User talk:Kanatonian/archive 13

Barnstar

Wow, thanks! Lexicon (talk) 17:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Diseased

I hope you mean deceased not diseased and am imposing that policy rigidly, SqueakBox 19:59, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:RapeVictims

Thank you for reviving this category. Now Squeakbox is going around changing the title of articles to bypass the category. This user appears to be determined to get his way one or another. He is abusing wikipedia and trying to prove a point. What can be done about him? Fighting for Justice 22:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 24 July, 2007, a fact from the article Prawn farm massacre, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Yomangani ^talk 15:59, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warning to you

1:you have contributed a lot to Wikipedia particurly to Tamil.Thanks a lot.But I am sorry to say that certain editors do not like us and want to vandalise amd make us go like the marathi editors. Sarvagnya was a confirmed sockpupporter and Gnanapati is his sock [1] However due to help from Binguyen.[2] Later a drama was done with a so called second check not given to any other user and his friend used from another location and he was let off. Confirmed [3] Further Evidence [4] Further Evidence [5] Both have similar userpages [6] and [7] They are same user.They edit the same articles which they are not supposed to do.[8] Please read below about Binguyen [9] He cheated and lied during the Arbitition Victim [10] Now Tamil editors There is a Singalese/Kannada Tag team which vandalises articles and they plan to make us leave Wikipedia.Anyway I have left even before I joined. [11] Read here [12] Read here [13] Regards Adyarboy

I have a lot of faith in the Wiki process. After all Wikipedia to fail miserably because of so called cabal action is akin to failure of humanity to resolve its acute problems. As long as we don’t violate wiki process especially civil, attack, sock the law of averages says that the party with the righteous attitude and action will always triumph. I am a Hindu and I was brought up on the stories of Mahabharatha in which the five Pandavas eventually won against the one hundred Kauravas because they were righteous from day one. But till they reached the point of victory, they had to suffer. I have a story to tell and write and no force on earth however evil or strong except death itself can stop that. Thank for your warning Taprobanus 19:48, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prawn farm massacre

It does seem to be a bit of a mess over there! I glanced at the talk page, and it looks like resolution isn't forthcoming. I've never been involved in an edit war that required mediation, but I wonder if that would help you. I'm keeping an eye on it and will try to help at least keep unexplained deletions down, but it might be worth looking into. Good luck. Moonriddengirl 16:45, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iwazaki

I warned him. If he makes any further comments of that sort, I will block him. Lexicon (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smile

Connell66 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hello

Asalamu Alaikum, thanks for informing me about the pics. Do let me know how I can improve the articles by adding or not adding pictures. I would like to improve the quality of the article and the pictures are not that important. Thanks and awaiting your reply Taprobanus 18:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Taprobanus. Thanks for your good work in Wikipedia. About the articles, we should not use non-free images unless in very special cases, where it would be really difficult for the reader to understand the topic without that very specific image.

Many images can be useful to articles. But we do have a policy to only use non-free material in very restrict cases. I hope you understand.

Keep on the good work! Best regards, --Abu badali ^(talk) 14:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Taprobanus, I think I've addressed the concerns you raised in the review of Economy of ancient Tamil country. Please take another look and let me know any comments.Lotlil 05:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well

Articles that start with "allegations" sound like a newspaper article rather than an encyclopedic one. I'd like to have that changed to something more factual. For instance, we have a plethora of articles on hoaxes or hypes (like the 2007 Boston Mooninite scare, which was "alleged terrorism by a TV channel") and they all tend to have better names. >Radiant< 12:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on what others think. Mediation tends to be limited to a small group of people, and a compromise decided by the small group is not binding towards the encyclopedia as a whole; if it turns out many people disagree with the mediation outcome, it won't stand. >Radiant< 11:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My edits

Any words/suggestions on my edits lately ? Also keep an eye on all these pages as I am sure they will go through some blanking :) Watchdogb 13:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Vc.gif

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Vc.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 23:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Allaipiddy Displaced.jpeg

Hi. I've been working on the Allaipiddy massacre article and I noticed that it makes use of Image:Allaipiddy Displaced.jpeg, which you have uploaded under a fair use rationale. I don't think that the image qualifies for fair use for the following reasons:

A free equivalent "could be created that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose" (WP:NFCC criterion #1). The image is a photo of the building and could thus be replaced with a photo taken by an editor and released under a free license. The only way I can see it as not being replaceable is if: (1) the building has been demolished, (2) the area is not reasonably accessible (e.g. it is cordoned off), and/or (3) one cannot take a photo of the building without jeopardising one's personal health and safety.
As I've noted at Talk:Allaipiddy massacre, the bombing/shelling of the St. Phillip Neri church seems to have little or no actual connection to the Allaipiddy massacre. As such, the image does not belong in that article (it might be appropriate in an article about the church or an article about the bombing/shelling). At the moment, the image is orphaned.

Please let me know your thoughts. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We need an article on the bombing as a seperate one. Thanks Taprobanus 18:03, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Using the sources provided by Watchdogb in the article on the church bombing, I have written a fairly detailed non-free use rationale for the image, attempting to address the main points at WP:NFCC. Please take a look. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oversight

I indef-blocked the stalker yesterday and will delete the revision so that it is viewable only to admins. If you would like the revision to be permanently removed, please make a formal request for oversight. (I've also e-mailed you about this.) I have removed the AN/I thread that you started for your own privacy. If you feel that is unnecessary, please go ahead and restore it. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I have deleted the revisions in question, but they are still viewable to anyone with sysop rights. If you would like them permanently removed, you'll have to contact someone with oversight privileges. — Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was GREAT. THANKS, I will write to Oversight. Taprobanus 18:32, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Hosur

Hi. I'll look into that sometime. But, there're other tasks too in my todo list on top of this. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 02:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neila Sathyalingam barnstar

That was unexpected – thanks very much! By the way, I have some questions that perhaps you can help with:

What is the significance of the title "Srimati"? Is it conferred on a person by someone else (for instance, is it a government award of some kind), or just one that is simply adopted by someone personally?
According to sources that I read, Neila Sathyalingam was "awarded the Viswa Kala Bharathi from Bharat Kalachar of India for her artistic contributions throughout the world". Are you able to shed any light on what this award is, and who (or what) "Bharat Kalachar" is?

Cheers, Jacklee 18:04, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response! Will incorporate some of the information you provided into the article. Cheers, Jacklee 19:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the additional information about the honorific "Srimathi". I've updated the article with some footnotes on the term "Srimathi", the Viswa Kala Bharathi and the Bharat Kalachar. Cheers, Jacklee 20:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sooriyakanda mass grave

Thanks for supplying the book reference. As I wrote on the DYK Suggestions page (now deleted because the article has been uploaded to the template), I agree that the allegations regarding Nanda Mathew are not key to the article and might be best left out. Regards, Espresso Addict 16:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 26 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sooriyakanda mass grave , 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.

--Carabinieri 20:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

britain, disambiguation.

Hi, I'm trying to reduce the number of links that point to 'Britain'. You have a link in your 'colonial era migration' paragraph which might be better as either [ United_Kingdom | Britain ] or possibly [United_Kingdom_of_Great_Britain_and_Ireland | Britain ]

Since you are working on the article I feel it would be rude to make a change without your approval. Pan narrans 18:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will take care of it, just a little busy now :) Thanks Taprobanus 20:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Editor?

Thanks for your comment, it means a lot to me -- I've just returned from holiday, hence the delay in response. Now I'm back at my desk, I will certainly give the idea careful consideration. Regards, Espresso Addict 15:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your phenomenal work on Sri Lanka articles and strict adherence to wiki policies, even under trying circumstances. You are a role model. Lotlil 21:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vankalai

I notice you'd left a couple of messages on this user's talk page yesterday. He was indefinitely banned a day before that, on the 12th, just about a day after he'd joined. Isn't Wikipedia a nice place? -- Arvind 13:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is a case of WP:BITE I am helping him off wiki because people have such short fuses here. Thanks for noticingTaprobanus 13:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tamil bell

No, I don't have immediate access to it. Give me a few days, I will see if I can find it somewhere. This may be unrelated to what you are looking for, but I think linking this bell to Cholas is a hoax. Lotlil 03:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minority Rights Group International

Hello Taprobanus. You probably know that the Tamils and Muslims of Sri Lanka were listed as number 14 on MRGI's 2007 list of people under threat. I have not seen this in any of the articles about Sri Lankan Tamils or Muslims, and it probably ought to figure in one of them. I thought I'd leave it to you to see where it best fit. -- Arvind 13:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to include that, thanks Taprobanus

Email

Didn't receive your email. Lotlil 20:39, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incivility

You're right, I guess I don't have an example of incivility on your part, and probably shouldn't have made the comment without such evidence, and so retract the statement. I guess I've just seen so much mud-slinging going on from both sides over Sri Lanka-related articles that I just lumped you in with all the rest—and honestly, with all that goes on, I would find it remarkable if it turns out that you had never been even mildly uncivil at some point in the past. I will let you know if I think you're being so in the future, though. Lexicon (talk) 23:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The provocation is there but my strategy has always been NEVER EVER to fall for it because that would be to counter productive to what I do, that is to document controversal issues and I need all the help I can get. All what the personal attacks against me has brought is many neutral wikipedians to come to my aid. We have a broad cross section people now interested in what I do and if I had been a mad dog, by now I would have banned. I dont even go strongly against people who attack me because that is also part of the strategy:)Taprobanus 14:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:War crimes by country

Hello, I thought you would want to know that Category:War crimes by country and all of its sub-cats are now under discussion for possible deletion. I don't know why it is that category creators aren't required to be notified, but I always make a point of leaving a note like this when I'm involved in a CFD and the creator doesn't appear to be aware of the discussion. Cgingold 14:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Just want to let you know, I can tell you from experience that it's important to get into the discussion early on. That's what gives other editors a chance to take into consideration whatever you have to say that other folks may not have thought of otherwise. A really good illustration of this just took place a few days ago. Cgingold 22:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :D

Question

Hey what was that policy? WP:MOS [14]? Cheers --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie | tool box} 01:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for point me out the policy bro :) --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie | tool box} 12:33, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: your solicitations to help

Apologies for an incredibly late reply. I have been on Wikipedia, but not signed in this whole time. Anyway, to the matter, the only way I think I can help is to see what other people need help with. It seems I have access to firsthand information, I think, but to prove that would be something. You see, I usually edit on simple levels like grammar and vandalism, and adding paragraphs and sentences to certain articles. Being involved in a project is something I am not used to, so, for lack of better words, my hand will have to be held. Seriphyn 15:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About your apology

I was confused at first, as I clearly stated that I took offense. Then for a minute or so I was almost convinced you wanted to insult me again via a Non-apology apology. But in the end I decided to believe that you honestly wanted to apologize, so, apology accepted. Still, be a bit less quick to accuse other people of violating policies like WP:STALK etc. in the future, and try to be a bit more direct while apologizing. Thanks and best wishes! Charon X/talk 14:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern University massacre

Re: User talk:Black Falcon#Sorry for the bother:(

Hi! I'm back (sort of ...). I took a quick look at the article and think that some of the points raised by Snowolfd4 are valid. However, I'm somewhat puzzled as to why the tagging was not accompanied by an explanation on the article's talk page, in light of the fact that it was disputed and repeatedly reverted. If you'd like, I'll take a closer look at the article after it's unprotected (Oct. 20); for now, I have suggested a an alternate wording for the "Background information" section (see Talk:Eastern University massacre#Background information), which was one of the issues Snowolfd4 highlighted. I'd be happy to know your thoughts on the matter. – Black Falcon ^(Talk) 04:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

	Thanks Kanatonian/archive 13
	I would like to thank you for your participation in my successful RfA, which passed with a tally of (44/10/5)^[1]. Whether you supported, opposed or were neutral in my RfA, I appreciate your participation and I hope that we can continue to work together to build a stronger and better Wikipedia.
	Regards, nat^tang 04:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]