User talk:Vadakkan/Paranai

Tamil

A barnstar in appreciation of the "little things" (pun intended on your user page) that you fixed on Tamil language-related pages. Wish you continue to contribute with the same spirit. -- Sundar 05:26, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

Great work on Tamil language, Arvind. Can you take care of the objections on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tamil language till Tuesday when I return back here? Thanks. -- Sundar 12:54, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

Sure, to the extent I can. The formatting objections are quite beyond my humble wikiing abilities, though. --- Arvind 15:40, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

In relation to that, can you confirm to what extent the added references where used in the writing or fact checking of the article? Thank you - Taxman 14:57, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

(comment left on Taxman's talk page) The section of the article on Geographic distribution has been completely rewritten using four of the books in the references (two of them are now mentioned in the text). I also made changes several weeks ago to the section on History based on another of the references, which I've now again inserted into the text. The analysis in the Examples section is based on standard grammars which are listed in the ancient works section of the references. I've also made several small changes to other sections recently, again based on the references. If you've any suggestions as to how the article could be improved by directly citing references in the text, they'd be gratefully received --- Arvind 15:36, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Great, thank you. That is better than I had hoped. As to inline citations, one way is to simply put the author's last name and the date and/or page numbers of the text in parethesis next to the fact you cited from that source. Such as (Smith, 2003, pp 22-24). One thing I did notice that would be great, is in the example section, the passage is listed in Romanisation and in English. It would be fantastic if it had a third spot showing the Tamil script before the Romanisation. Thanks - Taxman 16:02, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

- A special word of thanks, though insifficient, to you, Arvind. Thanks are also due to Taxman for his constructive comments. -- Sundar 04:56, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)

And it Tamil language is now featured! -- Sundar 04:10, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Arvind, I'd already made this request in Raul's talk page. May be, you can add your support there, so that he'll be reminded of the request. He's the one who decides the featured article for a particular day. -- Sundar 04:55, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

Tamil people FAC

Hi Arvind, are you aware that someone has nominated Tamil people for FAC? Please register your vote at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tamil people. Btw, there is some recent activity in ta:. If you've some time to spend, you can contribute there. Particularly, I seek your help in translating a couple of section in the Tamil article there. Also, I noticed your correction of the translation. I was looking for this word "kin", but didn't strike me. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 10:39, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Arvind. I got your message in my talk page. Take your time. We need to take care of our off-wiki life as well :-) As for browsers that render Tamil text reliably on Linux, the answer is "I don't know". I'm facing the same problem. Everytime, I need to connect to a remote windows desktop to edit Tamil :-( Firefox might have some support for Tamil unicode, but on windows it shows the diacritics separate from the consonants. Kasi of thamizmanam.org might help. Will let you know if and when I get more info. Thank you once again for your unparalleled contributions to Tamil people. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 14:41, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

Arvind, if you haven't noticed, Tamil people is now a FA. Btw, a minor suggestion: though I understand that you mark most of your edits as "minor" on account of humility, I would suggest that you do so only for typo edits and the like. Because, marking edits that others might want to look at/verify as minor is sometimes frowned upon by some people. Thanks. -- Sundar 04:12, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Welcome back

Hi. Noticed your response at Talk:Tamil people. Hope you edit here at least occasionally and possibly at the Tamil Wikipedia too. :-) -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 17:15, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

India related links

India-related tasks | Indian noticeboard Requests: Sibichen K Mathew, Dominic Emmanuel, AK Merchant, Counterfeiting of currency notes in India, Akhand Pratap Singh, Asura (band), Asian Variety Show, Cultural liberalism in India, India Export Tax, India Import Tax, More... NPOV: Greater Nepal Rajneesh, Ranjit Lal Jetley Hedgewar, Puttanna Kanagal, Bride burning, Sonia Gandhi More... Wikify: Railway stations, Mahavidwan R. Raghava Iyengar, Silk in the Indian subcontinent, IDBI Bank More... Cleanup: , Rampur, Tav-Prasad Savaiye, Shipping Corporation of India, Velama, Medical college (India), All India Radio, More... Merge: Raghava Rama, Sammar Bahisht, Sathya Sai Baba movement,More... Expand: Prime Minister of India, Krishna district, List of railway stations in India, Swaraj, Ashoka Kumar Thakur vs. Union of India (Supreme Court Case), Barak Missile Deal Scandal, 14th Lok Sabha, Adithada, Ali Sardar Jafri, Bandhani work, Bhaiband, Chikan (embroidery), China Town, Kolkata, Rahi Masoom Raza, Energy policy of India, Essar Shipping, Fair use, Hinduism in India, Imperial Bank, Inbuan Wrestling, Iran-India relations, Islam in India, Arjuna award, Sunil Mittal, Save Indian Family, Anjana Sukhani, Rajendra K. Pachauri, More... Stubs: Anand Math, A R Antule, Arjuna award, Army of India, Bapudeva Sastri, Bombay Dyeing, Indian Copyright Act, Marimallappa, Mumbai Skywalk, More... Translate: Bhojpuri Wikipedia articles, Maithili Wikipedia articles, Telugu Wikipedia articles, Marathi Wikipedia articles, Hindi Wikipedia articles, Sanskrit Wikipedia articles, Tamil Wikipedia articles Kannada Wikipedia articles Collaborate: Collaborations of the Month, Notice board, Category Adoptions To do, Version 1.0 assessment, India Portal, Life in India, India quick links Indian Wikipedians, More... Requested images: Ilaiyaraaja, M. S. Subbulakshmi, R. K. Narayan, Free image of Aarti Chhabria Other requests: Add maps from WikiProject India Maps to articles of Indian regions found at List of regions in India Create links/categories to {{Elections in India}} template

---Pamri ^{• Talk • Reply} 06:59, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Zoroastrianism on wikipedia :nn

Thanks for your clarification on my talk page. Does that mean that the en:Parsi page's link to nn:Parsarar needs to be changed? (some stub in-between to clarify?)

Just a thought... -- Fullstop 20:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

from jayanthv

excuse me ,i have given a apt discussion before editting periayr,i wish you would read and not blindly revert all edits.

what exactly do you mean by telling many buddhists are aethists?do you have sources to support that?even if there is,what is the definiton of a buddhists?one who believes in the followings of "lord Buddha".which runs exactly anti parallel to the definiton of aethism.and i am sorry to say this that the great thanthai periyar was just another hoodwinking politician who acted in many paronoid ways to get notice for his party.and it is evident that he was only an anti hindu,and not anti-god.if he was anti-god,he would have taken a strong offensive stand against all religions,but that would nullify his vote bank,so he did this,in fact they say he was anti upper caste,but he did nothing to uplift dalits,because he spoke nothing against the real oppresors the thevars and the nayaks. I also apologise for my unruly language used in my earlier discussions,please pardon me,i will not repeat it. i also read ur discussion on periyars page and your explanation and i am sure ,you will put up the article you had promised. --Jayanthv86 18:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Rani Mangammal

i have wikified the Rani Mangammal page,but there are a lot of names which you can write about and expand,so please look into it.--Jayanthv86 04:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Tamil language

Glad that you've made amends to Tamil language article. Most of the issues raised by an anon at Talk:Tamil language have been addressed. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 12:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

All the best with your doctoral work. If it's not a problem, what your field of research is? -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 12:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Tamil script

OK, Arvind. I'll take care. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 13:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Tamil literature

Arvind, In this edit, you'd referred (Hart 1975), but the citation is missing. Can you please add that? Also, the citation would be useful in a related discussion at Talk:List of English words of Tamil origin. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 12:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Arvind. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 05:15, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Paternity leave

Congrats Arvind. :-) -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 04:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Many congratulations from me also. ImpuMozhi 19:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Could you have a look at this?

Hi, I changed what I think was biased writing on the article about Black July, could you have a look at its discussion page? Ulflarsen 16:54, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject on Sangam literature

I noticed you wanted to form one. I'm interested :) Kingsleyj 23:43, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Redaktør/Skribent/Bruker...

Problemet er at jeg føler det virker svært pretensiøst å presentere seg som redaktør av wikipedia (jeg regner med du ville sagt redaktør i wikipedia), samtidig som jeg ikke ønsker å gjøre noe poeng av at jeg skriver bedre på bokmål enn på nynorsk. Det kunne vært løst simpelthen ved at man droppet vedhenget "..., og behersker bokmål/nynorsk" på henholdsvis Template:user_nb og Template:user_nn. De som er interessert i distinksjonen, vil oppfatte forskjellen mellom "brukeren" og "brukaren". For meg har den nåværende utformingen av Template:user_nb og Template:user_nn en smak av norsk språkstrid, og derfor ønsker jeg ikke å bruke dem. Samtidig ønsker jeg ikke å presentere meg som redaktør. --vibo56 09:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Languages of India

Your inputs could be valuable at Talk:Languages of India#Cleanup. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 13:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Appadurai Muttulingam

Hello Arvind, The article will survive the deletion (with all the keeps). So I will not comment on it. Thanks for the update. - Ganeshk (talk) 03:57, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Liberation Tigers

Good for you, for making the change to the introduction. And by the way, congratulations on taking the intellectual leap of splitting the long paragraph into two! Definitely an improvement. Credmond 21:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Can the LTTE be described as a "political" organisation?

User Vadakkan had vadalised the discussion page by shoving 3 differnet arguments by three differet users under one topic deleting the original sub headings of the arguments and replacing them with his own sub heading. Thus making it difficult for the user who initiated the topic to find it! This is not allowed in the discussion page.Please refrain from valdalising or you will be reported! Further if you like to experiment you can use the sand box! Thanks 172.130.231.48 19:19, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I encourage you to report me to whoever you choose if you believe I am "vandalising" the page. It is actually quite common to restructure discussion pages to bring related discussions together. It makes discussions easier because one does not have to rehash arguments that have been repeated a little higher up the page, and the heading title was transparent enough to be evident to the reasonable reader. But, as I said, feel free to report me for vandalism. -- Arvind 21:33, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

O.k. since you have a bad attitude I will do so and report your Vandal on changing peoples comments , well more like deleating them!. - Ron - 04:04, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

---

'Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. '- Ron - 04:22, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

---

Your comment requested

Hi, Can you please refer to [1] and offer your comments to solve a minor dispute in the Carnatic music article? Much appreciated. - Parthi 23:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Can you comment on my inline questions here? -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 07:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Create versus edit

I am in ur camp brother, creation is always very much better and then edit, you defend your work and improve it. Case in point the State terrorism in Sri Lanka. AFD is in and I am proud and relived that it began as a shameless piece of propaganda into article worth keeping. Thanks for you input in the discussion pageRaveenS

Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical Tamil Inactivity

I have tried to organise this project and created the categories and stub templates suggested by the project template, however there has been a proposal to merge Classical Tamil category with the Tamil literature category. I think it would be better if we make this project include all Tamil literature rather than just 'Classical Tamil literature' we could do better. Perhaps we should rename the project Wikiproject:Tamil literature.

