User talk:Raguks

Contribute to Kannada wikipedia
Hi,

Following your contributions on wikipedia, I guessed you're knowledgeable about Kannada language. If you are, please visit Kannada wikipedia and see if you can help us pace up the project even more. If you aren't, please ignore the message. Thank you. --H P Nadig 7 July 2005 13:00 (UTC)

space
Hi. Please could you add a space after a comma. Thanks =Nichalp   «Talk»=  08:18, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

Dandi
I've moved the material that you added to a new article, and started a new article as Dandi (poet); I hope that that's OK with you. I've made Dandi a disambiguation page, and moved the article there to Dandi, Gujarat. --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 23:32, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

India related links
Welcome!! --Gurubrahma 15:52, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Hindu-Arabic numerals
Hi! User:RN moved the article to Arabic numerals despite 28 votes favoring the title "Hindu-Arabic numerals" and only 17 favoring "Arabic numerals." He argues that if we don't count voters with less that 150 (or sth like that) edits, only 56% voters "support changing the title to Hindu-Arabic numerals", while at least 60% support votes are required. However, it was agreed between all parties in the beginning of the vote that the proposal is to move the article to "Arabic numerals" from "Hindu-Arabic numerals." It was also agreed (though I thought it was very unfair) that:


 * Those opposing the move have the advantage that it won't be moved unless there's a 60% majority
 * Those supporting the move have the advantage that the person proposing the move can do the *short* opening statement.
 * For all the rest of the voting procedure both parties are equal. (quoting Francis Schonken from 21:04, 18 December 2005 (UTC))

I would definitely have preferred it the other way round, since I think an opening statement makes a HUGE difference, since many people just read the opening statement and understandably don't bother with the discussion below the votes. The present situation was accepted with the agreement that the article will be moved to "Arabic numerals" only if more than 60% voters favored that title. Thus, only 40% oppose votes were sufficient to retain the title "Hindu-Arabic numerals." In the present situation (with over 60% voters opposing the change), I find the move to "Arabic numerals" ridiculous, besides being completely unjust and unfair. Your comments will be appreciated. deeptrivia (talk) 05:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Greetings
Holi greetings. --Bhadani 11:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. - Parthi talk/contribs 22:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:ChristopherLake Sunrise26dec06.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ChristopherLake Sunrise26dec06.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 04:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Jog Falls
Yes, apparently Jog is India's highest single tiered waterfalls, so the sentence is correct now. We also need to work on Sagara article. Gnanapiti 00:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Criticism of the Bhagavad-Gita
A tag has been placed on Criticism of the Bhagavad Gita, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

serves no purpose but to disparage their subject

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 19:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm sure that some scholars have criticised the Bhagavad-Gita, but I do wonder of the point in having such an article within Wikipedia. Imagine how difficult it would be to treat the subject in a neutral manner? Unless it's well-written right from the start I'd say it is too controversial to have at all. I hope you understand. Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 19:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Yakshagana Tala
A tag has been placed on Yakshagana Tala requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. 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.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. bd_ (talk) 05:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, just to clarify - it's not enough to simply gradually edit the article - what needs to happen is the article needs to be completely rewritten, and then the offending revisions possibly expunged from the history of the article. Please read the Copyright policy. If the article is not sufficiently rewritten, it will need to be deleted to protect wikipedia from legal liability, unless the original author gives their permission to place it on wikipedia. --bd_ (talk) 05:33, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for responding on my user page. While I understand this is an interesting subject that probably deserves an article, Wikipedia simply is not allowed to keep articles that have their phrasing "borrowed" from elsewhere. While I see you have been editing things a bit here and there, copyediting isn't enough - what I'd suggest is you break down the facts you want to get across, then, without looking at either the original source or the article you have now, rewrite the article. Now go back and correct factual errors, etc. This should get an article unrelated in structure to the original source. I'd do it myself, but I'm not knowledgable about the subject in question at all, I'm afraid. --bd_ (talk) 05:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, glad to hear you're working on it :) Sorry for keeping you up, it's just that wikipedia has to take a hard stance against copyright infringement, or risk being sued. Since you're the only author, you're also free to request that it be deleted, and simply re-create it once you're ready with an initial article, if you prefer - you can use the tag if you want to do so (replace the entire page with that one tag, and put a note in the edit summary as to why). This may even be the cleanest way, as it would remove the copyright infringing material from the history of the page entirely. --bd_ (talk) 05:59, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Media bias in India
I have nominated Media bias in India, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Media bias in India. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.  hmwith  ☮  18:35, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Raguks -- This deleted article could be re-drafted using the same or a similar title, but it must be written in a manner which mitigates a priori the impression that WP:OR or WP:FRINGE have arguable relevance. In other words, if this article were to have encompassed inline citations and bibliographic reference source notes which demonstrated unassailable compliance with WP:V and WP:RS, its ultimate fate might have been different.


 * Perhaps the following paragraph will be helpful in establishing a context:
 * "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth&mdash;that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed. "Verifiability is one of Wikipedia's core content policies, along with No original research and Neutral point of view. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in Wikipedia articles. They should not be interpreted in isolation from one another, and editors should therefore familiarize themselves with all three."


 * Are these familiar words? I would hope you recognize immediately that I copied them from WP:V.  If not, then this gesture becomes a good step in a constructive direction. --Tenmei (talk) 18:31, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Comment in archives
I responded to your comment left in my archives. I just found it today. Cheers,  hmwith  ☮  18:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Happy Holidays


Ret.Prof (talk) 13:42, 17 December 2009 (UTC) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

PLEASE...no more copyright violations!
Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. You've been asked repeatedly not to post copyrighted material to this site. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:30, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Recovering the content isn't a problem. The content itself is.  I did a Google search of a sample of the text and it came back word-for-word from another site.  It's certainly OK to write about the subject, but it must be in your own words with the other sites used as references.  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

FYI, this is the link:. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah, that's different. If the text is public domain, it's not a problem. I'll go ahead and undelete the whole thing. That will save you the trouble of having to recreate anything. Sorry about the misunderstanding; I'll fix the problem right away. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * All set. Again, I'm terribly sorry about the misunderstanding and I appreciate your polite attitude.  I can't tell you how many times I've gotten absolutely excoriated for deleting content which I can reverse with a keystroke.



PMDrive1061 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Anytime. :) Good night and thanks again.  PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:48, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Request for peer review.
Raguks avrige nanna namaskaragalu, I am Tejaswi, a native of Siddapur, Uttarakannada. The article Namadhari naik belonging to Karnataka wikigroup, is edited by me and deals with the community history of the Namadharis/Halepaiks of Uttara Kannada. In creating this article i have referred to most of Kannada literature sources, some of which are really rare [ex; Bombay gazetteer in Karnataka: Dharwad,Belgaum,Bijapur and Kannara districts, Venkataramgo Katti; Kaada toreya jaadu: Autobiography of Kadidal Shamanna; Kagodu ondu nenapu, C.B.Chandrashekhar;The Nayakas of Ikkeri, K.D.Swaminathan;,Bimba-Pratibimba, Dr.L.R.Hegde;D.L.N Avara Ayda Lekhana, Kamala Hampana]. These form a necessary part of the glorious literary tradition of Kannada language and need to be seconded. hence i request you to kindly review the page.

offlate, i have been facing unilateral notices on the material without a proper knowledgable discussion on the topic. the member issuing notices seems to lack relevent knowledge in the subject and is defintely biased. but the warnings and unwarranted editing may lead to the page loosing out on the precious information derived from above mentioned sources. So i request neutral observers like you to review it and opinionate. thankyou

Tej smiles (talk) 18:33, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I really appreciate your review of the Namadhari naik page. about the arrival alongwith Havyaks, it is still a hypotheses (just like the Havyaks themselves claiming that they were the 'Brahmins' mentioned in Talgunda inscription). But the popular belief in the region is the same and the ground realities that the Halepaiks and Havyaks all along history have formed the largest groups in the region all along the history and these being the only 2 groups finding continuous reference in the earliest of literatures (not to forget the traditions and sociological reasons), point towards that. I know as of now all of these dont lend any credence and mere popular belief cant be held to represent truth. thats the reason that i've placed it as one of the three theories. as and when further proof is available, it can be put up as the accepted theory. what do you say? looking for more inputs on the page from you. Thankyou.

