User talk:Kpbolumbu

Do not disturb Kpbolumbu (talk)

Do not disturb. Don't send any messages of advertising nature to me. Kpbolumbu (talk)

==

D. V. Gundappa
An adequate number of citations to reliable, authoritative, and neutral third-party sources would strengthen the trustworthiness of the edits you want to make. They are essential. Wikipedia requires them. Two good sets of Wikipedia guidelines that I have found really useful can be found HERE and HERE. You cannot have a paragraph of subjective and eulogistic fan-like statements drawn from a really loose paraphrasing of material in a book and then, because you cite the book at the very end of the paragraph, claim it is adequately referenced. Best wishes, George Custer&#39;s Sabre (talk) 13:09, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, An NOR and an NPOV have been adhered to while editing the above mentioned article. What counts as a reliable source? Three points. a) the type of the work (include a document, an article, or a book)  b) the creator of the work (the writer) - G Venkatasubbiah. (A highly reliable source as far as kannada language is concerned.) c) the publisher of the work - Sahitya Akademi. (Again a highly reliable source as far as kannada language is concerned.) They have been presented with a neutral point of view and no original research has been included. Kpbolumbu (talk) 08:32, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Talangere stone edict


The article Talangere stone edict has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This is an interesting tale. However, to place this in an encyclopaedia one needs more than interest. It needs to be notable, and substantial references are required in reliable sources. As a side issue, should the article be improved such that it may remain here, I am concerned about the title. It is, surely, an inscription, not an edict?

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fiddle  Faddle  12:05, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Talangere stone inscription


A tag has been placed on Talangere stone inscription requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.kamat.com/jyotsna/blog/blog.php?BlogID=452. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Fiddle  Faddle  12:47, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Ramayana
You've been reverted because your source does not meet our criteria at WP:RS. Dougweller (talk) 13:41, 9 July 2014 (UTC)


 * The source has been faithufully copied here in wikipedia without citing the reference. Yet, you are saying that this source is not a reliable source. You can just match the wikipeda text with the text given in the cited reference:

1) Wikipedia: "In Indonesia, Kakawin Ramayana is an old Javanese rendering; Yogesvara Ramayana is attributed to the scribe Yogesvara circa 9th century CE, who was employed in the court of the Medang in Central Java. It has 2774 stanzas in manipravala style, a mixture of Sanskrit and Kawi language. The most influential version of the Ramayana is the Ravanavadham of Bhatti, popularly known as Bhattikavya. The Javanese Ramayana differs markedly from the original Hindu prototype. The 9th-century Javanese Kakawin Ramayana has become the reference of Ramayana in the neighbouring island of Bali. The bas reliefs of Ramayana and Krishnayana scenes is carved on balustrades wall of 9th-century Prambanan temples in Yogyakarta. In Indonesia, Ramayana has been integrated into local culture especially those of Javanese, Balinese and Sundanese, and has become the source of moral and spiritual guidance as well as aesthetic expression and also entertainment. Cultural performances such as Wayang shadow puppet and traditional dances often took their story from Ramayana. In Bali as well as in Java, the dances based on the episode of Ramayana often performed in temples such as Prambanan in Java and Pura in Bali."

2)http://www.musikaal.com/Gallery/index.php/RAMAYANA-Wayang-Kulit-Jawa-puppets-and-stories/KAKAWIN-RAMAYANA-Indonesian-version "In Indonesia, Kakawin Ramayana is an old Javanese rendering; Yogesvara Ramayana is attributed to the scribe Yogesvara circa 9th century CE, who was employed in the court of the Medang in Central Java. It has 2774 stanzas in manipravala style, a mixture of Sanskrit and Kawi language. The most influential version of the Ramayana is the Ravanavadham of Bhatti, popularly known as Bhattikavya. The Javanese Ramayana differs markedly from the original Hindu prototype. The 9th century Javanese Kakawin Ramayana has become the reference of Ramayana in the neighboring island of Bali. The bas reliefs of Ramayana and Krishnayana scenes is carved on balustrades wall of 9th century Prambanan temples in Yogyakarta. In Indonesia, Ramayana has been integrated into local culture especially those of Javanese, Balinese and Sundanese, and has become the source of moral and spiritual guidance as well as aesthetic expression and also entertainment. Cultural performances such as Wayang shadow puppet and traditional dances often took their story from Ramayana. In Bali as well as in Java, the dances based on the episode of Ramayana often performed in temples such as Prambanan in Java and Pura in Bali."

After going through both these texts, you can either delete the content from wikipedia or retain it citing the reference of the above website. Yet, you may not copy the entire content as wikipedia does not allow copyright infringement.--Kpbolumbu (talk) 05:18, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

October 2014
Please do not add or change content, as you did to Drishyam, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 06:21, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

May 2015
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Kasaragod, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mlpearc ( open channel ) 20:19, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Kasaragod page - stop vandalizing (talkback)
--Joshua Issac (talk) 21:19, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

--Joshua Issac (talk) 12:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

--Joshua Issac (talk) 19:59, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

--Joshua Issac (talk) 17:40, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

July 2015
Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:
 * User contributions
 * Recent changes
 * Watchlists
 * Revision differences
 * IRC channels
 * Related changes
 * New pages list and
 * Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! 220  of  Borg 22:50, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Not interested Kpbolumbu (talk)

Our suggestions to major pages like Siddha medicine are not being considered and we don't wish to contribute any further Kpbolumbu (talk) Do not disturb Kpbolumbu (talk)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

 * Our suggestions to major pages like Siddha medicine are not being considered and we don't wish to contribute any further. Kpbolumbu (talk)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
day}has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Do not disturb Kpbolumbu (talk)

Do not disturb. Don't send any messages of advertising nature to me. Kpbolumbu (talk)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-

Do not disturb
Do not disturb Kpbolumbu (talk) 17:56, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

== ArbCom 2023 Elections voter delivery|talk]]) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)


 * do not 🚫 disturb Kpbolumbu (talk) Kpbolumbu (talk) 17:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Do नो disturb
do नो disturb Kpbolumbu (talk) 17:00, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

February 2024
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Talk:Battle of the Ten Kings, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan -  Let's talk!  17:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)


 * do not disturb Kpbolumbu (talk) 03:32, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * to ask for a valid proof is part of formal protocols. If you wish not to approve the validity of an argument, all the best for your propaganda Kpbolumbu (talk) 03:35, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You have already created a few topics in this talk page and you know the location by now. So the response could be had here itself. Don't force me to come to your talk page. Kpbolumbu (talk) 17:04, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Joshua Jonathan you could respond here itself. Kpbolumbu (talk) 19:17, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Joshua Jonathan you neither have the guts to speak nor you have enough proof to verify your naxalite thought patterns. Kpbolumbu (talk) 03:22, 27 June 2024 (UTC)