Also I would like to see some more input from other editors in this project. - Parthi 22:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

The project isn't supposed to be about the literature, it's supposed to cover the literature amongst other things (language, history). If you would like to expand it to be Wikiproject:Tamil, please go ahead - though for obvious reasons I would very much like to keep politics out of it, and that will be difficult with a broader focus. Let's continue the discussion on the Talk page. -- Arvind 10:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

LTTE mediation

Hey there, I was going through the new cases at WP:MEDCAB and I noticed that you are already mediating LTTE, which was listed as a case needed a moderator. I changed the case to "open" since you have it. Let me know if this was in error. Thanks! --Aguerriero (talk) 01:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your commitment to WP:NPOV regarding the LTTE article. Addhoc 17:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Kaveri Disputes article

Hi, After a long time, I have completed the Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute article in some shape and form. Most importantly, I've added some refs. Can you please take a look at the article and let me know if there are any glaring POV or anything that has the potential to be seen as POV. If you find anything, please let me know and I will add refs. Also the refs I've already added need some cleanup. Can you help me with this. I only know to add refs the 'plain vanilla' way. Also, while I've added refs for most of the controversial or potentially controversial portions, some parts of the article is still unreferenced. I will add it in due course. For all the above reasons, I've still left the underconstruction tag on. Once I get feedback from you, I'll remove it. I'll also make this request to few other editors, so that we minimise any risk of edit warring on that article. Thanks. Sarvagnya 23:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Kaveri Dispute Article

Hi Arvind,

Stand of the two govts: I do not know when you last saw the article. But I made some changes after I posted my prev message to you asking you to take a look. Basically, I've gone into the main grouses of both governments in the introduction part that I added. Please take a look at it and if there is something missing, feel free to add it. Only thing is, if you are going to go into the nitty gritty of their grouses, I suggest you do it under a dedicated section. I think its better to keep the intro as brief as possible.

River Dispute Principles: That info is contained in one of the pdfs I've put in the references also I think. I wanted to add that myself but because of the technical nature of the subject, I found it a little difficult to summarise fairly without ommitting anything. Anyway, if you want to volunteer to do it, please go ahead. Once again the only request is, make sure that its presence doesnt take the focus away from the dispute which is central to the article. Infact, I am not sure, but I think I had seen an article on WP about the subject. Cant seem to find it now. If it is there, you could make use of it too.

Politics involved: I made a mention of this in the introduction I added after my previous message to you. But I agree that you can go over it in a section dedicated to it. I had also read about how winning in the kaveri districts has been vital for parties in both states.

wider context of the problem of water resources in India : imho: This one I am not so sure. In all fairness, it should certainly find a mention. But try to keep it as brief as possible.

Also, the section covering 2003-2006 needs to be expanded a bit and references added. If you can do that, fine. Or else leave it to me as I've done all the digging around for references already. I will do it in due course.

Thanks. Sarvagnya 07:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Halmidi inscription

Hi. I believe you were making enquires about the Halmidi inscription. There exists a book by G.S. Gai (if i am not wrong) called Kadamba inscriptions. Gai was the chief Govt. epigraphist for ASI and he deciphered all the Kadabma inscriptions and wrote about it . You may find info on the Halmidi characters there, unless the book was written prior to the discovery of the halmidi inscription. I have now added Badami chalukya inscriptions from 6th and 8th centuries to the Kannada page. We had once discussed bringing out the evolution of the Kannada characters. This is a begining. Next year if/when I travel thru Hassan I shall make it a point to stop at Halmidi and photograph the prototype they have replaced the original with (in fibre glasss). In the meantime, enjoy the Chalukya inscriptions.

Dineshkannambadi

Help needed in Carnatic Music edit wars

Arvind, the following is the message I left in User: Sunder's talk page and User:Venu62's talk page :

I find that two users Skris and Sarvagnya are reverting edits completely unreasonably. I have provided evidences from authentic sources and yet, they are pusing for their POV rather than being neutral and inclusive. The Carntic Music page has not progressed due to such unreasonable edits. The time put in to improve the article gets wasted. I don't know how to seek arbitration. I've already posted a copy of this in User Venu62 who had maintained objectivity in a tireless manner. Please advise.--Aadal 05:21, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

History of Tamil Nadu

Hi Arvind, I have inserted extensive citations in the History of Tamil Nadu article. I think it is now in a state for a round of copyedit and review. If you could spare some time to go through this article, we can move towards peer review and then FAC. Appreciate your help - Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 06:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Brahminical culture and Dravidians

Arvind, I apologise for bringing up one task or another for you. Please see what can be done to the mess that the article on Brahminical culture and Dravidians, whatever the title seeks to imply. This has been moved from the earlier Dravidians and Hinduism. I look forward to your cleanup help and comments. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 09:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Yep, it's a total mess. Looks like whatever that can be salvaged from it should be moved to appropriate articles and this article deleted pending scoping and a rewrite from scratch. Consider commenting on the requested move in the talk page. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 10:23, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

re: Transcription proposal

Arvind, I had a good break during Deepavali. Had a look at your proposal; looks like it's a step in the right direction. While I'm no expert in this, I'll try to comment on each proposal based on what I feel. I've also requested comments from some knowledgeable Tamil Wikipedians. Let's arrive at something here. By the way, I liked the karpalagai metaphor. :) -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 06:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

On a totally unrelated note, you might find ta:எம்.ஜி.ஆர். கொலை முயற்சி வழக்கு, 1967 interesting and given your background, you might help in getting us references to court papers and all. If you got some "pure Tamil" word suggestions for legal terms too, the article would benefit. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 09:29, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Your browser rendering of Tamil script

Hi Arvind. I'm currently on Linux, so I'm just recalling from memory. If you're on windows, go to control panel -> settings -> languages -> select the check box corresponding to "script support for Thai, Indic, etc.," or something like that. It will install the appropriate packages if you insert your Windows installation CD at this point. However, on Linux I'm living with misrendered text. :( Some people have managed to tweak their system to render Tamil script correctly though. See if WP:COMPLEX or ta:Wikipedia:Font help helps. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 07:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I found just now that Konqueror renders it correctly in my Red Hat Enterprise Linux box. So, I'm going to use Konqueror for Tamil editing and firefox for the others! -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 10:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your response on copyrights for Indian govt work. I am afraid I saw the response only today and have responded back. Shyamal 06:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry, we may have been editing the India page at the same time and I probably inadvertently reverted some of the changes you made: unitary-->federal. Please make them again. Fowler&fowler 15:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Hortus Malabaricus

Thanks for your help on Hortus Malabaricus . :-) --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 05:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Tamil in FARC

Arvind, Tamil language is in FARC. If we don't act together to fix perceived problems, it will lose the FA status. Please take a look.--Aadal 13:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Arvind, THANK you so much! You being so much specific reference and elegantly steer clear of controversy! I don't know what will happen to Tamil language page, but some people are simply ruining it. So much more can be written (informative, neutral and non-partisan), but the actions of some of the editors who don't understand Tamil is hurting the chances of retaining FA. Greatly appreciate your input and help.--Aadal 16:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year!!

Happy New Year Arvind! Please take a look at the Tamil language FARC. We're not still there. We want to keep our FA in the new year! Tony has suggested that I try and book you and Sundar for a few hours. I'll seek extra time. I tried to solicit help from the league of copyeditors as well. There are only a few tags and I believe I can fix them. Sorry to bother you when you're busy !--Aadal 19:16, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Arvind, thanks for posting a request on India noticeboard.--Aadal 21:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

article request

romanisation of tamil--Ravishankar 10:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright questions

Hi. Please see this. The copyright status of couple of the images you uploaded has been questioned. Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 00:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Wow!

Boy, you really nailed the issue! Thanks dude, I appreciate that you understood what I was trying to do and let me and others know it too! I mean it - the issue and the bickering kinda fuzzed out my brain for a bit. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 17:23, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the links

Arvind, Your timing couldn't be better. I was just putting together an article on the sources of ancient tamil history. I had collected epigraphic and numismatic data, and was about to expand the archaeological section. The link and the paper you provided seem quite informative and will prove more than handy. Thanks. Lotlil 21:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

References

Hi Arvind. Some books listed under the references section of the Tamil language article are not cited inline. Could you have a look as to where they need to be cited or if they can be removed? I think some of them can be used in the grammar section. For example, the statement on uriccol could use "Kāṅkēyar (1840). Uriccol nikaṇṭurai. Putuvai, Kuveṟaṉmā Accukkūṭam". -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 06:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Sundar. Most of those references were actually used when the article was written. At some stage, I took out most references to "native" grammars of Tamil to forestall objections and claims of OR, POV and the suchlike, which were coming fast and thick. I still think it's probably safer if we stick to "western" grammars of Tamil. I have a copy of Pope, plus a couple of other shorter descriptions of Tamil grammatical. Let me know which bits you think need citing, and I'll add them in.

I must say I'm also a little perplexed by the suggestion that only references that've been cited should be in the "References" section. This is absolutely contrary to encyclopaedic practice - the references list in a typical longer Britannica article, for example, doubles up as a list of suggestions for further reading. One would have thought that the English Wikipedia, if it aims to be a serious rival, would want to do something of that sort, but I've long since given up trying to find logic in its policies. -- Arvind 12:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think the grammar section is contentious. But, just to make it more robust, please add citations for "uriccol", lack of articles, presence of both inclusive and exclusive pronouns, if you can find any. The official policy WP:CITE#HOW provides for including books in references without citing them when large parts of the text rely on them. The problem is with disruptive editors. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 12:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Done! -- Arvind 08:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Arvind. By the way, just have a look at the recent edits to Tamil people after your last edit. I'm not knowledgeable about that issue. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 08:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Halmidi

Yes I need to upload into commons, along with about 400 other images (mostly architecture/Kannada inscriptions related).:) Dineshkannambadi 00:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

A subtle change that needs your attention

Hi Arvind. Do you think this is a correct characterisation? -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 05:23, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd noticed the change when it was made. It reflects one (rather recent) POV, but I didn't have the energy to get drawn into a debate and I was hoping someone else would deal with it. Tamils aren't "multi ethnic" in the sense one usually uses the term. However, talking about "ethnicity" in the context of India is problematic, because of the various meanings the group can have. Are the descendents of Telugu or Sinhala or Arab migrants who adopted the Tamil language and ways "ethnically" Tamil? It depends on the definition of "ethnicity" one chooses to adopt. The secondary literature usually refers to Tamils as an "ethnic group" on the basis of common cultural and linguistic traits and the assertion of a Tamil identity, but if you adopt ancestry or origin as your basis you'll get to a different conclusion. My inclination is to simply change it to "people", which is the wording the Britannica uses. What do you think? -- Arvind 10:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree and have changed "group" to "people". -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 15:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Chennai

