User talk:CarTick/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Mysore and Coorg FAC

Your feedback at History of Mysore and Coorg FAC is greatly appreciated. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 02:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I am glad you are still working on this. I have too much to do in real life and will do what i can. Thanks for letting me know. --L I C 01:39, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Hi! How are you? Could you please keep an eye on Kongu Vellalar article. The article seems to be one-sided with lots of POV. If possible, could you also expand Nalli Chinnasamy Chetti article. Thanks.-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 07:11, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Especially, I wish to bring to your notice that the Kongu Vellalar article has been extensively rewritten by an anon IP, which I suspect, could be User:PONDHEEPANKAR's.-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 07:14, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure. Pondheepankar had a predictable pro-Nadar POV, as far as I remember. --L I C 01:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

A. T. Pannirselvam

Might you be able to expand this, since TN politics seems to be your area of expertise? It was prodded and I contested and referenced to a stub level, but it looks like this can be expanded. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 18:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I wouldnt call myself an expert. I am as much limited as you are to reliable sources. I would say, Ravichandar should be able to help with his hands on an astonishing array of books. --L I C 01:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't Paneerselvam the person who spearheaded the Anti-Hindi agitations in 1938?-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 15:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, this is the same person, I'm just surprised that a page is being created only now! Also, the district that was named after him for a while was Thiruvaroor/Thanjavoor/Nagapattinam area, but no longer a district. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 18:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

CarTick?

Identity crisis? :-) --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 02:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

apparently. :) --L I C 03:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

You still have to change your signature :) -SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 04:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

i did now. :) --CarTick 12:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

You changed your username again? :D -- Tinu Cherian - 19:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

yea. feels better now. :) --CarTick 19:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I think your 3 usernames reveal your identity: Daku Kartik Lakiyar. Sounds like someone from Chambal Wadi. I'm scared now. Abecedare (talk) 19:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

pretty close. Didnt help much trying not to reveal anything. :) By the way, congratulations for your new promotion. --CarTick 20:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) Is a car tick like a deer tick or the tick tock tick? If its the latter, have you considered calling the Tappet Brothers? :) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

yep... watch out when you have to on a lawn next time or drink "lime" juice. :) --CarTick 01:11, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

1999 Tamil Nadu Lok Sabha election map

hey added an election map to Indian general election in Tamil Nadu, 1999. I did it by districts (in terms of percent seats won in the districts) since thats the only free map I could find on Wikipedia. I used the tamil nadu legislative website for matching up lok sabha constituents with districts. If you could find a lok sabha election blank map, that would probably be better. I am trying to find a format to make elections maps so i can add to all of them. If this seems to work, I can start working on 2011 MLA election and have a map by % assembly seats won by districts. So check it out and let me know what you think. If you feel like there is a better way of doing it, let me know, and I will try to make it that way. Also let me know if you find any inaccuracies in the map. Nader85021 (talk) 04:17, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

RE: Tamil Nadu legislative assembly election, 2011 Achievement

Hi Cartick .. Wiki page for election is now part of the news regarding election I saw that in news.google.co.in section . Congrats ! --Rajkumarth(talk) 12:59 ,21 March 2011 (NYT)

India v. South Asia

Thanks for the support at ANI. Per your advise, let us just wait and see how the case unfolds. I've always called a spade and that explains the strong reactions. I expect a couple more. You've been around a lot longer and I would hate to see your wiki-reputation being tarnished because of associating with me. You might be safer if you distance yourself or at least tread cautiously.

I am sure there are administrators who will look at edit histories in-depth and keep the focus before taking next steps. Zuggernaut (talk) 06:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

thanks. we will see how it goes. --CarTick (talk) 02:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

This is to notify you (as you are a participant in the above ANI) that I've made several restriction proposals at this discussion which you may wish to comment on. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:07, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Lifting_the_Indian_history_topic_ban and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks, Zuggernaut (talk) 15:59, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Tamil Nadu legislative assembly election, 2011 - Results

CarTick, Please create an article page for "Tamil Nadu legislative assembly election, 2011 - Results" and let the contents be at the right hand side. Thanks in advance.
-- Kathamarai (talk) 19:17, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

i would love to do it for you. but, it is not that difficult. anybody can create articles in wikipedia. i prefer this title though. 2011 Tamil Nadu legislative assembly election results. just click on the red link, add the content and save it. pls ask me again if yo need help. --CarTick (talk) 19:21, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

2011 Census

Sure , i will help. --Rajkumarth ( User talk:Rajkumarth|talk]]) 1984!#$ 14:44, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

2011 Tamil Nadu legislative assembly election results

Please have a look and help me with your feedbacks. I have ordered the candidates in the form of

• Ruling alliance (DMK+).
• Opposing alliance (AIADMK+).
• Other recognised/ unrecognised parties alphabetically from state and national levels.
• Independent candidates alphabetically.

The list will get expanded as I am working still on it.

I want to add the electoral symbols in the election box for each candidates, please help me with it.

— kathamarai ^(talk) 17:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

looks like a good begining. i like the format. just one reservation. i am not sure we need to list all the independents. it will make the list too long and not many people really care about these guys. --CarTick (talk) 17:28, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

CarTick, I fully agree with you. Even I was feeling the same way, and it is too difficult to enter all the names at this stage. I am thinking of just going with only the party candidates for now. And if there are any prominent candidates contesting independently then we can include them during the latter stage.
What do you say?

And one more thing, do you know how to add electoral symbols column in this template?
Please help me with that if you know it.

— kathamarai ^(talk) 08:20, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thamarai, for election symbols or any additions, we need to change the template itself. here is the template you are using Template:Election box candidate with party link. i am not very good at these things, but i can figure out. 100s of articles use the template, we should be careful. my question is, do you really think it is absolutely important to have symbols? --CarTick (talk) 11:45, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

archiving

If you have a few moments, can you look at my current talk page archiving scheme (manual!) and let me know if I can move to bot archiving without wiping out my old talk page comments? I'm all thumbs when it comes to bots so this will be much appreciated! Thanks. --rgpk (comment) 14:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

without wiping out your old talk page comments? if you are worried about bot messing up with your previous archives, it wouldnt. all you would need to do would be to specify the begining Archive number and the size (x kb) you would like each archive to be. you might have to manually add and update the "archive display" on your talk page with begining and end dates when the bot moves to the next archive. --CarTick (talk) 15:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I set it up - could you take a look and see if I've done it correctly? I started it at 9 - so the numbering should be ok. (I just copied your settings!)--rgpk (comment) 15:40, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

looks good to me. i would monitor the first time the bot archives it. :) --CarTick (talk) 15:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Yup. I'm going to spend the day staring at my talk history (and getting ready to skip to Bolivia if i've broken wikipedia)!

Seamless. Thanks! --rgpk (comment) 17:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Copyright

Hey.. Long time no see.. How are you?? Is the new Shiv Nadar pic copyright free??Mayan302 (talk) 12:04, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

yes, how are you? hope your health is ok. well, User:C0MRADE claims copyright to it and i dont see a problem as such. i havent made an image search to see verify his claims. --CarTick (talk) 12:21, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

My health is improving..Thanks for your concern.Ok.Mayan302 (talk) 03:10, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, CarTick. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Padmanabhapuram Palace.
Message added 19:23, 20 April 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• Again. ╟─TreasuryTag►Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster─╢ 19:56, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Your post on Fowler's talk page

CarTick, this post is not acceptable. Throwing accusations at another editor based on your reading of their motivations is not how wikipedia can constructively work. I think you are a valuable editor, and I have a lot of respect for you, but you're beginning to cross the line in your interaction with fowler. Comment on edits and not on the editor is a healthy principle to live by here and I hope you can hew to that (like you've consistently done in the past). --rgpk (comment) 15:56, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Fowler himself admitted that he despises people because he thinks they misuse the river in the name of Hinduism. may be he should be careful not to express this personal dislike during discussions or influence his editing. --CarTick (talk) 17:12, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

That's a far cry from assuming that he dislikes hinduism. You're jumping to conclusions that are unwarranted and, even if warranted, are better not said. None of fowler's edits appear particularly controversial and many, if not all, have some support from other editors as well. It would be much better to assume good faith. But, this is just a suggestion and not a warning (I wouldn't warn you). So take it any way you like. --rgpk (comment) 23:30, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

it is not an isolated incident. he has made this comment some time ago and had to strike it off after Yogesh complained and you intervened. the comment wasnt particularly offensive to me, but what i believe such comments convey is that he has a deep disdain for Indian culture and expresses it in subtler comments every so often. Fowler's behavior is not uncommon. at the minimum, that was not a constructive communication to build an encyclopedia.

what prompted today's note on fowler's talk page was Yogesh's "India that is Bharat" discussion and fowler's involvement. he accused user Thisthat2011 (talk · contribs), who supported Yogesh, of making "Hindu nationalism related edits" which the user took offense and responded here. It turns out, after Sodabottle commented here, that Fowler, You and I were all wrong and none of us didnt understand the issue very well until Sodabottle explained it. being himself at fault by not understanding the issue well and clear, Fowler rather chose to accuse the editor of making "Hindu nationalism related edits". I have to admit that I also stand accused here because i warned Yogesh of making fringe theories which i had later retracted.

so, it is not one incident and there are many more hidden in this wikipedia ocean and i dont have the time to go through all of them. I am not contending that Fowler makes bad edits. he behaves bad. I really hope he will change his style of communication. for the record, i have no strong likes or dislikes for anybody and hold no grudges. my support to other editors is issue based and not permanent.

I was born in a Hindu family and go to temples to accompany my family and eat Sambar rice. I dont consider myself a Hindu nationalist and dont like to be called as one. think about going to United Kingdom page and accuse the editors there as members of far right British National Party.

I am glad you brought this up and glad to know that you dont think he is at fault. --CarTick (talk) 01:28, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I wandered over here following Ganga River links. Reading down, I wanted to say I have found your work here, at least the bits I've seen, very level-headed and useful. Nice to have you here! And, for what it's worth, it's been interesting to me learning more about India. Despite the obvious global importance of the country, I somehow missed learning very much about it. Time to make up for that. ...I had never even heard of sambar until just now. My loss, it looks like. Pfly (talk) 10:13, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Here is my 2 cents: Fowler needs to calm down and mind his tongue while commenting on others. But i don't think he has any hatred for hinduism. He is just prickly and runs out of patience very easily. And ThisThat2011's behaviour was indeed suspicious for a new editor. Given the fact that we have noob avatars showing up at India talk page and push an agenda similar to known sockmasters and editors now and then, it is not hard to see why Fowler reacted the way he did. A shortage of AGF for sure, but i dont see any hatred in it, just Fowler being Fowler. And BTW every now and then, he gets accused of being an Indian nationalist and having a POV against the Raj and the Company, as well. Its not like he gets dissed from one side alone. --Sodabottle (talk) 12:45, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Pfly for the word of support and Sodabottle for your comments. yes Pfly, India is a mixed bag, home of the wealthiest like Ambanis to the homeless in the millions. India also has large regional disparities, South and North can be very different. Kerala has the highest literacy (about 93%) and Bihar (one of the states Ganges flows through) is the least literate (about 63%). There are also disparities within individual states. Within a state called Tamil Nadu, Kanyakumari district has about 92% literacy and Dharmapuri district has 64%. like the rest of the world, literacy and social development go hand in hand. As inter-state travel is very rare among most of the Indians due mostly to that each state often has a different language, it isnt uncommon to see Indians develop a sense of India from their surroundings and die with it. It is also not uncommon to find Indians who havent firsthand experienced and witnessed the problems that are often associated with India. it is not to say that all problems are regional, some are certainly universal.

By the way, Sri Siva Vishnu Temple serves the "best" Sambar rice in the entire North America. 2 dollars and sufficient to satisfy half the appetite of an average adult. --CarTick (talk) 13:34, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

(od) The thing that worries me CarTick is that you're increasingly getting angry and a lot of your rhetoric, especially about fowler, is about perceived motivations and biases. Fowler is a solid editor, one of the best on wikipedia in getting sources and balance into articles - not just in articles about India as his many forays into FAR show. It is much better to present your opinions and let others comment on the topic than to go after an editor who is a demonstrated asset to wikipedia. The way you're going about this now makes everything into an us vs. them battle which makes it very hard for other editors who are not pov driven (and also puts you in less than salubrious company!). Going on a crusade is not healthy, I've seen it before and it rarely ends well. Bear in mind that Fowler and Khandke are not the only two editors on India articles and that you don't necessarily need to pick sides. You're a well respected editor and should work at preserving that respect, a much better way of getting your opinions into articles than drawing battle lines. --rgpk (comment) 15:41, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

it is hard to prove bias and motivation and are often perceived. i am sorry some of you dont see Fowler's condescending behavior. but, i do see it very well. i agree with you on some of the other points. i am sorry that you feel my comments made it uncomfortable for other editors. it was not my intention. wikipedia is not a battleground and nobody owns any article. i am out of everyone's way for an indefinite amount of time anyway. now you mention that my comments made it difficult for others to edit comfortably, i could also say that that is exactly what the indiscriminate accusations of "Indian and Hindu nationalists" thrown around at editors in various India related talk pages did. it made it hard for reasonable Indian editors to take up any position for fear of being accused of bias. --CarTick (talk) 18:04, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

he dropped one as we are speaking. If that hurts the feigned religious sentiments of some nationalist POV pushers on this page (and I obviously don't mean Regents Park), then that is not my problem. --CarTick (talk) 20:26, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree that Fowler is often condescending and needs to control his tone and have told him so on a number of occasions. I have less trouble with his nationalistic editors comments because I believe there is sufficient reason in at least some of the cases. Either way, fowler always backs up his comments with good sources and reasons and so, when the discussion devolves into nationalistic battles, it becomes hard for editors who are willing to look for a middle ground to figure out where that middle ground lies. Regardless of all this, it is worth remembering that these battles started with your comments on fowler's motivations for including the East India Company in the lead of the India articles and that, more or less, has lead to the battleground mentality that now permeates the Ganges and the India talk pages. Perhaps your plan for a bit of time away from wikipedia is not a bad idea, the perspective that we actually live in the real world is never a bad thing! --rgpk (comment) 13:59, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

i agree with you. i really should wean myself out of this wikipedia addiction. without a couple of papers published by mid 2012, the career seems destined to hit the wall. nothing seems certain in this gloomy economy. unfortunately, this interactive writing in wikipedia with the luxury of using other's articles is more addictive than the boring original research. i have a couple more good references for the Ganges article before i slam the door shut. since you brought this up, i think fowler is a great editor and a rare asset to wp. i also think he is pro-english and pro-company biased and dont think it is necessarily a bad thing and i also dont think these attributes are mutually exclusive. you have every right to hold on to your opinion. --CarTick (talk) 23:59, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Heh, Wikipedia addiction is something we all face, at least I do. Hopefully, though, you'll figure out a way to continue to contribute without being sucked in too much. Gloomy economy all around, eh? Sure is here.. Pfly (talk) 06:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Also, while I'm here, the comment above about F&f: "is just prickly and runs out of patience very easily" reminds me of some other long-term valuable editors who seem to repeatedly get into heated arguments (most of all User:Skookum1 comes to mind). There's a somewhat humorous essay about this kind of "wiki editor": Wikipedia:WikiDragon. Pfly (talk) 06:45, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I have tried to disappear several times before and never succeeded and therefore i have every reason to doubt my conviction. i really thank you for your support. appreciate it much and i really need some positive energy for the rest of the day. :) --CarTick (talk) 12:39, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Even when you gather enough conviction to stop editing, you will still be stalking users' talk pages. Its true, trust me! lol. --Wiki San Roze ^†αLҝ 13:52, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

i can imagine that. glad to see you around. hope everything ok with you. hope u r following the election. --CarTick (talk) 23:51, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Good luck

