User talk:Venki123

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Mudaliar, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

Welcome!

Hello, Venki123, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Will (Talk - contribs) 23:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

I noticed you placed a warning on a user's page here [1]. I removed it, as warnings should be placed on talk pages. I also noticed that you placed a block notice on the user's talk page here: [2]. There are specific rules about when a user may be blocked and only editors with admin priviledges can block users. Therefore, placing this notice has no effect, so I removed it. I will review this user's contributions and see if a block is warranted. In the future, please report suspected vandals to WP:AIV, but also please read WP:VANDAL first, as a guide to dealing with vandalism. Cheers. Dina 23:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You will also find a list of templates that you can use at Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. Be sure to subst them. Will (Talk - contribs) 23:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR at Mudaliar

Calling it vandalism does not make it so, it is a content dispute. You and User:Mudaliar are both guilty of violating WP:3RR. Revert the page again and you will both be blocked, or I will rollback both of your edits to a prior version and protect the page from editing. Take your dispute to the talkpage and hammer it out, it is the only way to resolve such conflicts. Consider yourself warned for 3RR. Cheers. Dina 23:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mudaliar article Message to Dina reg Vandalism/Reverts

Hi Dina, This is Venki123. I and the user Mudaliar have a content dispute regarding the article Mudaliar. The main issue here is which group of people have used the title Mudaliar as their surname. The user Mudaliar has no proof for claiming that it was the group Thondai Mandala Vellalar who used it. I have asked for proof many times. But he refuses to give it. I am unwilling to accept his claim without proof. I also have given proof of other groups who are claiming the same as he is. I have given proof from inscriptions dated from 1000 AD that the group called Kaikolar have used the title. I am not even claiming that Kaikolar were the first to use, since there is no positive proof. The user Mudaliar keeps deleting all the positive information about Kaikolar and seems intent on denigrating the Kaikolar group. Further he is not willing to allow other groups who also use the surname Mudaliar to add their name to the list of groups. He refers to certain sources and when I give the same source for more information, he deletes them. Please advise.

thnx Venki123 Venki123 02:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion is to create a Request for comment. Do not keep reverting the page. I have warned you both. You reverted (from your IP) and I blocked you for 24 hours. I am not a party to this dispute and would have blocked User:Mudaliar if he had reverted. I mean this in the nicest possible way: I don't care. I have no opinion about the content of this dispute. You can also go to mediation for some help. But do not simply continue reverting each other's edits. It's just against the rules. Content disputes happen, but the encyclopedia should not suffer. You cannot edit for the next 24 hours. When your block is over, please take care not to violate Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Dina 02:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

Making the edit not logged in still counts. Please take this time to consider how to approach your edit conflict more constructively. Cheers. Dina 02:23, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mudaliar article Message to Dina reg Vandalism/Reverts

Hi Dina, I am willing to follow the rules regarding RFC and then mediation. In the meanwhile can you please revert the Mudaliar article to its previous state before the user Mudaliar started denigrating all other groups. While the user Mudaliar has given proofs, he is not willing to accept statements from the same source he has given. Some of his legitimate sources are websites created by people belonging to his group and hence are not independent. thnx Venki123 16:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mudaliar article reverts by User Mudaliar

Regarding the username Mudaliar, it is the same as the article in dispute. Hence I suggest that he change his username to a different username so that it is easy to refer to him in the RFC and mediation process. Venki123 17:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crossposted to both your talk pages

I'm going to be really frank here. I originally thought that the reason I didn't understand this dispute is because I am a self-centered American women. But then I realized I wasn't giving myself enough credit. I am capable of understanding a well-written english article on nearly any subject. The reason I don't understand this dispute is because both versions of the Mudaliar article are terrible. Sorry to be so harsh, but I believe that that's true. I cannot fix this article. You guys can. Before you continue to bicker over this tiny, tiny dispute that half the world could give a fig about, you need to make at least that first paragraph make some damn sense! Here's my more constructive criticism:

Venki's preferred version

Mudaliar also Mudaliyar, Mudali, Moodley is a title and is the surname of many distinct groups. (Huh? title meaning what? a royal title, a professional title? Surname of many distinct groups of what? Scottish people? Any famous people with this name?) It does not refer to one caste or race. (Again, huh? I know this is part of the dispute, but why is this the second sentence? What's a caste? And who says its the name of a race? I've never heard of any race called Mudaliar?). The term Mudaliyār literally means a person of first rank in a feudal society. (What language? What society? England had a feudal society? Is this the word for first rank worldwide?) [1] However in recent times (How recent?) due to social upliftment the name (Really, what social upliftment? Who got "socially uplifted") is used by people belonging to various castes originally from Tamil Nadu (Where?)and in the Tamil diaspora (There's a Tamil diaspora? Is Tamil a language or an ethnic group? Where did the diaspora originate? Antartica?)for the purpose of social upliftment. (You already said that, but it's still unclear) Some castes are forward-caste (What on earth does that mean?) while most are backward-caste ( That sounds like an insult to me, is it a commonly used term?). Mudaliars are usually more financially well off than other communities. (This absolutely needs a reference. Also, where? I've never met a Mudaliar. Are they richer than Bill Gates?) Mudaliars also tend not to marry outside their community (Again, what community? I live in Boston, are there Mudaliars here?). Most Mudaliars are pure Tamilians with Tamil as their native language (Okay, I guess. Is there a ref for this?). Due to the strong interaction of Mudaliars with Telugus (Where do these people interact? When? What do you mean interact -- do business? marry each other?) some people confuse them with Telugus. (I'm so confused already, there's no danger of that) Mudaliars acquiring Brahmin dialect (I've heard the word Brahmin, but the fact that it's a dialect is new, oh, and a dialect of what? Tamil?) and Telugu dialect is mainly due to their strong interaction with various groups in the past. (so vague as to be meaningless) There are mudaliars in Sri Lanka too and they speak Sinhalese. (the surname or the caste? Also, why?)

Mudaliar's preferred version

Mudaliar also Mudaliyār, Mudali and Moodley in Tamil language literally means a person of first rank in a feudal society[1] (Again, where? Scotland?). It is originally the title and the surname of Tondaimandala Vellalars only, (Where? India? What part of india? Or is that a kind of people? Also when -- 1987? 400 BCE?) [1] [2] [3][4]. However in recent times due to the process of sanskritization (Huh?)the name is used by people belonging to various castes originally from Tamil Nadu (Where?!?!) and in the Tamil diaspora (What Tamil diaspora? Where did they originate, where did they end up?) for the purpose of social upliftment (Oh really? How?. Some castes are forward-caste (totally confusing term) while most are backward-caste (confusing and sounds borderline insulting. Meaningless phrase to this english speaker). Mudaliars are usually more financially well off than other communities. (Where? In Brazil? How well off? Needs a ref) Mudaliars also tend not to marry outside their community (Again, "tend" is uncyclopedic. Why? Where? What community?). Most Mudaliars are pure Tamilians with Tamil as their native language. (Okay, what's a Tamilian)

I hope it's clear that I am somewhat mocking an ignorant American here, and that neither of you will be insulted. I am just trying to explain that this dispute is sidelining you both from creating an article that could answer these questions. Answer the questions!!!! :)

I will unlock the article sometime this weekend. Not sure when. If you revert war and violate 3RR I'll block both of you for 48 hours and lock the article again, for at least a week. We can keep doing this, or you can work together to answer the stupid American girl's questions. Lastly, more writing advice: Make me care about this topic as a reader. Because I'll be honest, right now I really don't. And please stop fighting on my talk page. Cheers. Dina 16:42, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR vio block

You are blocked 24 h for 3RR vio.--CSTAR 22:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Devadasi

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Devadasi. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Natalie 16:47, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will tell you the exact same thing I told Mudaliar - you have both been warned and reported by me. It doesn't matter what discussions you are having on other pages or who said what where. Neither of you are justified in violating 3RR on Devadasi. And I would strongly recommend that the two of you undergo an RfC or arbitration or something, because your constant warring is really not helping Wikipedia. Natalie 16:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for WP:3RR on Devdasi

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three revert rule in regard to the article Devdasi. Other users in violation have also been blocked. The timing of this block is coincidental, and does not represent an endorsement of the current article revision. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future on the article's talk page (Talk:Devdasi).

The duration of the block is 48 hours. — Nearly Headless Nick ^{C} 17:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicts with other users

Unfortunately, conflict resolution really isn't one of my best areas, especially long running conflicts like the one you have been having with this user. Have you tried any of the steps in dispute resolution? If you have been having a long-running problem with another editor that is not simple vandalism or trolling, this is generally the thing to do. You could post on the administrator's noticeboard but most likely, you will simply be directed to dispute resolution. I think you and this user should really give it a try, as it's probably the best way of both crafting and enforcing a solution. If you would like an article or articles protected, you will want to file a request for page protection. Sorry I could not be of more help. Natalie 21:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be away from my computer for an hour or so and then I will see if I can put some information together for you. Like I said, dispute resolution is not really my best skill, so I may direct you toward another admin that is better with this particular aspect of Wikipedia than myself. Natalie 21:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

an option for dispute resolution

User:Durova, who is a respected editor, admin, and very experienced with dispute resolution, would be willing to mediate between yourself and User:Mudaliar if you'd like. Just contact her on her talk page. Natalie 23:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mudaliar

You recently filed a request for check user at the location filed above. However, per the code letter that you selected, you must provide diffs of the serious pattern vandalism that the suspected sockpuppets have committed. Thank you, PTO 04:50, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your dispute with Mudaliar

Venki, I'm not sure how I can make this clearer: I cannot help you with your dispute with Mudaliar. I know less than nothing about dispute resolution, so you really don't want me to try to resolve this. I really don't know a lot about sockpuppets or the procedure for blocking sockpuppets that may be but aren't definitely circumventing policy. I haven't even been an administrator for two weeks - this isn't an area I am comfortable taking action in.

Further, I find it disturbing that you repeatedly suggested that other users who were having problems with Mudaliar complain to me. I am not the Wikipedia complaints department, nor am I Mudaliar's keeper.

I would suggest, as I have suggested before, that you pick one of the steps in dispute resolution and follow it through. It seems that steps one and two (talking to the other party involved and disengaging for awhile, respectively) have failed, which leaves you with the following options: a 3O|request for a third opinion, a request for comment, an informal mediation (most likely through the Mediation Cabal or formal mediation through the Mediation Committee. After you have attempted two or more of these things and been unsuccessful, you may take this matter to the Arbitration Committee. Natalie 02:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your mediation request

I don't see why you request mediation for an issue that is primarily between you and Mudaliar. Also, you will never get the mediation to go through with the parties you listed. You do understand that all of the parties must agree or else the mediation will not be accepted, right? I think you should try a different dispute resolution process that concentrates on the conflict that is between you and Mudaliar. I undid your revisions because they seemed to whitewash certain aspects of Devadasi, not because of the Kaikolar stuff. Based on what little I know it seems that Mudaliar's inclusions distort the topic by extrapolating a Devadasi trend specific to a certain part of South India onto India as a whole. This may be defamatory; I really don't know enough about it to be sure. Anyway, if you can show me specifically what is wrong and what should be done on Talk:Devadasi I will try to develop a new version to implement. I really wish Lemongoat would come since he knows much more about these things than I but he appears to be inactive. Anyway, get back to me if there is something you need to ask. I watch the Devadasi page so I will see your case when it is posted. Thanks & cheers. The Behnam 14:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I don't know if you have checked recently but your checkuser request, Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mudaliar, turned up some results. The Behnam 14:45, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More Devadasi

I've moved Mudaliar's additions into their own "South India & the Chola Empire" subsection. Does that work for you? The Behnam 16:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Mudaliar.

For the Mediation Committee, ^demon^{[omg plz]}

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 16:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Mudaliar-Venki123

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Mudaliar-Venki123. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Mudaliar-Venki123/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Mudaliar-Venki123/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 16:15, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Mudaliar-Venki123

This arbitration case has closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Mudaliar and User:Venki123 are each banned from editing Wikipedia for a period of one year. This notice is posted by a Clerk on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. Newyorkbrad 15:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to advise that this account has been blocked for one year to implement this decision. Newyorkbrad 15:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Visit http://www.freewebs.com/mudaliars/index.html for research on Mudaliars.

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Venki123 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page.Kokarako Gumango (talk) 06:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]