Hi Arvind, I don't know if you noticed, Chennai is currently being reviewed for being delisted, at FAR. Please take a look at the article when you get a chance. Thanks. Lotlil 14:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Civility

Sundar, thank you for your comments on Talk:Tolkāppiyam, which I really appreciate very much, but it's not worth making an issue of. Leave it be. And thanks again for your support. -- Arvind 17:01, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes. But, a single editor becoming the arbiter for whether properly sourced content should belong in an article at all, whether the interpretation by the cited source is "correct" (read: POV) etc., is unacceptable. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 12:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I know, that's not how things should be. This is not really a new issue, though, and I'm not sure it's going to change. Well, let's see how to best deal with it. -- Arvind 13:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Pancha Marapu

Arvind/Vadakkan: Thanks for the Pancha Marapu edit to restore it to regular status and for supplying matter from Zvelebil and Ramanathan. perichandra1 15:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure. I'll try to develop it a bit more once my books come out of their cartons. -- Arvind 13:14, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

re: Article title

I'd prefer Sangattamil. But, I don't know what Wiki policy recommends. Classical Tamil, I'm afraid, might be misunderstood by some and Old Tamil doesn't sound like a name. :-) Whatever name you write it under, I'm looking forward to the article. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 04:38, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know why I've not put this article out as yet: I found out that Herman Tieken recently (two months or so ago) wrote a paper in a German journal which takes issue with Mahadevan's assertion that the language of the Sangam poems is the same as the language of the Tamil Brahmi kalvettus. Since, as you know, Tieken's views are taken very seriously on Wikipedia (even more so than by scholars), I thought there wasn't much point doing the article until I'd had a read of the paper and incorporated Tieken's criticisms. I've asked my library to get me a copy, but it's taking time getting here, and it'll then take time to read too, since it's almost certainly in German (which I read, but slowly). Anyway, it'll get done in a while, once I have the materials I need to do a comprehensive job. -- Arvind 23:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Sure Arvind. A thorough job there would preclude POV-pushers riding on Tieken upsetting balance. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 08:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Evidentiality

As a native speaker, I've never realised the nature of info provided by this verb marker. Good to know this. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 12:25, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Blackmails and threats from Kannada edit

Arvind Please see this threat by one wikiuser: [[2]] Is this the way Wiki operates. I thought I should report this to Wiki admin. I have tried to edit and then when reverted gave extensive arguments to support my edits. What does one do in this case? perichandra1 19:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The Toda RfC

Hi Arvind, Since you have already commented a number of times in the RfC on other people's comments, I thought it might be a good idea to register your own comments formally under your own name. I think it will help to have your arguments all in one place, rather than as addenda to other people's comments. Thanks! Also, in the brief snatches of time I could find today, I've managed to update the Toda people article a little. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:34, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry for not replying to your message on my talk page earlier - work pressures have been keeping me frightfully busy, so I've not been here very much. The issue seems to have moved on quite a bit now, so an express comment on the suitability of that image would probably be redundant. Incidentally, I note that you're planning to upload Vinod Panicker's images. I've already uploaded a few to Commons at commons:Category:Images from doniv.org, and I plan to upload more over the next few days. If you don't mind, could you please add the images you upload to that category, so we don't unnecessarily duplicate each other's work. Thanks. -- Arvind 22:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Malayalee

Thank you for taking part in the discussion. I've been trying to make it clear to those two editors (Tulu War and Dayaanjali) that Malayalam originated from Old Tamil (or Proto-Tamil-Malayalam) for a long time. They think that Malayalam has nothing to do with Tamil and that it hasn't originated from Tamil at all. --vi5in^[talk] 00:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello please ignore this person's comment. He is bluffing.we have not told anything contradicting the relationship b/w 2 languages. He has not provided any link(atleast) which says the words(Malai and aali) come from any language. I think wikipedia is not the place to add unvarifed content and anyone's political views.Tulu war 17:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Tamil help

Thank u very much. Taprobanus 22:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure entirely - it's reminded me just how beautiful the Tamil names for some places in the Northeast are. I'm afraid Mylanthanai has beaten me though - I have no idea what Tamil word that spelling attempts to represent. -- Arvind 22:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

It is written as how you would write Mayil (peacock) lanthanai (no retroflex). Thanks Taprobanus 13:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. -- Arvind 21:15, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

The toponymic analysis of Mylanthanai has now been included. Its meaning is trivial when you consider its old Sinhalese name. Bodhi dhana (talk) 06:26, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Transferring pics from Tamilpedia to En

How do I transfer pics that are in the Tamilpedia to English section? Thanks Taprobanus 16:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Taprobanus. The easiest way to move pictures is to use Magnus Manske's "move to commons helper", which is accessible here: http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/commonshelper.php. The language code for Tamil is ta. Once the file's been moved to commons, you can use it on the English wikipedia, and on all other wikimedia projects. -- Arvind 21:15, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Taprobanus 18:29, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi

I was pleasantly surprised to hear from you on the "paharia women" image talk page. I have replied there. Thanks! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:14, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

File:Working Man's Original Barnstar.png		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For your tireless effort in providing Tamil place names for English articles Taprobanus 21:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

BL Image issue

Thanks for weighing in on the image issue. I was thinking of pinging you myself but left in a hurry on thursday. As for the issue of the watermark, which you seem to think is irrelevant... well.. my argument is a little more nuanced than I could manage to present that day. My basic question/argument is this - assuming that it is indeed a watermarked copy of a faithful reproduction of the original and not a photograph of a photograph, does not the watermarking amount to the 'creation' of a new photograph? Butseriously says that it doesnt. What do you think? Because if it does, then the copyright well and truly belongs to BL as in fact, they explicitly claim.

Another point which I'm trying to get clarification for has to do with the date of publication. Since the couple of pd tags that have been discussed on that talk page hinge on the date of publication, do you think we should be a little more careful in not equating the date of creation and the date of publication. Agreed, that the two may not be very different in most cases, but I feel that the point needs to be considered and factored into policy.. if it hasnt already. Or if policy already has considered it, would you be able to shed light about how that was achieved or just simply any relevant thoughts on it. Thanks. More later. Sarvagnya 23:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello Sarvangya. You're quite right about the relevance of the distinction between the date of creation and the date of publication and of the fact that it's the latter that's relevant - this is pretty much what Wikipedia policy also says. It's policed somewhat more carefully on Commons than here, but I can't imagine a picture not being deleted if the term hasn't run out calculated from the date of publication.

Re the watermark, there is a threshold of originality that must be crossed in order for a work to be copyrightable. Mechanically adding a watermark or a logo to an existing picture will not normally cross that threshold of originality. It might be different if, for example, someone had added a Stella Artois or other brand logo to Picasso's portrait of Sabartes, but adding the BL's logo done is quite far from that and will not create a new copyright. I hope this helps, and feel free to just ask if you have any questions. -- Arvind 16:26, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

"Tamil needed" tags

Hello Watchdogb. I notice you've tagged Kalmunai massacre and Sri Lankan Civil War as requiring Tamil text. This tag is usually applied when, for example, an article about a Tamil place, person, film, book or some such thing does not have his / her / its name in Tamil script (or where they're mentioned in an article in a context that requires their name to be provided in Tamil script). Looking at these articles, I'm not sure exactly what they lack the Tamil script for. Could you let me know exactly what you're looking for, so I can try to add it? -- Arvind 09:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I was looking for a Tamil article on those two English articles. I thought that was how I should ask someone proficient in Tamil to write about those two article. I did not know that the tags I added were for a text. Anyways, sorry for my mistake. Thanks for approaching me about it because now I know what to use that template for. Thanks Watchdogb 19:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi :) I'd do it, but I have a few technical problems on my computer that prevent me from being able to use or contribute to the Tamil Wikipedia - and, in any event, I find it writing about the Sri Lankan situation a little too emotionally draining. I'd say the best place to ask would be the Village Pump on Tamil Wikipedia, which is at ta:Wikipedia:ஆலமரத்தடி - their coverage of the Sri Lankan conflict is not anywhere near as comprehensive as this wikipedia's, but you may find someone there interested enough to take it up. -- Arvind 23:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions. I know exactly what you mean because emotions do run wild when writing about massacres like Kalmunai. I hope your technical problems can be fixed very soon. Your contributions are awesome and keep up the good work. See you around Anna Watchdogb 01:44, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Dhalla pic

Do you have (or could you make) a higher res image of Image:Parsi wedding portrait with Dastur MN Dhalla.jpg? Specifically, the picture of Dhalla (for the Maneckji Nusserwanji Dhalla article)? Thanks. -- Fullstop 18:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Fullstop. Unfortunately I don't. I got that picture from a friend in Bombay - it was a pretty small print to start out with, and the scanner wasn't that good. I'll try and see if I can track down a better one, but perhaps you might have more luck? -- Arvind 09:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Need help

I want to create a list of Kings based on the infor box kings used by the Ganga dynasty article for Jaffna Kingdom article that I am developing. Can you help to locate the source code for that template please ? Thanks Taprobanus 00:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The source code is at Template:Western Ganga Kings Infobox. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 04:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, the article Jaffna Kingdom is alomost done, can you take a look and do any copy edit ? 16:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and keep a "watch" please. Taprobanus (talk) 21:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

P int of India

As my talk page says, am on a break and will be on a break for a few more weeks atleast. So I do not have the time to go through the article in detail, but simply looking at the overall organisation of the article, I must congratulate you on what appears like a thorough, professional job. Looks simply awesome. Trust you to polish it further in any way you see fit. More later.. once i am back from my break. Thanks and regards. Sarvagnya 12:06, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Also can you harvardize the India#Government section references. KnowledgeHegemony 13:39, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Primary Sources

According to Wikipedia' NOR guidlines there is no special preference given to a primary or secondary hence, I feel the primary sources should be kept along with the secondary, especially for the laws stated in the Constitution. Thanks. KnowledgeHegemony 15:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Political integration of India

Featured or not, the article as it stands seems to me as the best summary on the subject. Congratulations. A picture of V P Menon could've made it "complete", but I couldn't find any free pic that we could use. Perhaps we should ask at the wishlist here for a hi-res version of the photo here. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 12:52, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorta back

Arvind, I'm sorta back and can spend a few hours a week. Please tell me if I can be of use. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 03:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Am doing fine, just got a little busy. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 15:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello

In the english language school text book published by Department of School Education, Government of Tamil Nadu, India [3], the title of the third chapter of the 10 grade social science book is "The First War of Indian Independence (Great Revolt of 1857) - End of East India Company's Rule" (please see: [4]). Looks like (and I hope) that the debate on title "First War of Independence" is now closed, but just wanted to let you know in case the debate pops up again and I may have to use this reference.

Thank You Desione (talk) 05:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Desione. Interesting, thanks for pointing that out. If you look at the History textbook for Std. XII (which was the one I looked at), the chapter is called "Great Revolt of 1857", with "First war of independence" not even mentioned in parantheses. Funnily enough, the Tamil version of the Std. X textbook uses the word "perumpuratchi" - which actually means 'great revolution' or 'great uprising' - rather than "perunkalakam", which means 'great revolt.' Anyway, as you say, it seems to have been sorted out now. -- Arvind (talk) 21:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

File:Random Acts of Kindness Original Barnstar.png		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For your extremely wise words at User_talk:Ncmvocalist#Please.2C_for_your_own_sake.21 - given by Spartaz Humbug! 13:33, 13 March 2008 (UTC), and fully endorsed by Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Just Tired

Hi Arvind, I have to apologize for not getting around to doing some things I was supposed to (like getting some maps on WikiCommons and talking to my Urdu experts).

I'm feeling frustrated from all the fighting that lately seem to take place on whatever page I decide to edit. Speaking of which, could you take a look at the post I made on Dwaipayan's talk page? And give me some feedback? Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 07:33, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply

I have not come across that book, as I concentrate on the sub varity, I have the follwing book

• Gunasingam, Murugar (1999). Sri Lankan Tamil nationalism. Sydney: MV. p. 238. ISBN 0-646-38106-7.

About the flag, It is a generic flag, Vel festival is a festival held by the Kathiresan Temple in Bambalapitiya in Colombo. Number of other temples also participate such as the Bambalapitiya Pillaiyar Temple. These temples were established about 100 years ago by the Natukottai Chetties Taprobanus (talk) 12:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Carnatic music

Nilakana Sastri's book on Cholas (published in 1955) has section on their temple culture that was a precursor to Carnatic Music and Bharatanatyam. You should get it, if you already do not have it. Also the K. Indrapala's Evolution of an ethnic identity... puts it together as to how Chola Art forms directly lead to Bharatanatyam forms in sculptures in Sri Lanka. Indrapal quotes Nilakanta Sastri extensively. Taprobanus (talk) 02:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC) copied from User_talk:Aadal to preserve the context

There'll not be any point in that - the response will be that Nilakanta Sastri and Indrapala are not musicologists and hence not reliable as far as that article is concerned. And as experience with citing Sambamurthy, Emmie te Nijenhuis, Ramanathan, etc. has shown, even producing musicological sources doesn't really help. My own inclination is to retreat from the topic until these people come up with a solution - those guidelines should help deal with situations like these, and trying to do anything is just an unproductive waste of time until then. A few days ago, I realised to my horror that there is no information at all about Iraiyanar Akapporul anywhere on the web. As a result, I've started work on an article on that, and I can't imagine how that article could ever be controversial. We have a few scattered sub-articles, but nothing about the entirety of Akam poetry or Puram poetry, nor about the major literary forms, such as Kovais, and virtually no information about Tamil prosody (yappu). So there's enough to keep us busy until then. -- Arvind (talk) 09:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Arvind, Thanks for your comment and I fully understand it, "And as experience with citing Sambamurthy, Emmie te Nijenhuis, Ramanathan, etc. has shown, even producing musicological sources doesn't really help...". But the point is -there should be no objection to explicit facts such as inscriptions at the least (if they are not relevant to Carnatic music virtually none of the other material in it is. We all have provided WP:RS from reputable sources, but it is atrocious that they are all removed by just a group action of editors -the edit histories are all available - not just on this one topic but anything that has even remote connection with Tamil or Tamil Nadu. The comments are so uncivil! I entirely agree that there is no point "fighting" and "reverting" etc. But, when well cited material are added, is there not a way to stop a group of editors from removing it. I don't know how to seek admin support for adding well cited authentic facts. Right now one can see there is absolutely no reference to 2300 years of musical traditions of Tamils or Tamil Nadu. --Aadal (talk) 13:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

At the moment, there actually isn't anything that can be done about it. The vast majority of admins refuse to touch anything that has anything to do with a content dispute. Sometimes you'll find a dedicated bunch of admins who will crack down on a content dispute - as happened in Wikipedia:WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation - but that's the exception rather than the rule. The problem isn't unique to issues related to Tamil - it's happening in dozens of areas on Wikipedia, which is why the Arbitration Committee has constituted a working group to deal with the problem. They should come up with recommendations in a few months which, hopefully, will make it easier to deal with this situation, and others concerning Tamil history and culture. It seems to me that the best thing to do is wait and see what procedures they come up with - this article has been having issues for nearly two years, a few more months won't make any difference. -- Arvind (talk) 15:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks indeed for your wise comments. Agree. --Aadal (talk) 15:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Copy edit req

Sri Lankan Tamil people not done 100% if you have time Taprobanus (talk) 23:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Great! I'll take a look soon - I'm not a great copyeditor, but I'll have a read anyway. -- Arvind (talk) 12:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Hogenekkal town?

Thanks Arvind. Have incorporated the ref into the article, and posted a note on Ganesh's talk page informing him of the same. - Max ^{- You were saying?} 20:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

nuisance editors

hi three / four people (or the same person using adjacent cabin computer?) (with user names similar to gaaaneshk, maaaximvsdecimvs, mmmmcm19 -user names altered to conceal their identity) think their view is A L W A Y S right, BUT NEVER HAVE THE GUTS TO SHOW VALID REFERENCES...but they delete VALID REFERENCED content from other users if it pricks their personal opinion...hope we monitor the changes that this cotery of lie mongerers propagate ...hoping for your cooperation..hope no one else has a shock of their life when misquotations are passed on as quotations!!! Ksense (talk) 13:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

email

do you have an email? Sarvagnya 22:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Telugu and Kannada

Thanks for the note you left here. I have another question about the form or spelling of Karṇaṭaka. In Tamil, although not meaning the same, when one writes கருநாடகம் the n there is dental, d is retroflex and "k" is pronounced g. If the word is written as Karṇaṭaka, what would the meaning (in Skt? in Kannada?)? Sanskrit and Kannada both have all the letters - dental n, retroflex n, retroflex t and d, k and g. The Kannada word for country, I believe is naadu (correct me if I'm wrong), where the first letter n is dental and the other consonant is d and not t. There appears to be too many features of linguistic incongruence here in writing Karṇaṭaka (except that that is how it is written in Sanskrit). If Srinatha says "Karnata bhasha", it is neither Karṇaṭaka bhasha nor Kannada bhasha. What are the historical evidences that Karnata bhasha refers to the Kannada bhasha and not bhasha of the Karnataka region of the empire of his days (perhaps referring to Kannada and Telugu, or simply Telugu of the Karnataka region)? Thanks--Aadal (talk) 21:39, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Chola dynasty now in FAR

A user, Sarvagnya has nominated Chola dynasty in FAR. Would you please help? Thanks.

Chola Dynasty has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

--Aadal (talk) 23:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Citations

Hi Arvind. Happy to see you save the day for Tamil. By the way, do you happen to have "Negotiations with the past : classical Tamil in contemporary Tamil"? I read the summary of this book in the French Institute of Pondicherry^[5] catalogue. The summary says how "modern Tamil derives most of its vocabulary and syntax from Classical Tamil literature". If we get the actual quote inside the book, it would be helpful. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 11:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

By the way, regarding the ability to express complex ideas in Science, Art, etc., an evidence for that matter is in Tamil Wikipedia, where we tend to use terms formed ab initio from Tamil roots (which are "simple" and common in everyday usage). Check out the article on Bonobo, for instance. Suddenly, I feel like getting a lot of clarity of those topics reading in Tamil. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 13:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Good to know you liked it. It was almost entirely written by a single person, who doesn't edit here regularly. I just made minor edits to that article. ta:பட்டாம்பூச்சி is another good article written by Prof.Selvakumar. Of the articles that I started, ta:மௌ டம், ta:கேண்டரின் கோணல்கோடு நிறுவல்முறை, ta:கிப்பன்_பண்டம், ta:எம்.ஜி.ஆர்._கொலை_முயற்சி_வழக்கு,_1967, ta:பகடிப்பட_இயற்பியல், and ta:அபிலீன்_முரண்படு_மெய்மை are a few decent ones.

I can understand your feelings regarding what's happening here even without getting to read all those "failed words". Please take it cool. Let's remove that sentence until we can find a RS to back it. In the meanwhile, you can spend some time reading and contributing to the Tamil Wikipedia. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 16:36, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Arvind, the Tamil wiki article on Bonobo was written by one Vendan Arasu (வேந்தன் அரசு இயற்பெயர் ராஜு ராஜேந்திரன்) from Ohio. I was following some trail that led to Sundar's page and then I landed here. I can't believe what will happen to Tamil-related pages on English Wiki without such wonderful contributions from you, Sundar and few other dedicated persons! Many Tamils would be grateful! When you get some time, please visit Tamil Wiki too and offer some of your valuable suggestions. Sundar had talked about you quite a few times. Regards --C.R.Selvakumar (talk) 20:23, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Dating issues

Hi Arvind. We should produce the quotes from RS and get the lead rewritten in the Tamil language article. It's an eyesore now. I don't care if the dates get pushed forward or behind (after a decision by neutral people), but let this issue be resolved for once and the article look saner. Please see this discussion and help with quotes when you're back. Sorry that I'm not of much use here without access to most of those journals. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 07:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree it is an eyesore. In point of fact, though, I'm not too sure we even need to discuss the age of Tamil literature in so much detail in the lead. At best, we'd need a reference to the earliest Tamil-Brahmi inscriptions as examples of early attestation of the language. I'm thinking about a complete rewrite along the lines of the leads in Swedish language or Turkish language, which are actually a lot more informative about the language than the lead in Tamil language. We can deal with the history section once that's done. I'd welcome your thoughts. -- Arvind (talk) 09:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, age of literature is merely one aspect among so many others. I like the Swedish and Turkish leads. We should do better justice to this article which is viewed more than 50,000 times every month and arguably (still) the best summary availably freely on the subject. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 11:28, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Tamil nationalism

I agree that Sri Lankan Tamil nationalism needs its own page, but Indian Tamil nationalism and Sri Lankan Tamil nationalism are not two unconnected entities. There is a literature exploring the similarities and differences between the two, the extent to which the two influenced each other, and the extent to which they drew on a common past. To simply turn Tamil nationalism into a disambiguation page ignores all of this. Also note that the Tamil wikipedia itself has a substantive article at its equivalent page, ta:தமிழ்த் தேசியம். -- Arvind (talk) 11:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I feel it is better to discuss this matter over email. Can you please email me or specify your email so we can get things sorted out ? Thanks Watchdogb (talk) 13:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

The Tamil nationalism is equal to French Nationalism of France and Sri Lankan Tamil Nationalism is equal to Quebec's French minorities French Nationalism, although bot share similarities but are different entities. My opinion Taprobanus (talk)

I think I understand what your concern is. Would it be taken care of if we turn the Tamil Nationalims (current dis- ambiguous) page into a page that explores the similarities and differences between the two, the extent to which the two influenced each other, and the extent to which they drew on a common past. Also can you please tell me the literature that explore these two in detail ? I am willing to write the article! Furthermore, the Indian Tamil Nationalism could be well developed but I am lacking some academic sources. Can you also point me in the right direction ? Watchdogb (talk) 18:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Dissam pagaes have become article pages still being used as a diassam page as well. Taprobanus (talk) 20:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I have fixed the problem, Tamil nationalism directs to Tamil Nationalism (India) and it has a dissam page as listed as other uses that directs to a Dissam page. That should satisfy your requirements ? no ? Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 13:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Not really, but I'll return to the issue in a while. -- Arvind (talk) 09:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

How about it now ? Taprobanus (talk) 13:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Thanks for your support at my recent Request for adminship. I hope you find I live up to your expectations. Best, Risker (talk) 16:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Amritasagara

My source (Narasimhacharya) does not mention Gunasagarar's commentary, just Amritasagara's prosody Yapparunga.... Please tell me which source you refered to.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 00:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm currently studying the Yapparungalakkarikai, and in the process I happened to notice that the reference was in the commentary rather than in the text itself. It's borne out by the Madras Tamil Lexicon's entry for "kunakankiyam". If you look at the online version (romanised), the reference it gives is "karikai, payiravurai"(i.e. karikai, commentary on the payiram section). I should add that it's not really a major issue - I just thought you might be interested in knowing. -- Arvind (talk) 22:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Adolf Hitler at Berchtesgaden.ogg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Adolf Hitler at Berchtesgaden.ogg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image:Adolf Hitler at Berchtesgaden.ogg

Thanks, I wasn't aware that I could do this. I've re-added the video as a thumbnail. Gary King (talk) 16:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

queyroz

Thanks for providing the details of queyroz, we definitely need more statements with good sources like this. One question: is the tilde ~ really on the 'o' as you write "pataõ, Fernaõ" or rather on the 'a' "patão, Fernão"? The latter version is the one used in modern Portuguese, but I do not want to exclude that some different usage was common in former times. Jasy jatere (talk) 07:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

It's odd. In the 1930 translation - and in the 1916 Colombo edition of the original Portuguese - the tilde is always over the o in the ao combination, so we have Jafanapataõ, Ceylaõ, Chilaõ, and so on. The Portuguese title printed in the 1916 edition is Conquista temporal e espiritual de Ceylaõ Third party European sources tend to print both the title and the author's name with the tilde over the a, but it's quite clearly over the o in the 1916 edition and the 1930 translation. I'm not sure whether this is a Ceylonism or reflects the original orthography. The way to check would be to look at the original 17th century printing, but I have no idea where one might find a copy of that. -- Arvind (talk) 11:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

since we have 3rd party sources and 2nd party, I suggest we stick with 2nd party (i.e. current) until we can get hold of the original source (if ever). Thanks for being careful about this. Maybe we can add a sic or so to the names.Jasy jatere (talk) 13:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Sri Lankan Tamil people

Hi, the above article has undergone extensive copy editing, a final look through would be helpful. ThanksTaprobanus (talk) 03:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Taprobanus. The article looks good. I've read through it, and will read it more closely over the weekend. A couple of initial thoughts:

• The "history" section ends fairly abruptly in the 18th century, with the more modern bits being covered in the section on "politics". This is fine, but perhaps you could add a paragraph or so summarising the developments since then, with the details remaining in the politics section?
• I think the "marumalarchi" poets (and definitely Mahakavi) deserve a mention, as perhaps do Varadar, Neelavannan, the Marxist poets, Cheran and others? It may also be worth mentioning the fact that authors like Appadurai Muttulingam have won critical acclaim and awards on both side of the Straits - to emphasise the fact that SL Tamil literature isn't just an isolated phenomenon, but something that has an important place in, and has made an impact on, Tamil literature more generally. -- Arvind (talk) 22:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
• One more point on the "history" section - Iravatham Mahadevan discusses pottery fragments from Poonagari in Jaffna which have inscriptions in Tamil-Brahmi characters. Most of these are too fragmentary to be read, but on one the word "vēḷān" is clearly legible. Mahadevan identifies this as a clan name also found in inscriptions from Tamil Nadu, and says that the inscriptions "leave no doubt that the language of the pottery inscription is Tamil." He also says the sherds have tentatively been dated to the 2nd century BC, pending regular excavation of the site. Mahadevan is clearly a RS (the book in question is part of the Harvard Oriental Series!), so I'd say this epigraphic evidence merits a mention in the article. -- Arvind (talk) 09:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

• Do you have the complete cite for IM's claim. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 12:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's a quote and full cite from Mahadevan:

"Several inscribed sherds have been discovered during exploration of villages in the Poonagari region of Jaffna. One of the inscriptions reads vēḷāṉ, a clan name related to vēḷ. Most of the other sherds are too fragmentary, but the occurrence of the diagnostic Tamil-Brāhmī letters ḻ ḷ ṟ and ṉ leaves no doubt that the language of the pottery inscription is Tamil. The sherds have been tentatively assigned to ca. 2nd century B.C. pending regular excavations of the sites." - Mahadevan, Iravatham (2003), Early Tamil Epigraphy: From the Earliest Times to the Sixth Century A.D., Harvard Oriental Series vol. 62, Cambridge, Mass: Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies, Harvard University, ISBN 0-674-01227-5 at p. 48.

There is also a photo of the "vēḷāṉ" potshard on p. 56 of the book (Figure 1.21A). -- Arvind (talk) 15:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

re: Iraiyanar Akapporul

Arvind, thanks for creating the article. Will read it and post my comments here. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 07:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Arvind, I finally read the article end-end and made some minor fixes. Thank you for bringing such unique content to Wikipedia as well as shedding light on such remarkable literary works of the Sangam era. Great to know that it was featured in the "Did you know" section.

Regarding the scope, I agree with what has been included. The main challenge is that an unitiated reader might be left wondering what "akam tradition" is until they come to the content section. It would be nice if a short article on that subject can be created and linked to from the lead. I'm not sure whether italicising the Tamil phrases and names further would make the article more readable for non-Tamil readers. If you think so, I can do that. Another issue affecting readability is the length of sentences. Most of them are so "precise and specific" that I dare not try rewording them. :-) However, the following sentence is extraordinarily long as well as difficult to comprehend. Can you please simplify this one?

“ By chronologically ordering the isolated moments which Tamil akam poetry, and describing how they fit into a serialised plot, the text - and in particular, Nakkiranar's commentary - related the emergent ciṟṟilakkiyam tradition to the ancient akam tradition, and thereby helped create a new approach to literature, on the basis on which a plethora of new literary forms developed in succeeding centuries. ”

I think, reading your summary brings the maximum understanding of the subject for a fresher and with the least effort possible. Even though I had read about tinai in my school days, reading your article has helped me by "characterising" the akam literature. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 06:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Sundar. Thank you for your comments. You're quite right about the sentence length. I'll see if I can get someone to simplify the language. On the other point, I'd quite like to create a good article on Akam poetry. I've been thinking for some time about first writing articles on individual topics such as ullurai, iraicchi, tinai and meyppatu which will help in writing the main article. I'll try and finish the one on ullurai before I disappear again. Hope all's well with you. -- Arvind (talk) 09:30, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Arvind. Looking forward to the said articles starting with ullurai. Things're fine now, but I had been through some difficulties for the past few weeks. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 09:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Arvind, please have a look at ta:திணை விளக்கம் when you find some time. It might either help with tinai or could find help from it. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 17:24, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello again Sundar. Sorry yet again for the long silence, things have been a little complicated at my end as well (nothing very serious, but wearying). Thank you for the pointer to ta:திணை விளக்கம். Incidentally, couldn't that article simply be merged into ta:அகத்திணை? The old texts treat purattinais are simply being the "purams" of specific akattinais (e.g., "vetchi" is said by Tolkappiyar to be "kurinchiyadhu puran"), so there really won't be anything like that level of detail as far as their mutarporul or karupporul are concerned. -- Arvind (talk) 22:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Arvind. I am far from being knowledgeable on this subject. So, I've linked your comment from the article's talk page for other contributors to comment upon. When you write the tinai article, we can have a look at the treatment and possibly adopt the line in Tamil Wikipedia, if people agree. Take care. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 07:34, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Iraiyanar Akapporul

On 15 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Iraiyanar Akapporul, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 17:23, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Cool Userbox!

bamb	अपुन बम्बैया मे खिट्पिट् करता है

Its really classy! --KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 13:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Award

Thanks but the article still needs a long way to go:))Taprobanus (talk) 02:34, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Peter Schalk

Peter Schalk of Uppsala University is one of the strongest proponents of the theory that the Ilam < Simhala derivation (which goes back to Robert Caldwell) is wrong. There's a long piece by him in Jean-Luc Chevillard's felicitation volume for François Gros, published by the Institut Français de Pondichéry. What is the details of this book or article so that I can get it ? Taprobanus (talk) 12:11, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello Taprobanus. The piece I'm thinking of is a contribution in a book. Here's the citation:

Schalk, Peter, "Robert Caldwell's Derivation īlam<sīhala: A Critical Assessment", in Chevillard, Jean-Luc (ed.), South-Indian Horizons: Felicitation Volume for François Gros on the occasion of his 70th birthday, Pondichéry: Institut Français de Pondichéry, pp. 347–364, ISBN 2855396301.

I have a copy, but it is buried somewhere. For the moment, though, I've provided a long quote from Thomas Burrow on Talk:Indo-Aryan loanwords in Tamil - he, too, takes the view that the name is Dravidian. Will that do for now? -- Arvind (talk) 12:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I received an e-mail from PS, he is in Heidelberg now as soon as goes back to Uppsala, he will e-mail me the references. Thanks for your smart analysis of the situation. I do miss the conflict we used to have because sometimes from conflict you get to a better place. Eelam article will be a better one for it one day. Taprobanus (talk) 21:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, that means I can postpone the bookhunt. I agree about articles sometimes becoming better because of conflict. It would be nice if we could manage to improve articles without the conflict, though. It can sometimes get quite frustrating. -- Arvind (talk) 12:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Is īr̤am same as īḻam ?Taprobanus (talk) 20:24, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Thomas Burrow (and a few others) used "r̤" in preference to "ḻ" to transliterate "ழ்", on the grounds that the sound in modern Tamil and Malayalam is actually a retroflex approximant, and is therefore better represented by an r-diacritic than an l-diacritic. So the DED uses "r̤" throughout, as do most of Burrow's publications. The ISO 15919 standard, however, is "ḻ". -- Arvind (talk) 20:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I've updated Eelam. Can you take a look when you have time please? Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 21:18, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Peter sent me a source, dont know where I archived it but changed it per your message. ThanksTaprobanus (talk) 03:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Indo-Aryan loanwords in Tamil

You had participated at Talk:Indo-Aryan loanwords in Tamil yesterday. Kindly have a look at revised Indo-Aryan loanwords in Tamil vote at its AfD. Thanks for your time ­ Kris (talk) 23:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I've voted to keep the article - I like the form it's moving towards. I still think it'll need more on the historical aspects, and on the impact of modern Tamil cultural nationalism, in addition to the phonological / linguistic aspects you're focusing on, but it's a rather good start. On a separate note, I've changed the example for the loss of an initial "c-" from "ilam" to "amaiyam". From a linguistic point of view, the latter is a better example because the loss of the initial "s-" is the only change that happened. Plus, unlike with "ilam", no serious linguist thinks amaiyam has Dravidian roots, and in an article that aims to provide an overview of processes of linguistic change, it's best to stick to simple, non-controversial examples. -- Arvind (talk) 12:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Arvind, loss of s/c to is not the only change I wanted to point out with that word. It was an excellent example of multiple changes, the most primary of them being the development of the retroflex l (which is called zh) in Tamil in an IA loanword, examples of which are otherwise hard to find. I dont find any serious linguist claiming that it is not a loanword, that is merely a case of ethno-nationalistic feelings playing foul. It is a shame that an academic article should thus be disrupted by those who probably have no idea themselves of what they are talking about. I dont mind leaving it out if I can find another example to show the development of zh in another IA loanword in Tamil, otherwise I might have to reuse it with the same authoritative references (or more of them) that I had cited for it, atleast DED and MU Lex. ­ Kris (talk) 16:32, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Surely Thomas Burrow is a serious linguist? He says that the word is probably Dravidian in origin. And one of the reasons he gives is that the shift of /hala/ -> /ḻa/ is not a very likely one to have happened. So it's not just ethno-nationalist feelings - there is an actual difference of opinion amongst serious linguists. Given the fact that linguists don't agree on whether this word has Dravidian or Indo-Aryan roots, is it really an appropriate illustration for any shift? A good example of an extremely unusual soundshift - and one which all mainstream linguists agree is an I-A loan - is /śri/ -> /tiru/. Perhaps that would make a better example of multiple sound shifts? But perhaps we could shelve this issue till the rest of the article is done. -- Arvind (talk) 20:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Arvind, you cannot say that "linguists dont agree" in the plural when you are just mentioning Burrow's ambivalence and no mainstream linguist's unambiguous disagreement. So there is no difference of opinion, and even if there is, we have to look at which information is more reliable. If everything is quite reliable, then we have to give both views and indicate who says what. In fact, I can myself comfortably explain all the sound shifts from siMhala to Izha, so I am not just basing my choices of words on blind beliefs placed on a few linguists. Moreover I am not to be drawn into ethnolinguistic/nationalistic disputes since I am not interested in such fights. I am just using a word that is very common and at the same time very interesting from a linguistic perspective. As I said, if I found a similar non-controversial word, I would use it. But at the same time, I want to include common words in everyday use so it illustrates the changes more understandably to the common reader. Izham is one such word. Anyways, as you said, I think it will be better to keep it on hold till the article is more complete. Thanks for your thoughts and interest in the article. ­ Kris (talk) 06:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The point is that the Dravidian Etymological Dictionary (which marks the Indo-Aryan etymology as being questionable) is about as "mainstream" asx you can get, and even that is ambivalent about whether it's an Indo-Aryan loan word. This means that if we use ilam as an example, we'll have to say in the text that linguists (in the plural - the DED was a collaborative project of two of the top linguists of the time) are ambivalent about whether or not it's an Indo-Aryan loanword. Having that sort of a qualification in a list that is supposed to illustrate sound-shifts will make the list seem pretty silly. Anyway, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it - there are plenty of people here who can offer a third (and fourth, and fifth, and sixth) opinion if there's a need. In the meantime, I'll see if I can find the time to add a bit of history to the article. -- Arvind (talk) 08:02, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Request for Comment

Hi Arvind, when you find time, please have a look at the freshly-minted ta:மாந்தவுருபியம். If you have any suggestions relating to the scope of the article or any interesting examples, I would like to know. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 13:39, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Your reply

Interesting! All those edits were made by one user, Lexmercatoria (talk · contribs), who appeared on Wikipedia one day, seemingly with this single-purpose goal. A few months later, when his project had run into the sands, he suddenly disappeared, but not before giving me an award, which I have long suspected was partly tongue in cheek. Anyway, if it is still a matter of concern to you, you could check his history and attempt to guess his identity.

However, if you have time (and you certainly have the expertise) would you still like to re-write the article in an OR-free manner? An objectively written (and referenced) article will certainly help enormously, if only to deter the myriad POV-warriors who have used it to vent their discontents. The many editors who would like to see that article improve could certainly attend to the background noise, and leave you to focus on the more important things, during the re-write. Let me know what you think. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Cheraman, poetry, and other things

Hi Arvind. Hope you've recovered well.

I've added an interwiki link to ta:கழறிற்றறிவார் நாயனார் from Cheraman Perumal (Nayanar) relying on this edit. Please check whether that's valid. My Malayalam reading speed has come down due to lack of practice and I don't know enough on the subject too to confirm myself.

Regarding poetry, I have done some research on the yaappilakkaNam part, but am mostly ignorant about tinai etc. I'm certainly interested in writing on such topics with your help. I have a copy of yaapparungalakkaarigai with theLivurai (not in hand, but will bring it soon) in addition to tolkaappiyam and nannul. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 11:42, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks much for pointing to this excellent article. It's a pity that, due to infinite number of prevalent transliteration schemes and our own ignorance, we couldn't get these articles while researching for our paper. I'll start writing articles on the various metrical units from Monday (hopefully). Please feel free to correct my edits as always. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 13:38, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

translation request

Hi Arvind, I found a thesis on Batticaloa Tamil and I need the precise title. I tried in my local Tamil shop, but they could not provide a good English translation. Could you please help me?

tamiZHk kilLaimoZHi oliyaniyal Ayivu maTTakkaLappukkilai moZHi

ilangkaip palklaikkaZHakatti vittiyalangkaara valaakattil moZHiyiyal ciRappuk kalaippaTTuttiR kuriya paTangkañaL onnuka ivaayavukkaTTurai camaappikkappaTTuLLatu

cuTTilakkam 74464

Thanks a lot Jasy jatere (talk) 11:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

tamiZHk kilLaimoZHi oliyaniyal Ayivu maTTakkaLappukkilai moZHi translates to "Research on Tamil dialect phonemics: The Batticaloa Dialect"

(thamizhkkilaimozhi: tamil dialect, oliyaniyal: phonemics, Ayvu: research, mattakalappukkilaimozhi: the Batticaloa dialect).

The second line is a bit garbled, it talks about "This research paper was completed to satisfy" something "in linguistics at the Vidyalankara Campus of the University of Ceylon." The transliteration "ciRappuk kalaippaTTuttiR kuriya paTangkañaL" does not make much sense to me, sorry. Do you have it in Tamil script? -- Arvind (talk) 15:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

thanks for this. You can find the original of the second line here: http://www.galoes.org/slm/Attachments/Images?action=AttachFile&do=view&target=JasyJatereTamil.jpg Jasy jatere (talk) 15:23, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, much better. It says "This paper was submitted as part of the studies for the degree of B.A.(Hons.) in linguistics at the Vidyalankara Campus of the University of Ceylon." -- Arvind (talk) 15:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

thanks a lot. Jasy jatere (talk) 18:27, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem

In the virtual world, without having the luxury of seeing one's bodily expression, it is only natural that it takes longer than ususal to understand ones position. your apologies accepted in the same spirit given. Docku: What up? 21:30, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

re: Kamil Zvelebil

Yes, this sure marks the end of an epoch. :-( May he rest in peace. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 10:15, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes indeed, not may left Taprobanus (talk) 05:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Turkish language versus Tamil language FA

Quality of Turkish language FA seems to be much better, do you think we should spruce up the Tamil language article ?Taprobanus (talk) 16:02, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

You're right, it definitely needs some more work. Sundar and I discussed that a while ago, but we didn't get anywhere. Do you have any ideas as to where to start? -- Arvind (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Thol. Thirumavalavan

Hoi. The article on Thol. Thirumavalavan had degenerated into something of a hatefest. I've taken a stab at fixing it, but Dravidian politics is really more up your alley than mine, so it'd be great if you could have a look at it as and when you have the time. -- Arvind (talk) 23:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Will look there in a bit. Cheers Wiki San Roze ^†αLҝ 13:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Vadakkan! I see that you have cleaned up the article a lot yourself. The major concern I see with the entry is suggesting that he is terrorist with the detailed explanation of his support to LTTE. I reckon it would be in conflict with WP:BLP. Did you have any specific concerns about the article otherwise? Dalit Panthers are not part of Dravidian party family but as a matter of fact see them to an extent to grow into an alternative to them. I might start working on the Panthers entry in a bit and then get to Thol. Thiruma unless you see serious problems with the latter. Cheers Wiki San Roze ^†αLҝ 21:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. The article had seen drastic edits by one or more Sri Lankan editors, who'd turned it into a screed about his support for the LTTE. I thought that was way overblown (he's best known for his domestic politics, not for his views on the LTTE), so as you saw I tried to clean the article up a bit. My main concerns are as to whether I've accurately portrayed his views - I've read some of his columns in India Today, but I've not really been engaged with Tamil politics for the past couple of years, so I wasn't sure if my summary represents his current views - and whether the article still overly emphasises his support for the LTTE. How would you suggest we deal with the latter issue?

