User talk:MRRaja001/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:MRRaja001. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Recent AfD nomination
It looks like you were trying to nominate an article for deletion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M. Santhi Ramudu, but actually used the template for closing a discussion, so your intentions are unclear. What were you trying to do? Bakazaka (talk) 23:14, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
- Please nominate the article for deletion. My intension is to delete the article only. MRRaja001 (talk) 8:22, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
- Pppery took care of it for you. Bakazaka (talk) 08:44, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Telugu Brahmin
- It appears that this edit consists of an unexplained revert of what appears to be an unobjectionable edit that cites WP:ISAWORDFOR, specifically:
Replace these cumbersome phrasings ("is a term for", "is a word that means", "refers to") with the more-direct "is"...
Was your revert an accident or do you have a reason for it? — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 15:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- I reverted and wrote it back because like in Maharashtra there are many brahmins in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana who migrated and settled here several centuries back and still speaking Marathi and Kannada, even Tamil Brahmins are predominantly found here. They all come under Telugu Brahmin Category, even though Telugu is not their mother tongue they still say that they are Telugu Brahmins. There are many Madhwa Brahmins too in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana who speak Kannada at their home and Telugu with outside people. So it's better if we mention Native of rather than who speaks Telugu just like in Maharashtrian Brahmin page.MRRaja001 (talk) 15:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, I understand that as a rationale for this edit that you made subsequent to your revert (and provided an edit summary for that explains the rationale). But in this edit, you restored the phrasing "term used to describe" that I had removed without explaining why you restored it. Do you have an explanation for this? Was it a mistake? — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 16:09, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- I reverted to maintain Wiki standards since Maharashtrian Brahmin was also written in the same way and was accepted by many administrators. MRRaja001 (talk) 16:30, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- I see. Editing for consistency makes sense, but in this case, it would seem that both articles have poor wording, per WP:ISAWORDFOR. I'll go ahead and remove the phrasing from both articles. — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 16:43, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah! Sure. MRRaja001 (talk) 16:49, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Great! I'm glad we could figure this out. :) — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 16:51, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah! Sure. MRRaja001 (talk) 16:49, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- I see. Editing for consistency makes sense, but in this case, it would seem that both articles have poor wording, per WP:ISAWORDFOR. I'll go ahead and remove the phrasing from both articles. — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 16:43, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- I reverted to maintain Wiki standards since Maharashtrian Brahmin was also written in the same way and was accepted by many administrators. MRRaja001 (talk) 16:30, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, I understand that as a rationale for this edit that you made subsequent to your revert (and provided an edit summary for that explains the rationale). But in this edit, you restored the phrasing "term used to describe" that I had removed without explaining why you restored it. Do you have an explanation for this? Was it a mistake? — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 16:09, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- I reverted and wrote it back because like in Maharashtra there are many brahmins in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana who migrated and settled here several centuries back and still speaking Marathi and Kannada, even Tamil Brahmins are predominantly found here. They all come under Telugu Brahmin Category, even though Telugu is not their mother tongue they still say that they are Telugu Brahmins. There are many Madhwa Brahmins too in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana who speak Kannada at their home and Telugu with outside people. So it's better if we mention Native of rather than who speaks Telugu just like in Maharashtrian Brahmin page.MRRaja001 (talk) 15:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Dvaita articles
- Hi MRRaja001, You bringing up matha politics at every Dvaita article is problematic. It compromises the neutrality of the articles. Uttaradi Matha came into being at the time Vibhudendra Tirtha. Please leave the internal politics and your bias out of the articles. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 10:42, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, I don't mean to do that. I'll be neutral. (MRRaja001) 11:21, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- But Uttaradi Matha came into being at the time of Vidyadhiraja Tirtha, not Vibhudendra Tirtha MRRaja001 (talk) 11:29, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- There was a controversy regarding the succession after Ramachandra Tirtha's demise as to who will take the pontifical seat (between Vidyanidhi Tirtha and Vibhudendra Tirtha). And hence the mathas split from then on. Vidyadhiraja is the progenitor of the Vyasaraja matha not Uttaradi matha. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 12:45, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- That was the reason why Kumbakonam Matha was formed after Ramachandra Tirtha not Uttaradi Matha. After Vidyadhiraja Tirtha his successor was Kavindra Tirtha for Uttaradi Matha and Rajendra Tirtha for Vyasaraja Matha Let's leave these, I'll be neutral, Thanks. MRRaja001 (talk) 12:36, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
- There was a controversy regarding the succession after Ramachandra Tirtha's demise as to who will take the pontifical seat (between Vidyanidhi Tirtha and Vibhudendra Tirtha). And hence the mathas split from then on. Vidyadhiraja is the progenitor of the Vyasaraja matha not Uttaradi matha. Prabhanjan Mutalik (talk) 12:45, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- But Uttaradi Matha came into being at the time of Vidyadhiraja Tirtha, not Vibhudendra Tirtha MRRaja001 (talk) 11:29, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |