User talk:Shehanw/Archive 1

Image copyright problem with Image:Ananda_maitreya_thero.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ananda_maitreya_thero.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 07:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Madihe_Pannasiha_thero.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Madihe_Pannasiha_thero.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, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:13, 28 March 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey (talk) 22:13, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Walisinghe Harischandra.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Walisinghe Harischandra.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, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 13:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Madihe Pannasiha thero.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Madihe Pannasiha thero.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, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 13:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problems with File:Walisinghe Harischandra.JPG
Hello. Concerning your contribution, File:Walisinghe Harischandra.JPG, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). As a copyright violation, File:Walisinghe Harischandra.JPG appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. File:Walisinghe Harischandra.JPG has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at and send an email with the message to . See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Chanaka L ( talk ) 04:52, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Page moves
Please see this policy page for more information. We typically do not include titles in the names of articles, unless those are the common names by which they are widely known. Very few exceptions to this rule exist, and popes are one of those (in part because their papal name is not their given name). If you feel this policy should be changed, you can start on that policy talk page, but in general we should not be including people's titles, religious or otherwise, in the names of articles. (ESkog)(Talk) 13:59, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, you're right - it looks like I was following a policy which does not appear to be actually used in practice. We need to address that discrepancy, but in the meantime, feel free to move the pages back to your preferred titles. (ESkog)(Talk) 11:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Religion and Sexuality
Sir: I reverted your recent edits to the Religion and Sexuality primarily because the changes you made seemed to flip the viewpoint entirely.

You took out the lead paragraph explaining that Buddhism does not go into details about what is right or wrong about sexual matters. You said that Buddhism defines sexual misconduct as a list of things. I believe that some sect of Buddhism may consider those things to be sexual misconduct. But that does not represent all of Buddhism. Also, as some religions are authoritarian, and strive to control their adherents, and with Buddhism it is a personal matter, some of those things are not true. For instance extramarital sex and premarital sex are absolutely not inherently regarded as sexual misconduct. They both could be misconduct for some people under some circumstances, and not misconduct for other people under other circumstances.

The comments about sex being one of the downfalls that could end a monks or nuns career could perhaps be true in some places, but even if it were wider than your sect, are more detail than needed in the section of that article. It is the kind of thing that would be appropriate in detail in an article about Buddhist Monasticism perhaps.

Some of the changes you made seemed good, and maybe we should put those int. I did not want to revert in bits and pieces though. The comments that chastity is seen as necessary to reach enlightenment could be good. Although I would prefer to not use the term chastity, as that has different connotations in other religions (For instance in Catholicism, one can have sex with a spouse, and yet still be chaste.) Really the point is that giving up attachments to sensual pleasure is necessary to reach enlightenment (in the teachings).

Important to remain in the article is "In fact, Buddhism in its fundamental form, does not define what is right and what is wrong in absolute terms for lay followers. Therefore the interpretation of what kinds of sexual activity is acceptable for a layperson, is not a religious matter as far as Buddhism is concerned." It is important that people understand that lay people (the bulk of Buddhists) do not have the same rules as monks and nuns.

I think the last sentence, " Even for a Buddhist layperson, excessive focus on sexual pleasure by any means can be said to be not following the middle path, which leads to the Nirvana in Buddhism." would be valuable.

Regards, Atom (talk) 14:00, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I started following the page because of my potential conversion to Buddhism. I've done some reading from cross traditions and asked some of the Sanga in the local temples.  What was added seems to jibe with what the local monks said especially on rape.  I've seen many different interpretations and the paragraph could become it's own article to discuss all the interpretations.  One of the books I have says misconduct is to have sex with a woman under the protection/care of another person.  That would mean she is a child, married, mentally incompetent, engaged, an elder woman under care of children, etc.  It was the one 'golden' rule that could encompass many traditions.  I'll have to look for the book.  What is acceptable seems more rooted in non-Buddhist traditions of each community.  This sentence: " Even for a Buddhist layperson, excessive focus on sexual pleasure by any means can be said to be not following the middle path, which leads to the Nirvana in Buddhism." I believe can be easily sourced from some notable source.  I heard something like that from the Vietnamese Sanga.  Alatari (talk) 04:06, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * These are supposed to be explicit comments from the Suttas attributed to Gautama Buddha:
 * "One conducts oneself wrongly in matters of sex; one has intercourse with those under the protection of father, mother, brother, sister, relatives or clan, or of their religious community; or with those promised to someone else, protected by law, and even with those betrothed with a garland" (Book of Tens, Anguttara Nikaya, X, 206).


