User talk:Ravichandar84/Archive 12

{| cellpadding="10" cellspacing="8" style="background-color: red; border: 1px solid red;; vertical-align: top;"
 * colspan="2" style="padding: 0;" |
 * style="width: 68%; background-color: #EFF8FF; border: 1px solid #8888aa; border-right-width:4px; border-bottom-width:4px; vertical-align: top;" rowspan="3" |
 * style="width: 68%; background-color: #EFF8FF; border: 1px solid #8888aa; border-right-width:4px; border-bottom-width:4px; vertical-align: top;" rowspan="3" |

Arcot RM
I dont but I did a google book search. Need to hit a library with what y=uou need.Taprobanus (talk) 17:07, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for T. M. Nair

 * No problem :) Gatoclass (talk) 08:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:MKT Films
Template:MKT Films has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 18:47, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Madras Presidency
Fowler&amp;fowler «Talk»  09:16, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:Syrian Christian bride 1909.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Syrian Christian bride 1909.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. --  Tinu  Cherian  - 18:35, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I left a templated note for u so that you may add the missing author parameter on the image page. Please see the image page --  Tinu  Cherian  - 18:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Pradani Muthirulappa Pillai
Hi. The article above was previously listed for investigation for copyright concerns in December of 2007, and a source was not located. If you are able to locate a source for this, please relist your copyright concern. Otherwise, please consider placing Template:Cv-unsure on the article's talk page. This will advise other editors that the article may be a problem. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:13, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Manjampatti White Bison and Kukkal

 * ... that a rare Manjampatti White Bison and Indian Tiger pugmarks were recently seen near Kukkal village in Tamil Nadu state, South India? -- new article, self nom by Marcus (talk) 05:35, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * link new article 'Manjampatti White Bison' = two new articles in one hook Marcus (talk) 04:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * ... that the hills about Kukkal in Tamil Nadu, India are famous for the Manjampatti White Bison?- created by User:Marcus334 and nom by - Ravichandar My coffee shop 18:24, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * This rewrite is incorrect. Originial hook is correct as it stands. See hidden text in refs Notes 8 and 9 at Kukkal. Marcus (talk) 16:01, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Nowhere is it said that Kukkal is famous for Manjampatti White Bison. Marcus (talk) 16:20, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I am sorry. I didn't see that you've already nominated it.- Ravichandar My coffee shop 04:47, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Youtube
Hi. YouTube videos of actual film is certainly not spam, they had a further encyclopedic element which cannot be displayed on wikipedia. However there has been considerable debate over whether to link to it for copyrighted film clips as we don't want to be seen as encouraging it. I believe your 1937 is in the public domain, therefore is easily acceptable to be linked to Count Blofeld  11:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Anything pre 1948 in India is public domain see Template:PD-India. It would even be possible to actually upload the film to wiki as it is public domain. Count Blofeld  10:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

A teeny weeny confusion
Hello Sir Ravichandar (just noticed that you prefer to be address as Sir :D)! As you may be aware, I am interested in getting the Dravidian parties entry cleaned up. I am finding it hard to get the conection between Self-respect movement and DPs. DK was born directly from Justice party, whereas Self-respect movement was started by EVR even before he joined the Justice party. If we go by Cho and Viswanathan we can conclude that DPs are offsprings of DK and Self-respect movement. Do we then conclude that DK (and hence DMK, ADMK etc.) are children of marriage between Self-respect movement and Justice party, rather than a continuum? So is EVR the link? Wiki San Roze†αLҝ 12:18, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks mate. BTW about the 1952 Justice party: did it contest under the name Justice party or S.I.L.F? Did the the old Justice party contest under the name SILF or Justice party itself? This is quite a surprise to see a remenant JP till 1952, since if my memory serves right, even Hardgrage and Forester state that JP was renamed DK. Oh dear, my teeny weeny confusion is now getting too big for my teeny weeny head. Wiki San Roze†αLҝ 13:44, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thats a pretty good information. Would this mean JP and DMK fought elections against or with each other at one point? Thats kinda weird!! Wiki San Roze<i style="color:green;">†αLҝ</i> 00:15, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Sesame Oil
"Why does this article belong to WP:INTN"

because I believe Tamil Nadu produces maximum sesame oil in India (not sesame seeds but sesame oil). But I have no problems if you want to make it general to all India groups. J mareeswaran (talk) 14:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I have found the following link which says that Kerala (consumer for Oil Massage?) and Tamil Nadu (Producer from oil mill?) are the 2 states which trade the most in sesame oil. They are not the biggest cultivators of sesame seed. Tamil Nadu is significant producer of sesame oil but you are unlikely to see a picture of oil mill in Tamil Nadu. —Preceding unsigned comment added by J mareeswaran (talk • contribs) 14:43, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Seshayya Sastri
good work. Thanks.  Docku:  What up?  03:37, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The Hollow Crown: Ethnohistory of an Indian Kingdom by Nicholas B. Dirks is a great book on Pudukkottai kingdom.  Docku:  What up?  05:59, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Pearling crew 1926.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:Pearling crew 1926.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. J Milburn (talk) 15:11, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:Pearling crew 1926.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:Pearling crew 1926.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 15:32, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Please do not just add any old generic rationale- doing so is counter-productive and extremely damaging to the project. J Milburn (talk) 15:33, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:Pearling crew 1926.JPG listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Pearling crew 1926.JPG, has been listed at Images and media 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. J Milburn (talk) 16:07, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. J Milburn (talk) 16:10, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I have nothing personal against you; have we even met before? I disagree that the fair use rationale is valid (and the first one certainly wasn't) but, if it is, it will survive the IfD nomination anyway. The article still needs a lot of work before it will be ready for a FA nomination- a lot of the images are missing sources, and some of them may not be free for our purposes. I have already removed one, and nominated two others for deletion- the image issues will need to be completely resolved before the article can be promoted. J Milburn (talk) 16:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I have no desire to do that; don't be so immature. I have deleted the image that you requested was deleted, and I reccomend that you review each of the others in turn before nominating the article for featured status. J Milburn (talk) 16:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If you didn't wish to speak of it any more, you would not have messaged me. I will tag images that do not meet our strict policies, end of story. There's no question of assuming good faith and assuming bad faith- just images that do meet our guidelines, and images that don't. I haven't blocked you, I haven't warned you, I haven't accused you of anything- I have just notified you that images you uploaded were tagged for deletion. J Milburn (talk) 19:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * There are bots, yes, but people are needed to do most of the work- a bot wouldn't have seen the issue with that image. It's not just a matter of ticking boxes- as I see it (and my working knowledge of the image policies is very good) that image did not fit into that article, as the article was then. If you disagreed with the deletion of the image, you were welcome to discuss it on the deletion debate- I didn't delete it outright, which I could have done, I allowed several days for discussion. Of course you're welcome to discuss it with me on my talk page- what gives you the idea that you aren't? J Milburn (talk) 20:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, can you please realise that I have nothing against you? I realise that you are a long time and valued contributor (I can see that from the articles you have written) and I do not feel in any way that you should be punished or that you have done anything wrong- I just nominated an image you uploaded for deletion. This is very routine, it happens all the time. J Milburn (talk) 20:06, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Iyer
Hi Ravichandar,

With regards to your post, I have no issues as long as the gist of the edit is preserved. You can truncate it if you like and btw I hope you change your mind on continuing to contribute maybe after a break. Cheers, ShivNarayanan (talk) 23:00, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * }