User talk:ImperiumCaelestis/Archive 5

Speedy deletion nomination of Wp/gom/dn/नगर बरप


A tag has been placed on Wp/gom/dn/नगर बरप requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Logan Talk Contributions 07:10, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:HortusCert.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:HortusCert.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 08:29, 26 February 2011 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:29, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Response
The photo had been taken from a botanical document in dutch called Hortus Malabaricus compile 325 years ago by Hendrik van Rheede. It is not under copyright. Photo source Hortus Malabaricus
 * Thanks for the clarification. I've fixed the tagging now so everything should be okay. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:35, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Nagar barap?
फुडले फाटीं संदर्भ नासतना बरोवचें न्ह्य! एकाय पुस्तकान असो संदर्भ म्हाका मेळूना. Nijgoykar (talk)

nagari again
म्हज्या विधानात उपरोध नाशिल्लो.आतां नागरी बद्दल,ही लिपि देवनागरीच,वेगळी न्हय,हें पत्र हांवें वाचिल्ले पयली.हे लिपयेक आमीय नागरीच म्हणटात. Nijgoykar (talk) 16:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:HortusCertificate.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:HortusCertificate.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 21:06, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

About the so called Nagari barap
Hello, The Devaganagi script is also known as Nagari,which in Konkani can be called as Nagar barap.The script in the Rangabhatta's letter is a little older version of Devanagari itself,which was common not only in Goa but also rest of the India.Still many people from the older generations in Goa write the letters ra,sha etc in the way its written in the letter,and is no different script.It is mere hand-written version which can ave different form,and is not at all any modified version of standard Devanagari modified for Konkani.Konkani has been written in Devanagari,for ages and did not have its own version of Nagari.The standard Devanagari hasd undergone many changes.The above mentioned letter is in the standard Devanagari and not any other version of it,it belongs to the 16th century.This script is known as Nagar barap which is standard Devanagari itself,of which hand-written version may vary.It is not at all a different script,and there is no different script which bears the name of Nagar barap.

Nijgoykar (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:NSDeva.png
Thanks for uploading File:NSDeva.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Konkani inscription


A tag has been placed on Konkani inscription requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 20:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

What exactly are you trying to prove? Nijgoykar (talk)

Vandalism
Please stop posting your own research on the article! Or furnish the source from u have obtained the information!

I shall report vandalism!

Nijgoykar (talk) 13:02, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

eg:In the Rangabhatt document the word Okhad or medicine has been written in three different ways.
 * You have been modifying the article as per your needs and as per your own research! what about that?
 * The so called called Nagari script has evolved into todays Devanagari,check Konkani-Marathi documents from 16th,17th century from Goa,all are written in the modern version of Devanagari
 * There is no mention in even a single book which says that Nandaagari ever prevailed in western coast so that it can influence the script.
 * The nagari script at that time was not standardised,so diferent groups had their own verions,way of writing,pronouncing,

I am not against what you are doing but you are posting your own views which are not accepted by even a singe historian or linguist.

In the above letter when they say nagar barap they mean to say Devanagari and not any other script,and the following letter should not be used as a standard.I have many old letters in my family written in Marathised Konkani in Devanagari,Modi,and Kandevi.None of them follow standard rules.

Nijgoykar (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Wrong sources!
A history of Konkani literature: from 1500 to 1992  page 18.19.20 says the script is Devanagari and no such mentions of a separate older Nagar scripts are found in that book!

I have with me now!

Nijgoykar (talk) 13:26, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

You are again taking it wrong! and you cannot stop me from editing the articles and I will do it if I find any false or any information which is biased or not correct!

तुमी कोंकणी देवनागरी लिपयेंत चुकीची बरयतात,आनी हो एकेतरेचो अपप्रचार !

प्रत्येक शब्द अर्धकुटो बरवचो न्हय .. चुकीचे रीतीन बरवचो न्हय... हाचे सारको कोंकणिचो अवमान दुसरो ना .. आनी एक गोश्ट नागरी लिपि आता सद्या पोर्ण्या रुपान अस्तित्वात ना,पूण देवनागरी आसा,असो वेगळचार केल्यार आमीं झगडूंकूच उरतले

I am not getting personal here!

