User talk:Sarvagnya/Archive 9

Stop posting threatening messages on my talk page

Excuse me, but what authority do you have to tell what WikiProject I should or should not form? Who do you think you are? Approval from what community? Is Wikipedia privately owned by you. As for personal attacks, I have not attacked you. It isthe other the other way around. I do not attack people on the basis of the race, ethnicity, religion, nationality, or creed. Not once have I mentioned anything about such. However, in regards to you, you have blatantly accused me of a number of things which I have not done. You have called me names, and worse, you have condemned a whole ethnic group. What do you have to say about that? Lastly, do not come to my talk page with such threats. This is not a warning from you, but threat. Using all capital letters in a message equates to yelling. Therefore, let me remind to stop threatening and harrassing me. I have spoken to you with respect in the previous posts. In return you have posted abusive messages directed at me and my ethnicity. Your messages only spew hate. Wiki Raja 05:03, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I am not threatening you. I am only warning you that you are in violation of some rules of wikipedia. For example, your edit summaries which say, "rv vandalism" implies that I am a vandal or that I have vandalised a page. The fact of the matter, however is that it is only a content dispute. You have called me a vandal in your edit summaries a few times already, but this is the first time I've warned you. As for your accusation that I've called you names, insulted your 'community' etc., I can only say that you're letting your imagination run wild. btw, if you dont want me to come to your page and post WP warning templates, just stop giving me reasons to do so. Thanks. Sarvagnya 05:35, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I do not understand. What reasons are you talking about? You are restricting my freedom on Wikipedia. Are you an admin? Wiki Raja 05:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I am not restricting your freedom. I am not an admin. We all only enjoy as much 'freedom' as the WP rules and guidelines allow us. As per WP rules, you calling me a vandal or accusing me of vandalism when I have not vandalised is incivila and a personal attack. Thats all. thanks. Sarvagnya 06:03, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

RE:Your images

I see that you've uploaded dozens of images to wikipedia. While you have very graciously released it on 'GFDL', you say nothing about where you got the pics from. I mean did you click them/draw them yourself or did you beg, borrow or steal from somewhere. Please update your image with proper info about source or all of them may get deleted. Sarvagnya 00:56, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Please stop with the demeaning insults. Wiki Raja 01:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Stop crying and add proper sources to your images and prove to us that you didnt steal. btw, cpvio is stealing. Sarvagnya 01:07, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Stop harassing me on my talk page. You are giving me a hard tims is because of the issue you have created in regards to the Dravidian Topics template page, and the fact that I have passed all the tests you have put me through. This reminds me of the story of the 12 Labors of Hercules. Wiki Raja 01:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Your behaviour

With regard to the complaints at WP:AN/I, it's clear from just a quick look at the evidence that they're not unfounded. Please moderate your behaviour; while those with whom you're in conflict might well be being pushed into a slight overreaction, the fact remains that you have been behaving badly. I'll examine the evidence more carefully before I take further action. If you'd like to preempt that by changing your conduct, both on articles and on Talk pages, that would be beneficial all round. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 09:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

By all means, take a closer look at the diffs and come back. I will answer your questions. That is what I've said on ANI too. As far as I am concerned, Wikiraja's reactions are not 'slight overreactions' but but border on the insane. For example, his conspiracy theories connecting me to a certain ARYAN818 is so funny, I could die laughing. For heaven's sake, I dont/didnt even know that there was a user called ARYAN818, least of all that he got blocked!! And his charge that I am a 'block evading sockpuppet' is so blatantly false that I am not sure why you admins are even entertaining his troll. Thanks. Sarvagnya 16:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't have to look at diffs to see that your behaviour has been bad; I simply have to look further up this page. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

• "Look further up this page..." - I dont know what you're talking about. All I know is that most talk pages on WP dont make any sense unless you know the context. And I dont think you know the context of most(if any) of my correspondences. And you shouldnt be trying to come to conclusions without even knowing the context. Like I've said on ANI, if you have any concerns regarding any diff, ask me. Otherwise, we would only be talking past each other coz.... I've done a fair bit of fighting POV on Wikipedia and naturally there are a few like Wikiraja who're understandably upset with me. But I cannot be held responsible for their angst. Sarvagnya 23:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, but what is this? Can an administrator, knowing that an account is a sockpuppet account allow it to be open? Or do certain users have special rights? So even after the administrator Dmcdevit on 12 November 2006 allowed you to carry on with sockpuppetry on the condition that you would not use the both accounts to edit a same page, you went ahead and used both Sarvagnya and Gnanapiti sockpuppet accounts to conduct a vote fraud on 9 February 2007 here in which one user got kicked out of Wikipedia because of this vote outcome. Oh, by the way, sorry I forgot to add on the administrative incident noticeboard this. I didn't know you were blocked in the past for fighting with another user. Also, you have been warned of violating the 3RR on 28 August 2006 in regards to a WP:3RR and warned here again on 17 October 2006 in regards to another 3RR. Then you finally received a 12 hour block on the same day for violating the 3RR on 17 October 2006 here. Even after the warnings and block for 3RR you continued with your chronic reversions which resulted in a warning to you on 29 October 2006 here Wiki Raja 07:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Leaving aside sock-puppetry accusations, which I can't look into at the moment, you are clearly guilty of serious incivility (I note that you've now gone back and struck out some of your abusive coments, though not all, which gives the lie to your claim that you don't know what I'm talking about). --Mel Etitis (Talk) 08:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikiraja, consider this as a warning. If you continue accusing sockpuppetry against me without any proof, I'm going to report against you to admins. Admins certainly know more than you, who to block and who to unblock. So stop your baseless claims. Gnanapiti 15:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

• Mel - I am not Adam Sandler and Wikipedia is no course in Anger management. You just dont irritate another editor for the heck of it and expect a civil response all the time. What Wikiraja is doing is almost like a child throwing tantrums once he's caught on the wrong foot. I caught him on the wrong foot both on the template issue and his copyvios of images. And now, he's just blowing his top. And like I've said, I dont see any reason to grin and bear it.
• Civility cannot be at the cost of harming the project. Both his template and his copyvios, 'harm' the project, so to speak. With the templates, I was very civil to start with([1], but once I saw that he would neither listen to reason nor stop tagging dozens and dozens of articles with that silly box, I lost my cool(this was after I had explained to him my stance on several talk pages like Template_talk:Dravidian topics, Talk:Dravidian people, Talk:Yakshagana, Talk:Carnatic music etc.,. You are free to go and check for yourself. And if you're talking about my message to him about his copyvios(dozens of them), I didnt 'go back and strike off' after you pinged me, but I did that minutes after I posted it. And in any case, I dont regret having written that coz., like I said WP is not a test of Anger management. Wikiraja seems to think that it is.
• And these sockpuppetry accusations, are ceasing to be funny anymore. I've already explained that there's been no socking, admin Blnguyen has explained on ANI, even my rfcu page explains it(and WR knows it) and yet he's continuing to spew nonsense. If there's been anybody who's been guilty of breaking rules on Wiki, its Wikiraja. Not me. Thanks. Sarvagnya 16:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Dear sarvajna avare,

what prompted you to delete my posts on History of Kaveri Dispute ?

Though i have added it back, i would like to know whether you have a valid reason ?

with regards

raja

Re: Archive please

Thanks for reminding. It had been pending since sometime, and I was lazy enough to postpone it everytime when I thought about it. :) Just archived the first 50 sections to an archive page. Thank you! - KNM ^Talk 08:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Vamsha

I will take a second look at the book today to correctly understand whether the author meant race or geneology. He may have meant Geneology.Dineshkannambadi 14:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I did not understand this part of your message. "Hi Dinesh, looks like you're working on OoR right now. I actually have left this section blank with an {expand} note. You may have noticed that I removed some info from the lead which I meant to move to this section. If you can bring that info that I removed into this section and add a few more lines, it will be good"

Did you mean move the section called "language of the Rashtrakutas" into the section that says "Early Rashtrakutas and Rash..of Manya.."Dineshkannambadi 02:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The tribes during the time of Ashoka were not called Rashtrakutas. Nobody knows what they called themselves or even if they existed. Historians have tried to connect the "Rashtrikas" in Ahokna inscriptions to the term "Ratta" and "Rashtrakuta" from the 6th century onwards. Nowhere have I read of Rashtrakutas before 6th century. This is why I said "proposed ancestors of the Rashtrakutas" without giving them the "name= rashtrakutas".Dineshkannambadi 01:47, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

regarding the Vamsha, You are right. The author uses the word lineage not race. So your geneology is accurate. Regarding the inscriptions that mention the lineage, the 860 inscription is not of dantidurga but of later kings, mentioning Dantidurga. The 808 inscription only makes a comparison, so is not included in the 8 inscriptions that call them Yadavas. The coins of Krishna II are from 772 but since coins are not inscriptions (as in Edicts) the author discounts them from calling them so.Dineshkannambadi 01:50, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I corrected my own mistake. I had written "Proposed earliest Rahtrakutas during the time of Ashoka". This would mean they called thmeselves Rashtrakutas at that time if they existed. This is however not true. from what I read, historians have tried to connect terms like "Rashtrika", "Rastika", "Lattalika" to the later dynasties who called themselves Rashtrakutas or Rattas. This is a confusing topic ofcourse.Dineshkannambadi 02:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