Incidentally, I know the VCK isn't a Dravidian party in that it isn't a descendant of the DK, but it's ideology is quite clearly derived from that of Periyar, so it is part of the Dravidian movement in a broader sense. I suppose it'd be most accurate to call them "Dravidian revivalist", in that they seek to return the Dravidian movement to its original ideals, which the descendants of the DK have abandoned. But that's just my view, of course. -- Arvind (talk) 22:10, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, he had been a open supporters of the rebels for sometime now and even challenged major political parties to openly declare their views on Eelam. He had repeatedly stressed that he supports an independent Eelam and according him that could be achieved only by the rebels. He is a fan of Periyar but the overall movement is far from the Dravidian umbrella. Dalit Panthers were formed in Maharashtra and derive their ideology, or atleast according to them, from the Black panthers. They look upon Ambedkar more as their guru (if I may call so) rather than Periyar. The main reason being that Ambedkar was a Dalit himself and Periyar came from a non-Brahmin elite caste. My personal view on this subject is that Thirumavalavan finds it rather as a convenient fact that Periyar's ideologies are still within the scope of the Dalit Panthers and hence can be used to gain grounds in TN, which the party itself can outgrow and use as a launchpad. But thats my plain POV there. Leaving the details to a side, I reckon the best way forward to go by the norms set in WP:BLP would be to expand Dalit Panthers of India entry including the party's views on Eelam and keeping Thiruma's entry updated but yet clean. As for DK abandoning its ideologies, my personal view has been that they have made a God out of man who said there is none. The whole chaos that resulted after EVR's statue was insulted is one such example and not to mention the regular garlending of his idol. :D Wiki San Roze ^†αLҝ 00:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Tamil people video again

I swear, i did not touch the video in any way. The video again doesn't work properly. --Ultramegasuperstar (talk) 13:59, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

No worries - this edit seems to have been the one that broke it. It's fixed now. -- Arvind (talk) 22:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

request for help

Hi Vadakkan, was wondering if you could help me with something, seeing as you understand Tamil. What is the title/subject of this article, மலையமான். Thank you for your help--Jac16888^Talk 01:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, its copied from another project and can be deleted. Thanks anyway--Jac16888^Talk 01:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes

I am putting two plants together, 600 jobs in total. It is a huge burden now. Taprobanus (talk) 17:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks will do. Taprobanus (talk) 04:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Category:Tamil Sri Lankans, Category:Jaffna kingdom, Category:Mass murder of Sri Lankan Tamils These are the categories (at least what ever within the category u want to pick and choose) one need to keep an eye on. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 16:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Republic of India: 'Administrative Divisions'

Arvind, please rename Administrative Divisions to 'Political and Administrative Divisions'. 70.112.0.5 (talk) 21:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Done - sorry, I hadn't realised the page was semi-protected. --Arvind (talk) 21:37, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Dinesh

See his Wikipedia space contributions and you'll see why YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 06:25, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Critique

Hi there! Would you like to offer a broad critique of History of Mysore and Coorg (1565–1760), which I've been ignoring lately. You can do so on the article talk page. A paragraph or two. Not the details, but the big picture. I'm hoping it will inspire me to get my ass in gear and attend to the article, add the footnotes etc. I mean I haven't even copyedited it in a long time. Shameful. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Folk Hinduism

Hi Arvind. Just saw your comment at Talk:Tamil people. Please do send the article to me at the same address. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 10:21, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Great. I'll pull out the disk which has it and email it to you by the end of the week. --Arvind (talk) 19:26, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Bengali romanization issues

You previously participated in a discussion regarding romanization of Bengali. It has been continued at Talk:Bengali script. Please discuss it there if you care. — AjaxSmack 01:42, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

ur input would be appreciated..

as you appear to be knowledgeable of Indian law, could you please weigh in here. --Like I Care 17:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Estonia–India relations

Can you help find references fro Estonia–India relations? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Iyer

Hi Vadakkan, a number of Iyers do actually speak Sanskrit, and some do exclusively. However, I'll wait to revert until I have found a source.Pectore^talk 23:14, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

non elected Chief Minister

could you please comment here. thanks. --L I C 15:04, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I've replied on the talk page. -- Arvind (talk) 18:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

thanks. appreciate your comment. --L I C 19:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Please help

Can you tell me what தலை டா நீ means?Please?SchnitzelMannGreek. 18:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the english pronounciation is "thala da ne". Does that mean anything?SchnitzelMannGreek. 00:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello SchnitzelMannGreek. You'd left a query on my talk page a couple of weeks ago regarding "தலை டா நீ". In case you still want to know what it means, it translates roughly to something like "You're a real head, mate." It's a slightly odd phrase, but whoever said it could have meant something like "you're a genius" and could have been genuinely appreciative or ironic. Perhaps you can figure it out from the context? Sorry this reply is so late - I've not checked Wikipedia for the past couple of weeks. I hope it helps. --Arvind (talk) 18:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd also add that fans use the word "தலை" to refer to Ajith Kumar. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 17:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

ayyavazhi

I was not aware of that, thanks for bringing it to my attention. On Google Scholar I found five hits for the word, so I thought it was fringe. I'll admit "hoax" was the wrong word in this context. Happy editing! Pectore^talk 23:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Tamil language edits

Hi Arvind, I'm at the Wikimania 2009 to present a paper on Tamil Wikipedia. That's why the long absence. Had a look at your recent changes. They appear to be well-sourced and well-written. One other impact of European languages on Tamil prose is the increased use of the passive voice? (A learned user had once pointed out at the Tamil Wiki that it really makes the prose sound synthetic when we use passive voice so much in Tamil.) Your note on consonant clusters (தமிழில் மெய்யொலிக் கூட்டம்) was interesting. Will ping you if I have more comments. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 20:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, hope the paper goes (went?) well! I'm not sure if passive voice is the result of European impact or of the impact of vadamozhi. Sangatthamizh didn't have it certainly, but I'm not sure about chozhatthamizh, and it's worthwhile investigating when it crept into Tamil. I'll do a bit of digging on this - it's a very interesting point, and thanks for bringing it up. -- Arvind (talk) 11:06, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Arvind I just happened to see this as I logged in after many months. I had pointed out in Tamil Wiki and elsewhere that passive voice is gaining dangerous levels of currency and makes it sound unnatural. It is unnatural to Dravidian languages and you can see its rarity in literature and complete absence in spoken language. In literature you would find it almost exclusively in Thirukkural which as a metric exigency uses it only at the end of the kural ending it in படும். Also it is the commentators who use it profusely. Basically you will never find it in normal poems as opposed to didactics or commentaries.

As for the origins of the current trends it is squarely on those Tamil elites who have been trying to mimic English structure as they have started their speech first in English and try to match Tamil to it. Sanskrit influence would have made it show earlier over the 1500 years. Also in spite of the commentators' usage it never flourished. Continued usage of this will make Tamil less fluent and cause serious problems in the views of speakers as if its too cumbersome. You can see that in Tamil we always say "கேட்ட கேள்வி" not "கேட்கப்பட்ட கேள்வி", "இது யாரால் ஆகும்" not "யாரால் ஆக்கப்படும்". "இன்றைக்குச் சாயம் பூசுகிறது" (not "சாயம் பூசப்படுகிறது"), "நாலு நாளாக இது பண்ணுகிறது" (not பண்ணப்படுகிறது).

You can see the influence of English in non-grammatical contexts also: whereas people used to say நெருக்கடி now people use அழுத்தம் in total imitation of English pressure. Similarly மன அழுத்தம் instead of the traditional உளைச்சல் as they translate from tension instead of thinking straight in Tamil. Similarly அவனை நெருக்கு instead of current "அவனுக்கு அழுத்தம் கொடு". Note in addition that what used to be expressed succinctly with a verb now requires noun + auxiliary verb as the elite speaker first thinks of English noun tension then translate and then add a verb. That also brings to this discussion the imitation of English auxiliary verbs in place of entirely different auxiliary verbs originally in Tamil. For example: தப்பாக எடுத்துக்கொள்ளாதே is imitation of ("take it wrongly" or mistake) whereas originally it was தப்பாக நினைக்காதே.

Hope this helps.

perichandra1 14:00, 27 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Perichandra1 (talk • contribs)

Arvind, the user that I mentioned is Perichandra1 and he has put it very well. As for the paper, I would consider it well-received given that there were three parallel tracks. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 19:31, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Forgot to add that we're doing a bit of original research on changes in grammatical rules over time in Tamil for a paper. Will send some of the findings to both of you for comments. To start with, we ran checks on classical works for the occurrence of words beginning with "cha, chai, and chau" and that gave some interesting insights. Need to add a disclaimer that my co-author and I are novices in Tamil grammar-related issues and have hardly read existing literature on those. So, our "findings" might turn out to be "common knowledge". :-) -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 19:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Periannan Chandrasekar and Sundar. I agree very strongly with what you say, and have a lot of thoughts about this - the problem of style in Tamil in particular is something I've been grappling with for a couple of years. We have guests visiting us this weekend, so I'll reply in detail next week. -- Arvind (talk) 20:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

IAST, IPA help

Can you check the transliteration I added at Iyengar and add the IPA pronounciation guide, if possible ? Regards. Abecedare (talk) 02:59, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

This isn't going to be easy. The word is written slightly differently in Kannada-Telugu and Tamil. In the first two, it's written ayyaṁgār, but the Tamil spelling in the article transliterates to ayyaṅkār. And, to complicate things even further, the word can also be written as ஐயங்கார் aiyaṅkār in Tamil (and this spelling is actually slightly more common than the one in the article). The first line will become eye-splittingly complex if we bung all this information there - perhaps a little box showing how the word is written in the various South Indian scripts, and giving transliterations, is a better solution? -- Arvind (talk) 20:01, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I have replied to your comment on my talk page, to keep the conversation consolidated. Thanks. Abecedare (talk) 08:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Vadakkan. You have new messages at Abecedare's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Abecedare (talk) 04:20, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Vatteluttu

Can you take a look at some of the incoming links that were changed from Vatteluttu to Grantha? Along with the AfD, User:HumanFrailty, changed links on pages including Burmese script, Lao script, Thai alphabet, Khmer script, Bhattiprolu script etc. However, my script knowledge isn't exactly half as good as it should be to figure out of these changes were correct or not. Figured you might be able to provide the right answer. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 16:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

This is a mess all around - basically, some months ago, another editor made changes to a number of articles to use "Vattelutthu" as a generic name for all southern scripts (which it isn't), and as a name for all stages of the Tamil script (which also it isn't). I fixed some of that at the time, but there's a lot still unfixed. Some of HF's link changes seem to be related to that, but I'll have a closer look this weekend. -- Arvind (talk) 22:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks; I should know the answer to some of these, but it's been so long since I had an interest in these topics and I've pretty much forgotten most of it :) cheers. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 22:50, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Most of the references *seem* to be fine. I'll keep an eye out for this issue, though. -- Arvind (talk) 20:21, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Ok. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 04:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Political history of Mysore and Coorg FAC

All the issues (except additional alt-text that I will be adding in bits and pieces during the day) have now been dealt with. I welcome comments from you at the FAC review or on the article talk page. Thanks! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:06, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

PS Not sure why I didn't think of you earlier! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:06, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Template talk:Middle kingdoms of India

Hi, I created a possible new template at User:Vinay84/Template:Middle kingdoms of India DO you know how to put up a notice for replacement so that a lot of people discuss the possible replacement? --Vinay84 (talk) 04:24, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Who are you really, Arvind?

You must be a prominent person among academicians. I saw many users leave messages in your talk page and asking advices. You must be an academician in social sciences (or in linguistics). And the issues which have been discussed or you have contributed have always been some valuable issues. Unless you are a Wikipedia administrator, for the academic honesty, it would be better if you could tell something about you and of your publications etc. So many learners, researchers etc. may appreciate such information. Doesn't it? Nevill Fernando (talk) 02:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm an academic in the social sciences, yes, but I don't think I'm a particularly prominent one. I do not tend to write very much about my main area of academic research (because I have strong views about it, and would find it difficult to be entirely neutral), and so haven't felt a particular need to publish full details about who I am, though Arvind is my real name. -- Arvind (talk) 20:18, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

The tone of some of your edits seems that you are the author of the book “ Women in World Religions”. Am I a good psychoanalyst? Nevill Fernando (talk) 00:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm very flattered, but I'm not that Arvind, I promise! I'm nowhere near as eminent. -- Arvind (talk) 14:34, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Tamil people

Arvind, can you take a look at this edit. I reverted an unreferenced edit once, and the user and I had a discussion when I said anything should be referenced. He added a reference to this but nothing in the statement is supported by the ref, it's pure synthesis IMO, but I'd like another opinion. I haven't found any other reference to it, and the Tamil bell article doesn't support the add either. One more ref was added subsequently to the museum, which was more commentary, nothing else. I checked with Abecedare and he suggested I check with you. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 00:45, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Addition: See this. I have no idea if the claim of Tamil people sailing to NZ is true or not, but the current sourcing is certainly inadequate. Will appreciate your input. Abecedare (talk) 00:52, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I've commented there. -- Arvind (talk) 20:18, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Did I forget to thank you? ..

Vadakkan ,Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 174 in support, 2 in opposition and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks goes to RegentsPark, Samir and John Carter for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). Have a great day ! -- Tinu Cherian - 06:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Chola Dynasty vs Chola Empire

The page was moved from the former title to the latter a couple of days back by a relatively new user. Going through the article, I'm not sure which one is the correct title. The article is an FA using the former title. Your opinion? cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 16:15, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

No real opinion on the preferred name, but the current first sentence of the article is ungrammatical and the whole first paragraph is overly "listy" and "bluesy". Compare with the version that survived FAR. Also surprising that the infobox map (in both versions) is unsourced. Abecedare (talk) 16:33, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I looked at the FAR, and it appears that the article was approved well before most policies were in place. The map was also specifically discussed. I think someone is bound to take this up for a review pretty soon. -SpacemanSpiff 16:57, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Chola Dynasty. This article isn't just about the relatively brief period when it was an empire - if we just want it to be about the Imperial Cholas, it'd have to be a very different article. The map is rubbish, and should be changed. I'll get to work on this article. It is, overall, a very good and solidly referenced article - it just needs a lot of the fluff removed. Abecedare, SpacemanSpiff (lovely nick, by the way - I'm a proud owner of the complete collection), will you have the time to help, perhaps also involving Regentspark and others? -- Arvind (talk) 17:25, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I can help at the periphery (copyedit, formatting), but I am not well-versed enough in the subject to help much with the content. Let me know if there is something specific I can do. I'll move the article back to its old name in the meantime. Abecedare (talk) 18:07, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I have moved it back but not updated the lede, since naive changing it to Dynasty and rephrasing it a bit, seems inadequate. Can you give it a try ? Abecedare (talk) 18:11, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

You're being a little too modest, methinks - you've shown yourself to be an ace with using academic databases in the past. But the article actually does use the most important sources already, so it shouldn't be too hard to get it back into shape. Work is a little crazy this term, but I'll get started this weekend. The lead is a mess - I'll see if it can be quickly fixed pending a rewrite. -- Arvind (talk) 18:17, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I can definitely help with the article, but my wiki-time over the next few weeks is a bit booked. Got a couple of FLC candidates currently running, taking R. K. Narayan to FA and just starting work on M. S. Subbulakshmi with a GA goal (shameless publicity to seek help on those :)). Therefore, if you allocate some specifics to me, I can take care of them (I don't have academic access to sources though.) BTW, I can do one better than the collection, I have a real life Hobbes :). cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 18:32, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

(reply to Arvind, after ec) Not really being falsely modest; just speaking plainly. I can look up academic sources and (usually) understand and paraphrase them. This works well when the topic of interest is narrow and non-controversial, because it is sufficient to look up 1-2 high-quality sources and know enough about it to write a couple of "encyclopedic" (!) sentences or paragraphs. However, when the topic is vast (for example, South Indian history spanning >1000 years), it is important for someone who has a good knowledge of the field to at least supervise the editing to make sure that due weight and source quality is maintained. So if say I have to comment on economic development during Rajendra I's reign, I can do so with a modicum of clue given an hour or two; but if I have to analyze and contrast the relative impact of the Chola rulers, I'll need more time than I can possibly devote to the topic. For a concrete example, I was dissatisfied with the map since it was unsourced, but unlike you, I couldn't instantly opine that it was indeed "rubbish". That's not modesty, that is self-awareness and a respect for expertise. :-) Abecedare (talk) 18:45, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I've taken a bash at redoing the lead as an interim step. Could you (plural) have a look and "please do the needful" -- Arvind (talk) 18:43, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Dear Aravind,

Do you mean to say that other kingdoms such as those of the Chalukyas and the Hoysalas were bigger and hence were empires and not that of the Cholas... surely there is something wrong here...

Also the recent wholesale changes made by Mr. Vadakkan with support from you have removed some of the changes approved especially with regard to the list of important and great Kings of the Cholas when there was a dispute over this article primarily between me and user Dinesh Kannambadi. The names of other important kings like Vikrama Chola, Kulottunga III etc. have been removed and what seemed to have happened was over a harmless enquiry there was a discussion among a limited group and the changes seem to have been made wholesale.

Already I have given a request to change the name of this article to Chola empire and have backed with reliable source and quote from K.A.Nilakanta Sastri's book. Please see my request and intention and the source quoted on the Chola Dynasty talk page. Yes, I am new to Wiki and do not know how to put up a request for change of title of a wiki article. I never received any help from any quarter... Instead of guiding new users, now this kind of bulldozing is occuring. Pls. remember on the Western Chalukya page all their claims especially the controversial portion on Tailapa-II and Satyasraya having defeated Rajendra Chola and Raja Raja Chola are simply based on a single source, the book by Suryanath Kamat. In contrast there are at least five claims either to the contrary by other sources. Pls. do go over the archive page where the dispute resolution took place and there was a proper well informed decision to back my claim about inclusion of some Chola kings among the important and great ones of the Chola dynasty.

Yes I am a new and inexperienced user. But at least people like me should be involved in discussions.

Do reply. Thanks

Srirangam99 (talk) 10:18, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello Srirangam99. I think our object here is the same - to have a high-quality article about the Cholas which meets the standards required of featured articles on Wikipedia. There is no problem having an additional article about the Chola Empire - the Imperial Cholas clearly were an empire, and I don't think there's any dispute about that. However, the article in question isn't just about the Chola empire - it's about the entire Chola line, starting with the Sangam-era Cholas, and I don't think anyone refers to the Sangam-period Chola state as the "Chola empire." A specific article about the Chola Empire would need to focus on the later Chola dynasty of the imperial period, starting with Rajaraja Chola I. But we also need a more general article about the dynasty itself, and that is what this article is. If you look at the equivalent article on the Tamil Wikipedia, it, too, is under the title "Chozhar", not "Chozha perarasu."

As far as removing the list of rulers from the introduction, please do take a look at the guidelines in Wikipedia:Lead section. Having a long list of rulers in the lead section makes it less accessible and harder to read. In general, it's a good idea to not have more than three, or four at the most, rulers named in a single paragraph. I took a call that Karikalan, Rajaraja I, Rajendhiran I and Kulothungan I were the most notable. I'm not wedded to those names - if you want to change any of them, that's fine, but having more than four names in the introductory paragraphs really makes it hard to read. -- Arvind (talk) 10:46, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply Arvind, what about this question that I raised earlier?

Do you mean to say that other kingdoms such as those of the Chalukyas and the Hoysalas were bigger and hence were empires and not that of the Cholas... surely there is something wrong here...

Srirangam99 (talk) 12:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I've bolded the bits of my earlier reply (above) that answer your question. -- Arvind (talk) 14:27, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

To elaborate, your example of the Chalukyas is spot on. The main article about the Chalukyas is under Chalukya dynasty. The only article to use the title "Empire" - Western Chalukya Empire - deals exclusively with a period of around two hundred years, from the late 10th century to the late 12th century. As I've said before, there is definitely scope for an article titled "Chola Empire", which deals only with the period from the 10th to the 12th century, when the Chola dynasty ruled an empire. But the main article about the dynasty must be under Chola Dynasty - just as it is with the Chalukyas. I hope this makes things clear. -- Arvind (talk) 14:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Dear Arvind, you can always reply to me on my talk page itself. No need to do double labour... I want to be guided by you as to a few things like the mediation by Sebastian. He was specifically requested (I think) by Taprobanus. There were a lot of things where he pointed out my mistakes and I have never disregarded them once. But there were indeed one or two things which he accepted (if you look once again at the archive of discussions) where he accepted my contention about inclusion of names of notable kings. The objection regarding no requirement to name kings without bringing in the context would not I think apply because in the introductory paragraphs about any encyclopedic article the names of 6-7 notable kings gives the user some idea especially when you consider an aspect like the Cholas (the medieval ones) having lasted from 848-1280 AD, and this longevity couldn't have come if some of the kings ranging from the earliest ones like Aditya I and Parantaka I (if I may say, Aditya I (not Raja Raja I as is popularly believed) was the one who occupied Tondamandalam in Tamil country as well as subjugated the Banas and the Gangas in Kannada country, making the Cholas into an empire between 872-902 AD while his son Parantaka (902-956 AD) expanded the empire further into Sri Lanka through Madurai). I sought inclusion of Kings Vikrama and Kulottunga III because Vikrama regained Vengi from Chalukyas and had hegemony over the Eastern Gangas of Orissa while Kulottunga III (1172-1218) re-occupied Sri Lanka (Ilangai as it was called then) among the notable kings of the Cholas. I had given specific reasons to Kulottunga III (which indeed was opposed by Dinesh by pointing out that he lost to the Pandiyas, but that was in 1215 AD while for the first 40-odd years, Kulottunga was strong and it is after him that the decline of the Cholas is witnessed.

I am sorry I have given a lengthy explanation... but I would end with just one word that all this info plus others have been sourced by me from two books primarily by K.A.Nilakanta Sastri (History of South India and Advanced History of India with the second book covering not just South India but of the period up to the advent of the British).

Could there be a re-think pls.?

Srirangam99 (talk) 08:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

R. K. Narayan

I would like to nominate R. K. Narayan for Featured Article status and would like your opinion on the article, and how it can be improved to meet the FA criteria. Can you provide feedback at Wikipedia:Peer review/R. K. Narayan/archive1? cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 04:54, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Just saw that you're back. You can ignore this peer review, but if you do have comments, you can add them on the talk page. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 23:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

you may perhaps want to add something to Tamil Linguists

Brahminated Iyers (talk) 01:14, 13 November 2009 (UTC)