Nijgoykar (talk) 02:08, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

 A history of Konkani literature: from 1500 to 1992, Manohararāya Saradesāya, (page 9, para 3) and Devanagari (page 9, para 4)  does not distinguish between any scripts!

Moreover I very well know about evolution of Nagari which gave birth to Devanagari!

But Nagari is past! Devanagari is present! You mentioned in the article about the Konkani language that ;;Nagari is now in vogue''... the question is where is it used ? by whom is it used now?

Another thing!

About Modi:

The linguists need not have an access to the documents which all the old business and aristocrat families possess.

We do have Konkani written in Modi script,which my father showed me and he was he one to teach me modi script!

1.there is a document which says:

 Sambasethin ravaldevache sevek vayile bhaat didhale ase - Margashirsha krishna ekadashi 1795

2.The other document says Narayanasethi joao kurasaav da jesuk 150 ishkudu dene aasa Date not written. Nijgoykar (talk) 02:24, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Your sources
Your sources are not reliable .Do not use anyone's blog as wiki source. Identifying reliable sources

Nijgoykar (talk) 02:50, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Exactly!
That is what I have been telling you since many days! WIKIPEDIA NEEDS PROOFS

I always knew about Nagari,but you say that IT IS IN VOGUE NOW.. which is FALSE!

I have read that book and i do not need to read it again!

Almost 90% of linguists and historians call the modern Devanagari as Nagari and u cant deny the fact!

Nijgoykar (talk)

I do not really need your advice nor your biased opinion,keep them to yourself it will help some day.FYI I have written almost half of the article so do not tell me what should think about my own mother tongue.I am not at all biased like you nor do I have that so called bhasha-vad like you! Konkani and Marathi are sister languages,and you cannot change that fact.

'''Do not reply! No further communications please'''

Good luck!

Nijgoykar (talk) 05:54, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

The new page.
Hello there, First of all, don't remove tags without any action, tags are usually put on pages by bots or automatically; removing them should be with care. Second, one link alone is not enough, an article has should at least 5-6 internal link to not considered as orphan, when I checked the article there is also some other problems like Wikifying. So, try to link more to your article, add more categories to it, try to put images in thumbnails and add a caption with them; get examples from other articles, if you did not success tell me to help you on it.

Thank you, Nima Nima1024 (talk) 21:19, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Your New Page
Hello there. I realize you and Nijgoykar are engaged in an edit war. That being said, you shouldn't have created a whole new page as you did at Kanara (Canara) Konkani. Creating new pages like that amounts to redundancy and duplication. You may not be aware, but there's already a page for Kanara Konkani at Karnataka Konkani. Disputes are meant to be resolved amicably through dialogue on the relevant page's discussion section. I'm going to ask Nijgoykar to discuss instead of edit warring too. I would encourage you to stop edit warring with him, rather engage in a discussion on Konkani language's Talk Page. After gaining consensus from all contributors, you are free to carry on the edits that reek of controversial nature. Start a discussion topic on the talk page, and I will contribute too.  Signed &#124;  Aoghac2z  &#124;  04:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Using Reliable Sources
Hello again,

I noticed in one of your comments that you hold the belief that blogs may be used as sources. On the contrary, blogs are never to be used as sources on Wikipedia. Please see WP:RS to understand what kind of sources may be used. Blog content is largely generated as a self-published entity... Wikipedia does not allow any content that emerges out of self-published sources. The reason for this is simple: I can start my own blog and publish content and then use that to corroborate my edits on Wikipedia by listing my own blog as a source. If everyone starts doing that, Wikipedia will be a breeding ground for gibberish. Hope that makes sense. I appreciate the enthusiasm you are displaying on Wikipedia and it is great.  Signed &#124;  Aoghac2z  &#124;  04:17, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello again. Just replying to the comment you left on my talk page. For future communication, please reply here itself, instead of my talk page... so that we can maintain coherence of the flowing conversation. Anyway.. I haven't had a very close look at the sources you have used to add content to the new page that you've created... but at a cursory glance I could tell that some sources are not acceptable. For eg.. pages like this and this do not seem to be reliable sources because the content on those pages seems to have been borne out of mass user submission and feedback. I will look more into it later.. but right now, I'm trying to discern (via a dialogue with seasoned editors) whether creating a whole new page is the right thing to do. Ideally, all this wonderful content you've been adding should have been added to the main page at Konkani language.  Signed &#124;  Aoghac2z  &#124;  06:47, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello, To begin with, I must submit that Konkani orthography rules in Karnataka and Kerala or to be more precise, in the Kannada and Malayalam scripts,  have not yet been established. Popular orthography in Kannada script Konkani suggests that they are in stark variance to the Konkani orthographic rules laid by Thomas Stevens Konkani Kendra, Panaji for Goan Konkani. ourkarnataka.com and and mangalorean.com are reliable sources for popular and prevalent orthographic rules for Canara Catholic Konkani and Aamchigele.

If you peruse the "view History" page of Konkani language and Karnataka Konkani you will find that I began by contributing to these pages. You will find that user Nijgoykar was on a covert edit war against posts on Canarese Konkani. If you further peruse our user discussion pages, you will find that in spite of offering valid references to posts on Canarese Konkani, they were deleted by the said user. Nijgoykar believes that Konkani was written in the Devanagari script right from the 3rd century CE and refuses to allow posts which state otherwise. I have observed this jingoism against other users as well.

I would like this article to be a part of the main Konkani language article; and indeed it is. But I am a novice at countering wiki-valdalism and thought it best to write a separate, factually correct, stable and unbiased page.

Finally, I must share with you another piece of information. कोंकणी (kōṅkaṇī), the name of the language, is at variance to ಕೊಂಕಣಿ (koṅkaṇi) ((transliterated as कॊंकणि)). koṅkaṇi is the prevalent pronunciation in Karnataka and Kerala (and surprisingly, in Goa as well) and I believe it should be written as it is in the Kannada script; it is only logical.

Looking forward to your reply. Imp er ium Caelestis  07:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. You are absolutely right that orthography rules have not been established for Kannada and Malayalam scripts. ourkarnataka.com and mangalorean.com are NOT reliable sources in this regard. The content they have on their pages is NOT academic, rather it is content submitted by the general populace. If you wish to confirm the non-reliability of these two sites as sources, you may ask seasoned editors too.


 * Secondly, I realize Nijgoykar was engaged in an edit war with you, but it didn't warrant the creation of a whole new page. There are other ways to counter jingoism.. most notably summoning other editors to participate in a discussion. Don't worry about it.. we'll merge all this new content you've been contributing into the main Konkani language article.


 * Thirdly... कोंकणी is the standardized name used in the devanagari script. It is officially recognized in Goa. Replacing that with कॊंकणि just because it is the direct transliteration of Kannada script doesn't cut it. I realize there are differences in the way Konkani is spelled out, but that is the task of linguistic bodies to bring about a standardization. Not ours. Our task is to record facts as they are, without performing analysis of the same. Do you ever see कॊंकणि in major publications of the Devanagari script? As far as I know, it is कोंकणी.  Signed &#124;  Aoghac2z  &#124;  14:37, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your reply.Firstly, I reiterate that Konkani in Karnataka and Kerala has not yet been standardised. Hence the need to rely on Canarese websites and literature. It must be stated that orthography in Canara Konkani is not ad hoc, if not standardised, but employs prevalent rules.


 * Secondly, I am a novice to Wikipedia and did not intend to engage in an edit war. I was not aware whom to approach. I have no issues with merging the article into an existing page. I have given my views on Yes Michael? •Talk's page and I'd like you to have a look.


 * Thirdly, कोंकणी is the standard name for for the Goan Antruz Standard Konkani dialect; which I am sure you are, as I am,  not conversant with. I have clearly mentioned in the citation कॊंकणि (koṅkaṇi) is a direct transliteration of the name of the language as written in the Kannada script (ಕೊಂಕಣಿ) and is the prevalent pronunciation in the states of Karnataka and Kerala.

I'd like you to have a look at this blog where the name of the language is written as कोंकणि. Looking forward for your feedback. Warm regards, Imp er ium  Caelestis  00:20, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Writing edit summaries
Hello. I hope you are having a good time on Wikipedia. I have noticed some of your edits to Konkani language. It is advisable to give good edit summaries for your edits. It simplifies things to another editor who is browsing the page history. Have a good day.  Yes Michael? •Talk 09:47, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello Michael. I am indeed having a good time on Wikipedia. My posts to the Konkani language page were edited out by another user. I am not sure if any of my posts do exist on that page anymore. Nevertheless, I will peruse it. Could you share one example with me to drive the point home??.

Please guide me with the article Kanara_(Canara)_Konkani to check whether the references are appropriate.Godspeed!! Imp er ium Caelestis  10:01, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * See this for an example. Anyway, another editor has requested me for a comment on the 'edit war' situation on that page. I will look into it. I will also have a look at your article and suggest accordingly. Have a good day!  Yes Michael? •Talk 10:15, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * In case you didn't know, edit summary is to be written in the specified field, just above the Save page button. Happy editing!  Yes Michael? •Talk 10:36, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Kanara_(Canara)_Konkani
Hello, this is in reference to your style of citing sources on Kanara_(Canara)_Konkani. The way you are citing web sources is fine, but I notice that many a times, you are citing from the Constitution of India. When you are doing so, just do not write plain text like "The IX schedule of .........states.....so and so....". Instead, cite the book, and the page number using the. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.  Yes Michael? •Talk 13:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello, Citations from the Constitution of every country are quoted as section-subsection-clause- subclause and preceded by the date of the amendment and amendment number, if applicable. this procedure holds true even in a court of law or the legislature. It is nigh impossible to quote a page number as there is no precedent, and page numbers keep changing due to constant ratifications, amendments and abrogations. Awaiting your reply. Imp er ium  Caelestis  14:18, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe right. Anyway, styles like this or this is invalid. The reference should be a reliable source. Simply a statement will not do. For instance, when you say that Konkani my be written in Roman script also, I agree, because I am from Karnataka and I know how Konkani is written, etc. But the encyclopedia needs reliable sources. Also, while using web references, use the template.
 * I must commend you on this article. You have done a great job with it. Once the refs problem is sorted out, it should turn out great. Regards,  Yes Michael? •Talk 14:32, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually, those cite notes were actually not meant to serve that purpose. They were more like N.B. I was not aware that they couldn't be used in the N.B. sense and were strictly for citation. I have deleted those cite notes and added the statements therein, into the paragraphs they were meant for. Thank you for sharing the citeweb template. I have added all links to the template. I have also cited page nos for voluminous books as per your advise. I hope you find the article up to the mark. Awaiting your reply. Imp er ium  Caelestis  23:56, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * There are still many improvements need to be done :). Don't worry, I'm sure we'll iron them out. this, this, this are some good examples of how not to cite :) . Regarding the script stuff, you can cite a reference to something as simple as a grammar book; it shouldn't be much of a problem. Most of the others seem to be in perfect order. Nice work! I will look into the article itself, and suggest changes in some sections. Regards,  Yes Michael? •Talk 05:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you should remove much of the grammar part and put it into another article. Article is too long.  Yes Michael? •Talk 16:56, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

ಮಸ್ತ ಧನ್ಯವಾದ :) I was actually thinking on the same lines. I wanted to add typical nuances of the Canara Saraswats, Canara Catholics and the Nawayathi Muslims to the grammar part but stopped short thinking that the article was looking voluminous as it is. I was also planning to move the Konkani script part to a new page as it goes out of a normal screen. I have a few queries: Awaiting your reply. Godspeed, Imp er ium  Caelestis  17:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You have added the globalize tag. Please state the reasons for tagging it so?
 * You have added the overcoveragetag to the article. is this action in coherence to WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias?
 * I have not yet added enough to the article and keep adding as I get access to information. How will the above tags affect the article?
 * Are you satisfied with the amendments I made to the citations on the said page?
 * Taking the last question first, the citations are OK. Nothing too serious to be worried about.
 * I added The Globalise and overcoverage tags mainly because it focuses too much on grammar. The article should be on the lines of the FA Tamil Language.
 * However, I request you not to make big changes. As you know, there is a discussion going on in my talk page, and if the ultimate decision is that the articles should be merged, then some of your work may go a waste (like the lead and some other sections).  Yes Michael? •Talk 17:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I've got to go now. Was watching the good India Ireland game till now. Got to run and complete a record. College tomorrow. Kindly have a look at my comments on my talk page, and state your comments. Please keep in mind a global perspective. Good night!  Yes Michael? •Talk 17:40, 6 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your feedback and interest in the articles, considering it is not your forté. I feel separating the grammar and script part at this juncture, without taking all concerned users into confidence, will be premature. If at a later juncture, a consensual decision to merge the concerned articles into one page is arrived at, it will be very disappointing. That is the only reason I have, as of now, refrained myself from making major contributions to the Konkani Language, Karnataka Konkani and Canara Konkani articles, and also adding more articles on grammar, syntax, semantics, etc.


 * I suggest you reconsider the tags or give an explanation as to why they should be tagged so on the talk page as required by Template:Globalize. Both templates require the installer to explain his/her reasons on the talk page of that particular article. warm regards Imp er ium  Caelestis  17:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:01, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:FAQ-COVER.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:FAQ-COVER.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:31, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

mate!! that one skipped right out of my mind. gimme a sec, I'll do the needful. regards Imp er ium  Caelestis  06:39, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

done Imp er ium  Caelestis  06:43, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Helpful Tips
These should come in handy. Good luck with your editing! Joyson Noel Holla at me!  20:56, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Konkani Language Agitation


A tag has been placed on Konkani Language Agitation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Metiscus (talk) 15:06, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Konkanitextbook.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Konkanitextbook.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Regarding your message at PUI, it is extremely important to understand that simply slapping the right template on the image doesn't make it acceptable to use. We only use images that are out of copyright, ones where the copyright holder has EXPLICITLY granted an acceptable free content license (GFDL, Creative Commons, etc), or where there is a very strong claim of fair use.  None of those apply here.  The vast majority of images found somewhere on the internet are copyrighted, unlicensed, and not appropriate for us to use.  I understand the desire to "find the right answer" that allows the image to be used, but in this case, there likely is none - it simply is not acceptable to use the image. --B (talk) 19:32, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

The image is of a state government text book and comes under the same category as the constitution, acts of law, rulings of the court, etc. and these can be used provided they are produced as is Imp er ium  Caelestis  19:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Foot bahubali21.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Foot bahubali21.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. B (talk) 19:34, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Konkani-catholic-catechism.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Konkani-catholic-catechism.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. B (talk) 19:36, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Naqsh.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Naqsh.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. B (talk) 19:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Konkani User Template.
You might want to use this on your profile :)

Thanks indeed anonymous fellow Konkani Imp er ium  Caelestis  20:06, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Here's one i created long ago:

Joyson Noel Holla at me!  20:13, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Konkani Language Agitation
Hi, i have changed the article's title to a more appropriate one. I have a great deal of interest in this subject. As such, i plan on working on this article. I have created a sandbox page just for this article. This will take some time. There are other articles i plan on finishing first. However, i shall post the revised draft in it's entirety upon completion. Joyson Noel Holla at me!  17:18, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I checked out the new title. That will do just fine. Looking forward to your contribution. cheers Imp er ium Caelestis  17:35, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Question
I have two questions which i would appreciate you to answer. Do you know what "Copyright" is? Are you aware of the term? Answer me here! Joyson Noel Holla at me!  20:22, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * answer

care to elaborate?? Imp er ium Caelestis  20:28, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * yes I know what copyright is.
 * I am aware of the term.

OK! Then why have you been stealing images from sites and uploading them as in public domain without evidence. For instance, the following images can't be in the public domain:


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Goembab.jpg
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Konkanitextbook.png
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Konkaniagitation.jpg
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Konkani-porjecho-awaz.gif

The first image, although taken before Goembab's death in 1946, is no longer in the public domain as it was published in the following website which i assumed you took it from.

http://www.goanews.com/news_disp.php?newsid=35

Unlike most countries, which determine the copyright from the death of the author, in India, for photographs, the copyright runs for sixty years from first publication. If this was first published on a website, it can not have had its first publication earlier than the 1990s and therefore it will not be PD for another 40 years.

The Konkani text book is definitely copyrighted by the Goan government. The last two images were taken in 1986. So, it can't possibly be in the public domain, unless the respective images authors released it as such. Joyson Noel Holla at me!  21:13, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Shenoi Goembab Language Agitation

I am already in discussion with user  B w.r.t. the above mentioned files. check Files_for_deletion/2011_March_9.


 * do not assume
 * don't make allegations/accusations.
 * do not use dramatic language. learn the use of passive voice in communication.
 * keep language within the realm of formal communication. maintain formal correspondence.
 * read Non-free_use_rationale_guideline. If need be, copyright templates can be changed. Imp er ium Caelestis  21:45, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, i'm sorry if i didn't address you as "Sir" or "Your highness", but i am formal enough as it is. I don't need to be more formal. Yes, i have read the discussion. It's of only one file and all the participants agree that it must be deleted. My assumptions are correct. Your flouting of Wikipedia rules and guidelines are glaringly obvious. You have not uploaded either of them under fair-use. Copyrighted images cannot be uploaded in Commons. If you wished to use them under fair use, then you should not have uploaded them in Commons. Furthermore, you have dishonestly claimed authorship of these images. How can you possibly be the author of Shenoi Goembab's image, given that he died in 1946? The Konkani agitation image was taken at Azad Maidan in 1986 by Lui Godinho. See this. Unless you happen to be a Hindu with the odd name Lui Godinho, you can't possibly be the author of the image. Moreover, your false claim to be the author of Shenoi Goembab's image clearly demonstrates that you cannot be trusted with your claim of authorship for the Konkani agitation images. Joyson Noel  Holla at me!  22:37, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * By the way, Goembab's image was published on the link in 2000, way before facebook even existed. The image on facebook was probably taken from there. Joyson Noel  Holla at me!  22:47, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

well thank you Judas Iscariot!! some help you've turned out as a veteran. If you have a problem with the infobox, then say so!! I don't expect you to call me Sir et al; just mind your manners. Those pictures do come under the public domain read the PD-India template properly and then throw your rants. Anonymous works, photographs, cinematographic works, sound recordings, government works, and works of corporate authorship or of international organizations enter the public domain 60 years after the date on which they were first published, counted from the beginning of the following calendar year (ie. as of 2011, works published prior to 1 January 1951 are considered public domain).

I warn you. Do not bring religion or faith into the realm of this conversation. It is neither pertinent to the subject nor does it efficaciously supplement your point. Imp er ium Caelestis  23:36, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Joyson, I do not think that Goembab's image was first published in 2000. From its look it was published long ago, possibly as frontispiece illustration to one of his books. Granted that User:IC has wrongly asserted himself as the author, the need of the hour is to delete this image and try to retrieve its original source, or one prior to 1951. Then it can be claimed to be out of Indian copyright. Now, the million dollar question is, that publishing Wikipedia is under Indian or American law? If American, then yes, fair use can apply to encyclopedias and a rationale made to use it. AshLin (talk) 23:33, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much indeed AshLin. I have been earnestly hunting copyright tags for these images which are a rare sight even on the internet. customised tags are not available. I had the same problem looking for a copyright tag for the Bahubali inscription image. I claimed it under freedom of panorama. However, since it is a 3D image, the matter is under discussion. Your suggestions are awaited. warm regards Imp er ium  Caelestis  23:44, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Judas Iscariot? Don't tell me to mind my manners, if you don't have the decency to do so yourself! Be Civil as i have been towards you and steer away from name calling, or else i'll report you to WP:ANI. As for reprimanding you for not following the rules and lying about the authorship, i am well within my rights to do so. There is no complimentary way of doing it. I simply can't respect dishonesty. I understand that you are new here, but that is no excuse at all for not following basic rules. As for helping you, that's exactly what i am doing. My reprimand is helpful if you take it in a constructive way, admit your mistakes and learn something from it. That way, you could avoid these sort of things in the future. However, that doesn't seem to be the case. Instead of being mature and acknowledging your mistakes, you have reprehensibly resorted to false accusations of incivility and name calling, in a self-righteous belligerent manner. Let alone the fact that you have disregarded my previous advice of studying the basic rules carefully. As such, i will no longer care to help you.
 * Ashlin, even i feel that the image was probably first published in a bio about him, prior to 2000. However, i can't verify it as i lack evidence. Since the only link i was able to find with the image was the goanews.com article (an Indian website) and it does not provide the image's source, i must logically assume that it was first published there. Personally, i don't care to find the image's date of publication. The Shenoi Goembab article already has a free image of significantly better quality. If Imperium wishes for the image to remain in Commons, then as the uploader the onus lies on him to prove that it was published prior to 1951, or first published in a non-Indian source. Furthermore, i was not reprimanding him for using copyrighted images under a valid fair-use rationale, but for dishonestly stealing images and pawning them off as his own under false licenses. I suggest that you read comments carefully next time, before commenting yourself. Joyson Noel  Holla at me!  00:50, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Joyson, I consider your last sentence offensive and have responded to you on your talk page. AshLin (talk) 04:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You have no reason to be offended! I have provided my reasons for it in my talk page. Joyson Noel  Holla at me!  06:30, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Well Joyson Noel,  you were the one who started with with the uncivil language and it better be you who puts an end to it. Your personal attacks will not be tolerated. Go on and report to WP:ANI. You have not only prejudged me a stealer, but also commented on my religion; and I take offence to that. Bear in mind that you and I are on an equal footing; keep your reprimanding  off my page. Exhibit your hollering on user-pages where it is appreciated. Hereafter, reserve your comments for me to article and image talk pages. Imp er ium <sup style="color:#0000FF;">Caelestis  05:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you responding to my comments that i typed in the real world, or those imaginary comments that i must have typed in your fantasy? You wan't me to report you to WP:ANI. Not a problem! Just resort to name calling again. I dare you! I was not reprimanding your personality, but your conduct which is far from exemplary (very sub-standard, i must add). So, these don't qualify as personal attacks. Any responsible editor will do that. You yourself asked me to help you with the Manual of Style in the article, and when i notice these plagiarized images and reproach you for your misdeeds (i.e, plagiarism of images), you dishonestly accuse me of being uncivil, resort to name calling, and then threaten to report me for incivility and insulting Hinduism. Instead of admitting your mistakes like a mature and responsible person, this is the level you stoop to. Had i known what kind of a person you were, i would have never have decided to help you out. You don't deserve my help at all. Thanks for wasting my time. Joyson Noel  Holla at me!  06:30, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I have interacted with responsible editors like Pratik Mallya,  Aoghac2z  , ' Yes Michael?  and  AshLin and have heeded to them and have appreciated their way of putting things across. So I know how a responsible editor communicates and I don't see you in that bracket; so your latest self-congratulatory communication, of you being a responsible editor, holds no water. Rather than dealing with the technical aspects of the images, you have, through your first communication on this matter, resorted to wanton character assassination. extremely unbecoming of a veteran; if that is indeed what you consider yourself. You were not coerced into wasting your time; to help or not was your prerogative.Your verbal reasoning skills show in poor light when you construe my statement do not bring religion into the realm of this discussion as I insinuating you insulted my faith. My faith in the supremacy of grey cells over grey hair only increases with each piece of correspondence I receive from you. Imp er ium <sup style="color:#0000FF;">Caelestis  07:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I really don't think that it the place of a person who does not even know basic wikipedia rules and policies and engages in slandering and selective dishonesty to tell me how a responsible editor behaves. I have been an editor for more than three years and you've got to be the most dishonest bold-faced person i've ever come across. You expect me not to reproach you for not heeding to my advice and stealing images. That is laughable! Rather than saying "Don't bring religion into this", you accused me of commenting negatively on your religion and then lie that you didn't accuse me. Do you even know what you are talking about? All i said was that you could not Lui Godinho, the real author of the image you stole. Your user page mentions your religious background as well. As such, it would be odd to see a Hindu with the Portuguese name of Lui Godinho. You stole the images, passed them off as your own and got the well-deserved reprimand. Please note that i only reprimanded you as you are new here. However, if you continue do such a thing in the future, then i know very well how to deal with you. Furthermore, i don't have to indulge in character assassination. Your dishonesty and conduct speaks for itself. My words do not demean you. Your own conduct does. Anyway, i agree that you didn't coerce me to help you. It was my own goodwill and honorable intention to help a fellow Konkani lover that coerced me into doing so. This is what made me respond positively to your plea for help. As i've said earlier, had i known then about the sort of person you were, i would have never obliged. As for your last statement, i've warned you previously about having to resort to personal attacks. Well, it seems that you won't learn your lesson with just a warning. Enough of your nonsense! I have reported you to WP:ANI. Any further comments should be passed there. Joyson Noel  Holla at me!  10:51, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion requests for images
I have nominated these images for deletion in Commons. You are invited to comment on the following pages: Joyson Noel Holla at me!  22:37, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Goembab.jpg
 * http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Konkaniagitation.jpg
 * http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Konkani-porjecho-awaz.gif

YGM
Hope you don't mind the mail. Sorry if it has caused any inconvenience!  Yes Michael? •Talk 18:50, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * not actually. It was nice to hear from you. I can't seem to get the mail icon on your user page. is it because of your semi-protected status?? Imp er ium <sup style="color:#0000FF;">Caelestis
 * Ah, no. You can mail me here. Just hadn't put the email icon on the talk page.  Yes Michael? •Talk 18:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Konkani related articles
Hi Konkanimogi's,

Let me begin with complementing you all for your effort in taking interest in, and projecting Konkani related articles on Wikipedia. As suggested by Yes Michael?, I have separated Konkani Phonology and Konkani Script from the Canara Konkani article and have internally linked all articles to each other and to the main Konkani language and Konkani people article.


 * 1) I plan to create an article on Konkani Devanagari orthography (or I'll join you if you create one first) based on the booklet published by the Goa Konkani Academy and I solicit your help in this endeavour.


 * 1) An article on Konkani Grammar is also in the pipeline.


 * 1) I opine that the Konkani language agitation kōṅkaṇī prajētsō āvāz in Goa and its effects on Karnataka, Kerala and Maharashtra be highlighted through a separate article.

I solicit your views and feedback on the talk page of those respective articles. Any other feedback may kindly be directed here.

देव बरॆं कॊरॊ Imp er ium <sup style="color:#0000FF;">Caelestis  08:00, 8 March 2011 (UTC)


 * As long as it is well-researched and comprehensive, it would be fine to create a separate article on the Konkani language agitation. Joyson Noel  Holla at me!  10:01, 8 March 2011 (UTC)


 * voila!, here's the Konkani Language Agitation article. Imp er ium  <sup style="color:#0000FF;">Caelestis  23:22, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Konkani phonology
Hello. Just a quick note to let you know that I really appreciate your article on Konkani. I'm a post-doctoral researcher in Amsterdam and I'm really interested in certain aspects of the phonology of this language. If you have a moment, could you please contact me? I'd like to ask you a couple of questions about the Konkani sound inventory and nasality, and, if you're interested, invite you to participate in a database of the world's languages. Please drop me a line at ml.coler@let.vu.nl (also please delete this email address once you've written me!). Thanks a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zabucha (talk • contribs) 07:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey, aren't you Bloeme Bergmann from Leiden University? I greatly appreciate the interest you are taking in our language. Joyson Noel  Holla at me!  11:22, 25 March 2011 (UTC)