You ae right. The LEAD was too long. At the same time, somehow, the language of Rashtrakutas does not sound right in the article "Origin of Rashtrakutas" as we are supposed to be discussing about research into their origin, research notes etc. The info in the "language of Rash" para already appears in the main article for Rashtrakutas. Shall we move it to the end and call it "Language of Rashtrakutas of Manyakheta" specifically? The fact that the Rashtrakutas of Manyakheta encouraged Kannada is universally accepted. What do you think.Dineshkannambadi 03:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I took a re-look at the book by Pandit Reu and Kamath. While Reu dwells in detail about the words in Ashokan inscriptions and its interpretations, Kamath does not bother about it. He focusses more on the 7th century onwards.thanks.Dineshkannambadi 04:10, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I also feel that the focus of this article should also be 7th century onwards. But we should certainly mention theories, if any, about lineages like that of the Ashokan period. But we should only give it as much weight as the authors have given it. Sarvagnya 04:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

How does it look now.If it looks ok, we should removed the tag and the section " early Rashtrakutas" as much info on the early Rashtrakutas has appeared in the Research section itself.Dineshkannambadi 04:19, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

WP:KAR DYK

Hello Sarvagnya,

Can you please update this page Portal:Karnataka/Did you know, with the DYK that you created from the article Unification of Karnataka? Thanks, - KNM ^Talk 04:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Image tags

Hi! I saw your post to Aksi's page and I thought I'd answer it since he might take a while to get to it.

To upload images to wikipedia, the image must satisfy the following two criteria without conditions:

1. The image must be allowed for commercial use.
2. Derivatives of the image must be allowed

If an image is not released does not satisfy the above criteria, it is deleted without exception. "Wikipedia only" use is not 100% free outside wikipedia, going contrary to the goals of wikipedia, and so is not allowed.

If you own the image, you must say so, if not, you need to get the appropriate permission via email and forward the same to permissions@wikimedia.org (naming the image in question). You will get a ticket, which will be put up on the image page.

Licences

GFDL licence allows:

1. Derivatives to be made
2. Commerical use to be made

only if

1. The original author is credited (attribution)
2. The derivative image is released under the GFDL licence only (share alike)
3. The GFDL notice must accompany the image where used

Creative Commons

There are two licences allowed here:

• CC-BY- and CC-BY-SA-

1. CC-BY-[version] : allows a user to use an image commercially, and make derivatives. The only condition being the author must be credited.
2. CC-BY-SA-[version] : allows a user to use an image commercially, and make derivatives. The conditions being the author must be credited, and derivatives of the image be released using only the CC-BY-SA-[version].
   

[version] here refers to 1.0, 2.0 and 2.5. Each one is worded differently, and may not be legally compatible with each other. You can use a single version, or all three.

You can also dual licence your image, choosing to tag the image with both the GFDL and either of the CC licences. The user can choose any one licence of his/her choice.

There are India-specific (compatible with Indian law) CC licences available for use; see {{cc-by-sa-2.5-in}} and {{cc-by-2.5-in}}

Public Domain

An image released under this licence allows a user to use an image commercially, make derivatives, without attribution, without any further licence conditions.

Information

When uploading please give the following imformation: Description, Source, Date, Author, Permission, and Other versions (if applicable)

Hope this was informative enough. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

CC licences

On CC licences

Um, no.. that is not 100% correct. There are two licences, the CC-BY-x requires only attribution, but the CC-BY-SA-x also requires that the derivative be released only under the CC-BY-SA-x, very similar to the GFDL.

GFDL vs CC

Professionally speaking, the CC licences are more user friendly for image reuse. For example, if an image needs to be printed, the image must be compulsory accompanied with the GFDL preamble (This), which takes a lot of valuable space. CC licences do not have this requirement. If I'm not mistaken the CC-BY-SA and GFDL are now compatible with each other (It's somewhere there on the WP:POST archives).

Revoking

No, once you release an image under any licence, you cannot revoke it. Also {{PD-self}} is not applicable under Indian law unless you sign away its rights at the Registrar. =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Images

Hi. Sorry for the delay in replying to your question. As I can see, Nichalp has already answered your question (the answer is so good that I have saved the reply in a text file for other users who ask me the same question:)). If you have any further queries, do contact me or Nichalp. My personal choice for images is cc-by-sa, which forces attribution and ensures that any derivative works can remain free. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:34, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

No personal attacks. You've been warned.

Your mischevous insinuation in your edit summaries here and here is a personal attack. Stop it now.

Please stop. If you continue to make personal attacks on other people, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Thank you.

Sarvagnya 07:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I do not understand how that was a personal attack? Can you please explain? Wiki Raja 18:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Hoysala architecture

You have given me a very big compliment, something difficult to live up to. Its you guys who keep me going. This is a new type of topic and this success will greatly help in future architecture related articles w.r.t other empires.thanks for your contributions.Dineshkannambadi 21:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Holi Greetings

Happy Holi!!!! Nikkul 15:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

India Demographic

Because of India's rich diversity, no one image can represent all of India's one billion people. That is why I propose selecting a new demographics image every three months. This would allow for a regional balance and would show India as a whole. Many people have agreed that this is the only way to represent India's rich and varied diversity. Since you have voted for a change in the demographics section, I wanted to update you on this proposal. I would love to hear your comments on talk:India. Thanks so much. Have a great day!

-Coollemonade 23:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)