 * "Abandoning sexual misconduct, one abstains from sexual misconduct; he does not have intercourse with women who are protected by their mother, father, mother and father, brother, sister, or relatives, who have a husband, who are protected by law, or with those already engaged" (See Bhikkhu Bodhi translation, In the Buddha's Words, p. 159, based on MN41; Saleyyaka Sutra; I 286-90).


 * So the statement that Buddhism has nothing explicit to say on the matter is incorrect. Alatari (talk) 04:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Brahmachari Walisinghe Harischandra
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Brahmachari Walisinghe Harischandra, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://sundaytimes.lk/070916/FunDay/heritage.html and http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2009/09/20/imp04.asp, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under allowance license, then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Brahmachari Walisinghe Harischandra and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Brahmachari Walisinghe Harischandra, in your email. See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Brahmachari Walisinghe Harischandra with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Brahmachari Walisinghe Harischandra. See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:Brahmachari Walisinghe Harischandra saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! VernoWhitney (talk) 21:15, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Brahmachari Walisinghe Harischandra
The copyright problem template has been restored to this article, and it has been protected to prevent its being removed out of process again. The template contains directions for addressing the problem; the notice you were given above contains directions as well. The template itself says, "Do not edit this page until an administrator or an OTRS agent has resolved this issue."

I appreciate that you are working on rewriting the content. Please do so in the temporary space as proposed, as the rewrite will itself need to be evaluated by an administrator (either me or another administrator who works copyright problems on Wikipedia). Please note, though, that you will need to rewrite the problematic text completely. I see that you proposed the following text:

The corresponding passage in the source says:

While you have changed the second part of the first sentence, it is only superficially altered through the words "gradually began". The second sentence is identical.

You proposed this text:

The corresponding passage in this source says:

The first sentence is identical. The second sentence is an unusably close paraphrase.

These are merely examples of continuing problems. I have not closely evaluated the entire proposed rewrite, but simply reviewed enough to ascertain that it was not complete.

Wikipedia is bound to comply with the copyright laws of the United States, in which country we are founded and based. While facts are not copyrightable, creative elements of presentation - including both structure and language - are. The essay Close paraphrasing contains some suggestions for rewriting that may help avoid these issues. The article Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches, while about plagiarism rather than copyright concerns, also contains some suggestions for reusing material from sources that may be helpful, beginning under "Avoiding plagiarism".

Alternatively, if the material can be verified to be public domain or permission is provided, we can use the original text with proper attribution.

Please let me know if you have questions about this. I will be watching your talk page for a time. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:19, 1 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Using copyrighted material, as long as it is cited and quoted may be done in small quantities. To remain within Fair Use, the quotes should be small in proportion to the whole copyrighted work.  Also, the quote should not impact the capability of the copyright owner to exploit its value.  In the specific case used above, some (small) part of the content from the copyrighted work can be used, if quoted, and with attribution.  Give the nature of the source, perhaps a sentence or two, but not the entire biography, IMO.


 * From the Wikipedia policy, Fair_use: "Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea. Copyrighted text that is used verbatim must be attributed with quotation marks or other standard notation, such as block quotes. Any alterations must be clearly marked, i.e. [brackets] for added text, an ellipsis (...) for removed text, and emphasis noted after the quotation as "(emphasis added)" or "(emphasis in the original)". Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited."Atom (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I believe commonsense should be used in these type of situations.The last edition of the article Brahmachari Walisinghe Harischandra is far away from a copy right violation and it is within the Fair_use.Anyway i am not going to edit that article any more because I have wasted (if it is going to be deleted) too much of time on developing it.

@ Atom:Thanks for your Information.