Tej smiles (talk) 17:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I will agree with later argument some what. It can be put as a speculation. But to put it as a theory needs thorough research work backed by literary or archeological sources. On the first part that Havyakas claim they are the Brahmins mentioned in the stone stab, the stone stab in question is of Varadahalli which clearly states villages they were put up in. There is extensive research available which have verified this, for its credence after matching vilages and family trees. You may refer to Havyaka wiki page and read "Havyakara Itihasa" by Vidwan Timmappa. This book will also give you reference to more sources to look in to Namadhari history. It is possible that Namadharis are mentioned in those sources as well. PS: It is important to write goood write up on Namadharis than to get hung up on some issues. So I will support your edits, so long as they do not seem biased.

~rAGU (talk)

Hi, I didnt know about the research on the basis of Varadahalli inscription regarding alotted villages and family tree. If that is the case then i take back my words on 'Havyak claim'. My info was based on the discussions i had had with my Havyak friends and their elders. they did king of give a semblence of legend without any proof and i treated it in the same manner. Even the Havyak history sites i referred to (one of them by Dr.Narayan Hosmane) didnt give ample evidence (so did Wiki page). But I do believe it has to be Havyaks. The problem with Halepaik history is that there hasnt been a thorough research on the subject, though a lot of references might be found in literary sources. The available materials too lack crdibility as they depend much on legends and hearsay (not to forget confusion about various terms in the first place). I hope this page on wiki serves as a future impetus to research on various aspects given in it, hence i've collated all info available in a single page. In these days where almost everybody wants to claim a glorious past n royal lineage my endeavour has been to make sense of the truth as it is. In that manner i've based the tone of my page on the lines of the Havyak page (neutral). I appreciate your ideas on the page, plz feel free to suggest more, and thankyou for the new links. You can be rest assured this page wont be having a biased line.

Tej smiles (talk) 07:53, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Havyak History
In my search my sources i have usually landed up with a lot of info about Havyakas. Some of these i have edited into the page (ex; The old term for Uttara Kannada-Haiva and the resultant name 'Haiga' for Havyaks). But i have to mention here that i have been a bit wary of putting in info lest i shouldnt be misunderstood. Mentioning it in the discussion page would have been a good idea but some how i havnt done that too. You seem to be interested in the community page so i think i can give some of those links to you. 1rstly, the link for the term 'Haiva' is in the shloka, "Karatam cha viratam cha Maratam Konkanam tatha Havyagam Taulavam ch=aiva Keralam ch=eti saptakam" as well as in the Balagamve inscription of formation of Konkan as "Payve, Hayve or Haive 500". The inscription also talks about Parashurama-Jamadagni-Renukambe legend, the myhtological story about the origin of Konkan as being the boon of Shiva (Phanipa-Kankana-Varade), who it seems was wearing a hooded serpent as a bracelet, seven konkan being his place of abode & Haive as the bracelet (kankana) of the lady, the konkan. p.no.283, The dynasties of Kanara dist, J.F.FLEET.

Also the 1891 Gazzetteer of Bombay presidency of Kannada dists by Venkataramgo Katti has a good info about all communities in the district and their lifestyle. it can be used on the Havyak page.

both the above books are available for sale by Asian Educational Services, their site is http://www.asianeds.com

also, The people of India Series by the Anthropological survey of India has a full page on the community.

Tej smiles (talk) 08:18, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

New heading 'Historical reference' added to Belgaum Border Dispute.
Plz check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgaum_border_dispute#Historical_Reference. I have added new info which should change the way this dispute has been seen till now and tilt the balance in Karnataka's favour. It is obvious that it might face war-editing from certain sections. I request you to follow the page and ensure the truth prevails.

Tej smiles (talk) 13:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Jasminum multiforum/multiflorum
Hello, you created an article about a plant "Jasminum multiforum". I assume this was a spelling error, it should read "multiflorum". For your information: I've moved the article to the proper spelling and created an entry at Redirects for discussion because I think the remnant with the wrong spelling should be deleted. --Cyfal (talk) 15:04, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

LOL!
No, I'm not that old. :) Just a bit weary of the games is all.  Thanks for the nice note.  I swung by to do a few goodbyes and I appreciate your thoughtfulness.  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Kereetadavesha.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Kereetadavesha.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 02:18, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but some evidence of that license is going to need to be provided. Could you talk me through this? Where did you get the image from, who created it, how do you believe it is licensed, why do you believe that? J Milburn (talk) 10:58, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid permission for Wikipedia to use the file is not enough. Instead, the image need to be released under a free license. J Milburn (talk) 23:42, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * If an email from the copyright holder explicitly releasing it under a free license has been forwarded to the OTRS address, there shouldn't be any further issues. I don't have time to check that right now, but I or someone else will get to it in due course. J Milburn (talk) 16:39, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Kereetadavesha.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Kereetadavesha.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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 File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey (talk) 23:27, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I've restored the image. I found the OTRS ticket and added it to the image page, and so there shouldn't be any further problems. Sorry for all the trouble. J Milburn (talk) 00:40, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Joining the MtC drive
You seem to have forgot to add yourself to the logs subpage. Ebe 123 → report on my contribs. 12:54, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Photo of Guruji
Dear Raghu, I have uploaded a rare photo of Shri Raghaveshwara Bharathi Guruji -. Hope you like it. Thanks and cheers! :) - Bharathiya (talk) 07:29, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

April 2013
Hello, I'm Paris1127. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Adam's Bridge that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Paris1127 (talk) 03:29, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Narahari Sharma concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Narahari Sharma, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 18:27, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Narahari Sharma (August 21)
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [ Articles for creation help desk], or on the [ . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:59, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Improving Gamaka (storytelling)
If it is your intent to improve public knowledge of Gamaka, why not put some effort into improving Gamaka (storytelling)? The article is of poor quality now, and poorly sourced, so you could make a real difference in helping to make it clearer, better ordered, and with proper footnotes to WP:Reliable sources.

If you do so, I would strongly suggest that rather than just "write from memory" your personal views/knowledge of Gamaka, that you instead gather some good sources together (online or offline) to ensure that everything you add to the article can be traced back to a real book or article that readers can find if they need substantiation. Any fact you add that can't be readily verified by the reader is really not of great help to the article, whereas sticking to published sources will make it much more defensible for everyone. This would be a great way for you to bring more quality information about gamaka to the world. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:55, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Nothing I already don't know. I am dissapointed at wikipedia for putting all these bureaucracy and making it harder for people to add information. I dont know where you come from but many things do not exist on record even offline. They have to be quoted from eminent and well meaning people who dedicate their lives for certain things. I have done my bit. Go delete it and have fun. ~rAGU (talk)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Narahari Sharma concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Narahari Sharma, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:07, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Narahari Sharma


Hello Raguks. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Narahari Sharma".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. C679 07:02, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Malukugalu


The article Malukugalu has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Long unsourced orphaned article, with no references pointing to it. Took a look through the usual google searches, couldn't find a source that wasn't a mirror of Wikipedia.

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. Sadads (talk) 22:28, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

citation would be good
I am glad to see your edit on ontology, but I think it deserves a reliable source or two, and you are the prime candidate for that exercise.Chjoaygame (talk) 18:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC) I will add sources. ~rAGU (talk)

April 2016
Are you all Sepoys? Showing up at your master's orders? I am asking a question! Stop vandalizing the article - removing edits even when I am adding references. Humans have different ethics but you guys seem to be so utterly ignorant and not interested in knowledge. Is information acceptable when it comes from your masters?Again I am asking a question. You guys are vandalizing and attacking me. Seriously, are you guys not sepoys? Answer the question. ~rAGU (talk)


 * Until this moment I had no idea what "sepoy" meant (according to a Google search it appears to mean an Indian solider serving under British orders). I'm going to assume then that you are using this as an insult and that in spite of the previous warnings you are engaging in personal attacks against other editors. You need to stop doing this. You will be blocked for this behavior. Looking through your talk page it appears that you have been engaging in this kind of behavior for a while now. Consider this your fourth and final warning. SQGibbon (talk) 16:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I recite those Yajurvedic hymns referring to Bharatha Khanda or Indian continent (In the country of India in the Indian continent and to the south of the river godhavari - Bharatha Khande Bhaaratha varshe godavaryaha dakshine teere). Millions do this even to this day. So try to learn things you don't know instead of attacking people who add information and who correct you. Your pettiness will result in more ignorance ~rAGU (talk)
 * My role on Wikipedia is to make sure that recent edits to the entire encyclopedia are in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If they are not then I fix or revert them. I don't care about the content. I am not trying to improve the content of any article or increase my understanding of any subject in Wikipedia. I am merely working to make sure people do not abuse Wikipedia. Your edit that I reverted was against guidelines and potentially against policy. Your continued personal attacks are against policy. Not a single person has attacked you. Please stop your personal attacks and/or consider that Wikipedia might not be a good fit for you. SQGibbon (talk) 16:51, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If your role is good then you should not support those who delete content without allowing editors to add references. All Kautilya does is to delete edits. I do not know you are doing this intentionally or inadvertently but I have described what the effect is. The region is called Indian continent in the Yajurveda Sankalpa mantras which I recited since childhood. Bharatha khande bharatha varshe - etc. It is hard to find references to ancient texts on the Internet but if Kautilya and his friends keep deleting and vandalizing the edits you seem to back it. There is no personal attack in a question. Asking a question is not an attack, if you understand English. Look at my contributions and I am not in the business of deleting others edits. I am adding information and adding references.

~rAGU (talk)

Indian Continent

 * You are the vandalizer. Not even allowing to cite and add references. Deleting edits. You look like a job less vandalizer. Your only desire is to write your POV and delete any edits made to this page. I will get you blocked. If you continue to delete edits without allowing to add references. Add need reference remark.

~rAGU (talk)

May 2016
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Indian subcontinent. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. BilCat (talk) 22:03, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Your recent editing history at Indian subcontinent shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Kautilya3 (talk) 23:08, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Indic scripts
Please see WP:BRD, and do not reinstate removed content without discussion. The Kannada script is already present in the article's infobox, and you're simply adding redundant lead clutter. WP:INDICSCRIPT was formed precisely to avoid lame language wars. Wikipedia's aim is to build an encyclopedia, not glorify your language, ethnicity etc. utcursch &#124; talk 17:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

It is very clear you do not understand at all. I have no time to argue. ~rAGU (talk)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Csssclll


Do not create articles about living people that are entirely negative in tone and unsourced. Wikipedia has a policy of verifiability and any negative information we use must be reliably sourced, and our articles must be balanced. Negative, unreferenced biographies of living people are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Under section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy may be blocked from editing.

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 "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. Arkhaminsanity (talk) 16:06, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Buddhism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Atman. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

References and scripts
Please don't add unsourced content as you did at Kailasa temple, Ellora: you need reliable sources, as you have been told at least four times above, by other editors. Also, as mentioned above, please don't add unnecessary Indic scripts to the articles: if you want to contribute in the Kannada language, please do so at the Kannada language Wikipedia. utcursch &#124; talk 08:56, 16 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Who are you to decide what is necessary? No I dont add unsourced information. I add information. Some dull heads dont appreciate information even when they are sourced because they dont like it. Kuntala country is well attested in the wiki article on Kuntala itself. You are vandalizing edits. There is no Kannada Indic script for a Kannada emperor anywhere. Last time it was said it is in the table. Now even that is removed. Any revert you do to Kuntala which is well known and adds information and any removing indic script will be considered a vandalisation. So stop this attack on information. Deleting does not add information. ~rAGU (talk)


 * I don't decide what's necessary: the Wikipedia community does. Please see WP:INDICSCRIPT. If you have any objections, feel free to start a new discussion at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. Even if WP:INDICSCRIPT was not applicable, the script you are adding has no relevance to the article: it is not the script of the Rashtrakuta inscriptions, or of th modern state in which the site is located.
 * Also, have a look at WP:CIRCULAR: "well attested in the wiki article" is not a great argument. utcursch &#124; talk 13:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * So you let your friends lose on me? You decide what is a great argument and not the wiki article itself. It is sad that haters of information and fanatics like you are admins. Shame on you and your friends. Please continue to hate knowledge for your power trip. I believed your when you said "The Kannada script is already present in the article's infobox, and you're simply adding redundant lead clutter." see above in the same talk page. Now it is clear you dont want Kannada script. Are you a Marathi fanatic? Are you? ~rAGU (talk)


 * It was in 2016, when I told you that "Kannada script is already present in the article's infobox". As noted at WP:INDICSRIPT (which I've linked to in my recent message), there was an RfC in 2017, which resulted in the addition of "or infoboxes" bit. The participants in the RfC discussion are not my "friends": anyone can start and participate in an RfC discussion.
 * Back in 2016, I also removed the Marathi script added by you, twice. So, I'm not sure what are you basing the "Marathi fanatic" accusation on.
 * Please read about the Wikipedia policies and guidelines instead of indulging in personal attacks. And once again, if you love your language, consider contributing to the Kannada language Wikipedia. utcursch &#124; talk 18:56, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Theatre of India
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Theatre of India, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. You are an experienced editor, and shouldn't need to be warned about adding unsourced material, but you continue to do so - please stop. - Arjayay (talk) 09:12, 16 October 2018 (UTC)


 * The term medieval applies to Europe. Precisely stating centuries in order to avoid confusion does not need any reference as that is what is in the description. You need to cite to use a word that does not apply to India. This is very twisted way to just delete what you don't like. And do not point to irrelevant links. I am familiar with this stuff.

August 2019
Hello, I'm Kautilya3. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Article 370 of the Constitution of India, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 16:55, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Raghaveshwara Bharathi


A tag has been placed on Raghaveshwara Bharathi, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Tatupiplu'talk 15:20, 4 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Please see my reply on your talk page. I could not find the button to contest. This should not be deleted.

~rAGU (talk)

April 2020
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Shaka era, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. utcursch &#124; talk 14:39, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * citation for meaning words is available in a books people call a dictionary. Anyone can look up on spokensanskrit.org for "era" and you will find the transliteration "zaka" for shaka in sanskrit. What you do is vandalism.
 * ~rAGU (talk)


 * Please see WP:RS, WP:HISTRS, and WP:NOR. The dictionary also states that a king, an animal, a fragrant substance etc. Your unsourced inferences constitute original research unless explicitly supported by a source.
 * As already mentioned in the article, the word "Shaka" came to mean "an era" in generic sense after the use of this era became common. The original meaning of the word is not "era". There are several sources that support this statement, and are already cited in the article. For example, Indian Epigraphy (p. 262): "In medieval times, people tried to forget the foreign association of the Saka era and the word Śaka began to be used in the sense of 'an era.'" utcursch &#124; talk 12:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Whatever? Calling what you did Vandalism is personal attack? Unbelievable! The source you cite is full of speculation including your own quote. Where is the proof for that specualtion that Indians tried to forget etc? The details you cited were made up and added after I tried my first edits way back and you or guys like you deleted it. It is highly unlikely great mathematicians like Bhaskara who updated the calendar last fabricated anything. That is a serious and careless allegation. I am ofcourse going to come back with details. ~rAGU (talk)

May 2020
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Doug Weller talk 13:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 82 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Doug Weller talk 07:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

WP:Verifiability
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, you may be blocked from editing. OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:47, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Eclipse OMR


Hello, Raguks. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Eclipse OMR".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:53, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

April 2022
Hello, I'm Chiswick Chap. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Pranayama, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ''Hi, I see you were cautioned about adding uncited materials a while back. Please note that verifiability is a core element of Wikipedia - we simply could not have a global encyclopedia without verifiable sources in our articles. You are welcome to contribute to WikiProject Yoga, but note that we insist on citing Reliable Sources for all additions. Many thanks.'' Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:06, 27 April 2022 (UTC) Yogasutra is the most ancient text on the Yoga. Verse 2.49 is clearly cited in that reference. Even the original verse tansliteration is provided. Removing it as the source is not reliable shows ulterior motive behind it. ~rAGU (talk)


 * Um, no. It's one of many texts on yoga, certainly an ancient one, but with its own particular point of view quite unlike most of the other texts, as it happens. It's fine to cite that verse, but that is far from the whole story - indeed, most of the pranayama practised today is nothing like the YS's simple and ancient view - much of what people do now is modern, and most of the rest is medieval, a thousand years or more later than the YS. Accusing me of "ulterior motive" is completely without foundation - I've certainly no idea what you might imagine my motivation to be, and do not think it a proper subject of discussion. But I'm happy to tell you I have no motive other than structuring and documenting the article properly. The YS is covered in detail further down the article already at Pranayama (a whole section all to itself), so nobody is trying to suppress anything from that source or any other, we are treating all the sources according to their merits.


 * I see you are starting to edit-war against consensus. That will only get you blocked, perhaps permanently. I do advise you to stop at once, breathe please, and think what you are doing. It's wholly inappropriate and unconstructive. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:19, 28 April 2022 (UTC)