article and it's true I keep an eye on it, but to any observer who goes through my contributions and my edits in the talk page will see that I do my best to keep it balanced. I'm not trying to teach you anything, least of all, English. But I'm being honest when I say that your prose leaves a lot to be desired. If you really think there are peacock terms and bad grammar why don't you go ahead and point them out in the article's talk page? In fact, I asked the same thing to your sockpuppets Harjk and Crazyguy and you had nothing to show then. I mean, all you're doing is "I know what I am, but what are you?" So you went ahead and created articles. Good for you. So did I. Instead of talking a lot perhaps you should really try and prove all your various allegations. But of course, you had your sockpuppets to do that, right? If you were so concerned about the Nair article, why didn't you edit it directly? That's because you had your sockpuppets to do that for you. Like I've said umpteen times, my contributions speak for myself and I have a pretty decent reputation here on Wikipedia, which is more than what I can say for you. You don't have any right to tell me to stay away from anywhere. I'm concerned with maintaining quality on Wikipedia and in that regard I will cleanup contributions maintain that quality. --vi5in[talk] 17:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- You said my contributions speak for myself and I have a pretty decent reputation here on Wikipedia. Good, keep it up... But, I notice that you and uzhuthiran’s (both are charged of sock puppets and finally reached in a conclusion of ‘inconclusive’) currently do not have any dealing in WP other than aiming at my contribs and I, once again echo what I said before that do pay your attention in other areas also, especially in your ‘own’ articles, which is all currently needs to be thoroughly cleaned up, eliminate peacocks and unencyclopedic idioms-if you concerned with maintaining quality. I am not interested to edit it at this juncture. If I do it, I am afraid that it might spark into another edit war. --Avinesh Jose T 04:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not going to humour your paranoid delusions. Instead of claiming that there are peacock terms perhaps you should actually point them out. Saying things don't make them so. Also, your edits are being 'targetted' because they are of poor quality. Instead of getting so aggressive and defensive about it, you should welcome the help. --vi5in[talk] 17:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I have worked with many editors and partaken in many discussions. It is the first time someone says about my ‘poor quality’ edits and 'targeted' my edits other than you and uzhithiran. You still need to be divested yourself from bad faith edits. --Avinesh Jose T 04:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- Avinesh, you need to learn to write sensible English or get somebody to dictate words to you as you have done above.Uzhuthiran (talk) 14:41, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- I have worked with many editors and partaken in many discussions. It is the first time someone says about my ‘poor quality’ edits and 'targeted' my edits other than you and uzhithiran. You still need to be divested yourself from bad faith edits. --Avinesh Jose T 04:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not going to humour your paranoid delusions. Instead of claiming that there are peacock terms perhaps you should actually point them out. Saying things don't make them so. Also, your edits are being 'targetted' because they are of poor quality. Instead of getting so aggressive and defensive about it, you should welcome the help. --vi5in[talk] 17:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- You said my contributions speak for myself and I have a pretty decent reputation here on Wikipedia. Good, keep it up... But, I notice that you and uzhuthiran’s (both are charged of sock puppets and finally reached in a conclusion of ‘inconclusive’) currently do not have any dealing in WP other than aiming at my contribs and I, once again echo what I said before that do pay your attention in other areas also, especially in your ‘own’ articles, which is all currently needs to be thoroughly cleaned up, eliminate peacocks and unencyclopedic idioms-if you concerned with maintaining quality. I am not interested to edit it at this juncture. If I do it, I am afraid that it might spark into another edit war. --Avinesh Jose T 04:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Whoop-de-doo!!! I have no WP:OWN issues with Nair. It's true I created the article and it's true I keep an eye on it, but to any observer who goes through my contributions and my edits in the talk page will see that I do my best to keep it balanced. I'm not trying to teach you anything, least of all, English. But I'm being honest when I say that your prose leaves a lot to be desired. If you really think there are peacock terms and bad grammar why don't you go ahead and point them out in the article's talk page? In fact, I asked the same thing to your sockpuppets Harjk and Crazyguy and you had nothing to show then. I mean, all you're doing is "I know what I am, but what are you?" So you went ahead and created articles. Good for you. So did I. Instead of talking a lot perhaps you should really try and prove all your various allegations. But of course, you had your sockpuppets to do that, right? If you were so concerned about the Nair article, why didn't you edit it directly? That's because you had your sockpuppets to do that for you. Like I've said umpteen times, my contributions speak for myself and I have a pretty decent reputation here on Wikipedia, which is more than what I can say for you. You don't have any right to tell me to stay away from anywhere. I'm concerned with maintaining quality on Wikipedia and in that regard I will cleanup contributions maintain that quality. --vi5in[talk] 17:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- You don’t teach me English and stay away from me now onwards. Being an edit warrior in Nair with WP:OWN issues, you don’t have any right to speak about Own issues. Your Own Nair article is flooded with peacock terms and bad grammar. First you clean it and speak about grammatical accuracy and peacock term then have a leg to stand on in WP. Which is your good article contrib.to Wikipedia? But I can proudly claim that I have created dozens of articles including Government of Kerala and editer/removed/cleanups plenty in wikipedia. Keep away from me. --Avinesh Jose T 04:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- O RLY? I'm sorry to be this blunt, but quite frankly your English is not matched by your enthusiasm to create new articles. Your articles are poorly written, full of grammatical mistakes, peacock terms, and read like ads. It's not enough to make a few changes and then remove tags. Tags stay in place until articles are improved. The case was filed because YOU have WP:OWN issues and don't like anyone saying that your articles are badly written. Like I said before, for a user who has been blocked twice for sockpuppetry, you don't have a leg to stand on. --vi5in[talk] 18:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- I removed tags after cleaned advert sort of wordings from it. But it was reverted by Uzhithiran. If an article cleanedup properly, there is no need of keeping those tags. The case was posted because of Sockpuppet/meatpuppet style of edits was done by you. If an editor supports a vandal or edits on behalf of him, it should be dealt with meat puppetry. It is clear from the contribs that you and uzhuthiran are engaged in WP:ABF by targeting my edits. It is good, if you both could contribute more in other areas also. --Avinesh Jose T 07:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not even sure what it means to "accuse someone with your point of view". It's obvious you have WP:OWN issues if you remove cleanup tags from your article. I've given a response to your frivolous sockpuppet case on the case page. --vi5in[talk] 15:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Don't simply accuse editors with your point of view. I replied at sock page. --Avinesh Jose T 06:28, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- I also noticed that you deleted my original post on your talk page where I informed you that it is polite to inform users if there is a sockpuppet case on them, and that it is also a violation of WP:NPA to falsely accuse someone of sockpuppetry. This leads me to believe that you have no sincere desire to make articles better. You maintain personal vendettas and jealously and aggressively guard your own articles... major violations of WP:OWN there. At any rate, your conduct is very evident and there for all to see. --vi5in[talk] 06:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Hiya
Thats alrite. It had nothing to do with the article. By the way i added references to the food and drink and attire sections in the article.. its at the end of each section. Manu rocks (talk) 16:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- and check the Ettuveetil Pillamar article. Ive added references and the modern view etc. Manu rocks (talk) 08:54, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi
Hi, I'm Arjun Menon. I saw your contributions to Paliam. Being a partial Paliam descendant (on the paternal side) myself, I'm curious to know whether you are a Paliyam member. Maybe we even know each other. Here's a picture of me in front of the family house, taken this summer. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 07:14, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Vivin! Great to know that you're Paliath too. Its nice to find relatives of mine who are also addicted to Wikipedia like me. I used to spend like 10 hours a day during summer vacation reading Wikipedia. I used to edit anonymously for a long time, but created an account recently. Even this summer while at home; I once spent a whole day on WP, and my mom scolded me for it. I also notice that you are a programmer like me. Thats the one other thing (apart from reading) that I'm addicted to. I love programming. I started programming at age 8. In high school, I wrote a BASIC interpreter in C. I'm currently doing computer engineering at Stony Brook University.
- Regarding my family info. My grandfather's name is Radhakrishnan Achan. His sister is the current (94 years old) Paliath Welliama (I met her just 3 months back). My dad's name is Gireesan. As you might ahve guessed, Radhakrishnan Achan is my dad's father and Paliath Weliiama is his aunt. Radhakrishnan Achan's (and Paliath Welliama's) father's name is Narayan Namboodhiri. (If I remember right). My father's mother belong to parapooveetil, so does my dad. My (paternal) grandmother's father was Justice Govindan Pandalay. He was kinda well-known in paravur and chendamangalam in olden times. I guess that's a lot of information for now. Ask your mom, and tell me if she know my dad/grandfather. Cheers! Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 00:50, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- Hey Vivin! I just got information from my parents. They said I've met you and your parents long time back, when I was in Oman. Isn't this amazing..? Small World indeed! I'm studying Computer Engineering in Stony Brook. Sorry for the long lack of correspondence. By the way, since you are in the U.S., I could talk to you sometime on phone. I'll send you my cell-num. to your e-mail via Special:EmailUser/Vivin. Let's keep in touch by e-mail hereforth. It's been nice getting to know family members on WP. Cheers! Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 05:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Hey Vivin! Things are going pretty well over here. I hope you're enjoying your work at Infusionsoft. My Fall semseter is getting over in 4 weeks, I'm pretty close to the finals; so got lots of studying to do. BTW, did you get my mail? Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 20:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Upper cloth revolt name change
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Docku:“what up?” 00:48, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem
Thanks for your uploads. You've indicated that the following images are being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why they meet Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page an 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. --02:55, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Could you keep a watch over that article? Looks like militant POV-pushers trying to put up defamatory content there again[1].Zuppeandsalad (talk) 10:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Googlean
Give it another 24 hours for news to pop up.--Tznkai (talk) 16:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Sukhdev Singh Babbar
Welcome! Many of the India related articles need a watch from POV pushers, especially separatists!--Anish (talk) 03:57, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Now that it's primary creator, racist troll User:Otolemur crassicaudatus, has retired and left, perhaps it is time to get it AfD'ed again. This time, a better job needs to be done than poor Bharatveer did with his polemics. Sound arguments of WP:SYN and WP:NPOV can be made against the tendentious article.70.112.6.56 (talk) 01:01, 29 November 2008 (UTC)