Shehanw (talk) 13:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Buddhist terrorism
An article that you have been involved in editing, Buddhist terrorism, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Cossde (talk) 12:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for nominating the article Buddhist terrorism for deletion. I will make my comments at Articles for deletion/. Also thanks for contacting me. --Shehanw (talk) 13:19, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Kataragama town
I see that you have a point, so I am working on developing an article User:Kanatonian/Kataragama that is strictly related to the Town aspect of Kataragama using RS sources. I more than welcome you to participate in that effort. Thanks Kanatonian (talk) 22:09, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it is better to develop the existing Kataragama article (to avoid Content forking) rather than creating a new one. I can participate in that effort when time permits me. In your new Kataragama temple article there are few places which should be changed in my point of view. For an example, although Buddhists do not practice body piercing, article states Buddhists took over that ritual from the Hindus. You have also ignored the Theosophical views on Kataragama temple in the new article. The Date built is also controversial. Creating new articles when there are existing articles with same topics, violates the Neutral point of view and leads to edit wars. Thanks.--Shehanw (talk) 05:19, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think you were correct in saying there are two articles, one about the town that has an ancient and independent history and about the temple that seems to be according to RS sources a medieval introduction. I.E it is not a historically attested temple to a deity but only in the last 600 years. What we have to differentiate is, between legend and factual history as interpreted by historians. That's why I have legend section and history section. About body piercing, I even saw youtube vides about body piercing by non Hindus but if it is not supported by the RS sources, I will remove it. About the Theophysist interpretation, who are they Buddhist or Hindus ? Are they postulating another legend about Skanda ? If so if we have RS sources let's add it under correct religious sub section unless they are a group by themselves?  Also about the town, I cant find RS sources about education (number of schools), hospitals, even population from statistics Sri Lanka. Do you have any sources ? Kanatonian (talk) 16:38, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Kataragama has a total population of around 21,000. All the other important information can be taken from that web site, which is a reliable government source.. Read the two articles Theosophy and Sanat Kumara to get an idea about theosophical view on Kataragama temple. Theosophists are neither Buddhists nor Hindus and they believe that "all the religions have a portion of the truth". Theosophists identify Sanat Kumara with God Kataragama.  -- Shehanw (talk) 10:43, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I will add that as well also Paul Younger says Sinhalese try Hook hanging as well but still the majority are Tamils Kanatonian (talk) 13:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I am looking for RS sources to add information about Sanat Kumara at Kataragama, couldnt easily locate within the articles becuase the section about Sanat Kumara and Kataragama are uncited. Do you have any RS sources ? Kanatonian (talk) 13:58, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, unfortunately those sections are not cited. It is bit difficult to find reliable sources in this regard, but these two articles might be helpful to you.. --Shehanw (talk) 14:26, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Sri Lanka
This edit wasn't constructive; so if you're so interested in the topic, come join the discussion! I'm watching your talkpage, so please reply here or on the article's talkpage. Thanks...   ~ AdvertAdam   talk  08:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


 * This edit wasn't constructive; but it was reverting material, which violates Neutral point of view. What is the point in discussing, after you have re added the controversial section again? Sri Lanka have a history of over thousands of years and according to you & User:HudsonBreeze, Alleged War Crimes are a prominent part of Sri Lankan history? This article is about Sri Lanka and not about it's civil war.  Non of the Sri Lankan wikipedians have agreed to add these allegations to the article, but you have forcibly added them and now invites me to discuss it? Neither of you are admins here but others have to accept your POV first and then have to discuss to make changes. Is it the correct way of doing it? It seems like you and User:HudsonBreeze have made a conclusion that NPOV is Western POV? Is there a different standard for editing main page of Sri Lanka, because it is not a close ally of USA? If that is the situation, then it is better for Sri Lankan wikipedians to retire form Wikipedia. -- Shehanw (talk) 13:04, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * What kind of policies are you following, sir? What does all this have to do with nationalities/ethics? Wikipedia is not WP:CENSORED, and it's none-of-my-business what Sri Lankans think. Sri Lanka is an official government and the article had a "civil war" section, therefore it's our duty to represent whatever reliable sources say. If you object considering the claims are fake, then bring sources that say so and add it there. If you don't want to discuss it, then don't edit the article (See WP:BRD)     ~ AdvertAdam   talk  04:55, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh, and btw, admins are normal editors with administrative roles (within guidelines). Within a discussion/dispute, they're not allowed to use or propagate their administrative rights/tools. When they do, they loose their tools. Therefore, there's no difference between an admin and a newcorner, as-long-as they're following policies. Just a hint!     ~ AdvertAdam   talk  06:44, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * All the policies, reliable sources and rules are in Wikipedia, when you and your wikifriends want to attack Sri Lankan government and it's army for rescuing innocent Tamils from the Human Shield of Tamil tiger terrorists. But surprisingly you are not interested about the deaths of millions of Iraqis, Afghans and Libyans. It is clear that you want to hide Western Democratic Brutalities to the Muslims by making false allegations against the Sri Lankan government, who rescued thousands of innocent Tamil civilians from the Human Shield of tiger terrorists. If it is your duty to represent whatever reliable sources say, then why don't you make edits about the killing fields in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya? Wikipedia is not CENSORED for the main page of Sri Lanka, but it is CENSORED for the main page of USA. Why Double Standards ?
 * And about the Admins: Administrators are users trusted with access to certain tools on the English Wikipedia. They are expected to observe a high standard of conduct, to use the tools fairly, and never to use them to gain advantage in a dispute. In these kind of situations, administrator rights can be particularly helpful. That's why I mentioned that you and your friend User:HudsonBreeze are not admins in English Wikipedia. --Shehanw (talk) 15:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I don't see the above helpful. If you have time to revert, then it's your duty to read the discussion; otherwise, your revert is considered disruptive. Can youWP:AGF and be WP:CIVIL if you want to work a solution out. If you ever read the discussion, you'll see that I've only joined to cool the edit-warring then leave. Stop your accusations and look at this, for example. Something I've fully added myself. I haven't added a single word on Sri Lanka, but trying to be fair between the two sides. I gave them till the 18th to bring sources and make it neutral, then I'll revert everything (as I know it won't work-out). I do mean almost everything. You haven't seen that I've been against whom you calledmyfriends many times. I just follow policies here buddy: I don't edit the US article, neither do you! And yes, admin tools are for blocks and deletions, etc, and certainly not a higher authority in discussion.     ~ AdvertAdam   talk  16:55, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Ananda_maitreya_thero.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Ananda_maitreya_thero.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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sreejith K (talk) 15:39, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Galle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Institute of Business Management (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:41, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Balangoda Ananda Maitreya Thero's Wiki Page
Hii Shehanw :) Balangoda Thero was a close intimate of our family,hence we know how people used to Respect him and thought about him,As a kid I could remember how people addressed him,even in the papers and books hie used that term s name was written with the prefix of "Bodhisattva Gunopitha",Agga Maha Pandit is Just of the many Titles given to Most.Ven by a Buddhist Body.In contrast "Bodhisattva Gunopitha" is a Title given by a Whole Nation in Respect of his Dharmic lifestyle and Sasanic service.To the best of my knowledge and belief "Bodhisattva Gunopitha" is the highest title he acquired from the people while he was living.Now I will UNDO your edit back to my revision,However If you still think I am wrong you can Proceed and Reedit it.Thanks :) May the Blessings of the Noble Triple Gem Be Always with you !!! -- MediaJet     talk   05:10, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello MediaJet,
 * Sorry, I can't agree with u here as the Sinhalese adjective u have used here is not commonly used one any where else in books or media articles about ven. Nayaka thero. Your family and friends may have been close to ven. Thero and sometimes u may have used that term to respect him. But in Wikipedia you need to verify your claims with RS. I have edited this page over the years and went through many books and articles about ven. thero many times before my edits. The honorific I have used is the most commonly used one in many texts. Ven Thero also received a higher title named Abhi Dhaja Maha Rattaguru, but it doesn't appear in sources or media as much as the one I have used here. The source you have used has not mentioned about the term Bodhisattva Gunopitha in it, but says "Sri Lankan Buddhists widely considered him as a Bodhisattva." hence it is not the appropriate source to verify your claim.
 * Thanks.
 * Happy editing !

Shehanw (talk) 06:34, 16 February 2014 (UTC) Very well,I understand you :),Yes its hard to see the prefix used in Present papers,Its out of use like,However it was used specially in the paper articles sometime back.and our families regarded him as a Bodhisatva,Keep up your Good Work :) -- MediaJet     talk   08:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I will. You keep up your good work, too :), Cheers. --Shehanw (talk) 08:58, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

සුභ නව වසරක් වේවා !!!
තිසරණ ආශිර්වාදයෙන්,තිස් තුන් කොටියක් දෙවි දෙවතුන් වහන්සේලාගේ ආනුභාවයෙන් ආරක්ෂාවෙන්,වා,පිත්,සෙම් සමනය වි,කරන සියළු කටයුතු සාර්ථක වි,බත බුලතින් සරු සුභ නව වසරක් වේවා !!! -- MediaJet     talk   05:06, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I wish you the same. ඔබටත් එසේම වේවා ! -- Shehanw (talk) 03:38, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hikkaduwe Sri Sumangala Thero, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sri Lankan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:55, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kataragama deviyo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tamil (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:56, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pattini devi.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Pattini devi.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:01, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Pattini devi.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Pattini devi.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 17:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 1 September
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * On the List of people assassinated by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=623670655 your edit] caused a URL error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F623670655%7CList of people assassinated by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam%5D%5D Ask for help])

Disambiguation link notification for September 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mahatma Gandhi's visit to Ceylon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hatton. 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) 09:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Aluthwewa Soratha Nayaka Thera
A tag has been placed on Aluthwewa Soratha Nayaka Thera, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page, or a redirect loop.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Dl2000 (talk) 21:20, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Galle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page All Saints' Church. 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) 09:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Goddess Pattini.jpeg
 Thanks for uploading File:Goddess Pattini.jpeg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 15:34, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Goddess Pattini.jpeg
 Thanks for uploading File:Goddess Pattini.jpeg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:59, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Goddess Pattini.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Goddess Pattini.jpeg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:23, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kataragama deviyo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vedda. 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) 09:40, 27 December 2014 (UTC)