I am here to wish you good luck, but also to say that I am deeply angry at you for having wasted an inordinate amount of my precious time. I believe, you have chased this phantom of bias self-righteously and relentlessly across several Wikipedia pages to the point that I have felt hounded, your posts about Ian Stone's book, on Talk:Ganges#ganges_canal are but the latest manifestation of this ongoing obsession. In my view, others such as Zuggernaut and Yogesh Khandke have done the same, but I had expected more from you. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:56, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Fowler and CarTIck, if I may make a suggestion, let it go. Both of you are valuable editors with a stellar record of contributions and all you have to do is tell yourselves that you won't speculate on motives, won't comment on each other, and will focus your comments on content suggestions or edits (where you can happily point out, backed up by reliable sources of course, how inane the other person's ideas are). That way, wikipedia wins and no one loses. Not everything in life needs to be hashed out to the bitter end (except in a marriage!). Just a suggestion and I'm hoping that one of you takes the high road and just moves on. --rgpk (comment) 13:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

You got it. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

+1 with rgpk. You two are among people i respect most in wikipedia (and whom i try to emulate in wiki life). Please let go.--Sodabottle (talk) 14:46, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

that is flattering. agree, personalising isnt helpful. will heed your advice. to fowler: thanks for your wishes. i am not angry with you. just envious you have access to so many resources. --CarTick (talk) 23:49, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Only warning for racist attacks

If you make another attack on the intellectual abilities of an entire (race? tribe? clan? I don't know the right classification), like you did at in this diff at Talk:Tamil Kshatriya, I will request that you be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:38, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Comment struck by me. After further discussion, the statement was not intended to be racist; I still ask that CarTick try to use gentler language in the future, if nothing else than to avoid more misunderstandings. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

What?? I can't believe this. CarTick is referring to the "stupidity" of the "casteists" there. (i agree with his statement completely). No way that can be taken an attack an entire race/tribe/clan. Terming it as "racist" is beyond unfair. Please take a look at the statement again. Does saying "some racists are stupid" mean one is a racist automatically?. CarTick is one of the few people in wiki who attempts to clean up after relentless casteist pov pushers. He has been attacked by members of different castes (through possible offwiki canvassing) before for cleaning up caste articles. Qwryxian, please withdraw this warning. --Sodabottle (talk) 04:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC

Maybe we're interpreting that remark differently, but I read CarTick claiming that anyone in a certain group (i.e., the alleged group of Tamil Kshatriyans) is stupid, and that they're trying to invent a false history to make themselves look better. Now, I have exactly zero opinions about the underlying matter (of which caste affiliations are legitimate and which are not). I do know that describing a group of people who claim a particular identity, whether or not that identity has a historical basis, as "stupid", is unacceptable. Looking at the rest of CarTick's talk apge, it does look to me like CarTick generally does good work; maybe the frustration of dealing with POV pushers made CarTick respond inappropriately.

Perhaps I was too strong to call this an only warning. I do still believe that CarTick needs to not make any more such attacks, and that CarTick needs to be sure to remain civil even in the face of POV pushing. Furthermore, CarTick needs to explain on Talk:Tamil Kshatriya what verified reason he has for asserting that those people do not exist, given that there are sources on the page (that is, to justify his maintenance templates) in a more civil and full fashion. I'll point out I've also removed highly speculative and seemingly false info from that article; what's there now is much milder than what has been there in the past. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

thanks soda for responding to this. i will respond later tonight. --CarTick (talk) 13:52, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

you sound like a reasonable guy except for the part you are adamant you dont want to understand what i clearly meant. I am not going to re-explain it to you but just mention was was recently reminded to me by RegentsPark in another talk page. Everything you say and understand and admit you understand and pretend you dont understand is read and evaluated by a bunch of people who are watching that page. wikipedia, unlike the local caste association, is populated by mostly intelligent people and my page is watched by over 40 of such men. so, it is your call.

so, why dont we start with a a couple of questions 1) what in your opinion makes a claim of Kshatriya status by a certain caste legitimate and who has the authoity to grant that legitimacy? 2)as you dont seem to find any problem with the article, i assume you have access to all the sources mentioned and verified the claims yourself. so, could you please explain how the first sentence "Tamil Kshatriyas are a group of Hindus belonging to the Kshatriya caste who spoke the Tamil language and ruled much of the present day Tamil Nadu and Kerala during the first millenum. Large parts of the present day Sri Lanka were also ruled by Tamil Kshatriyas" fits with the article title Tamil Kshatriya? in other words, i am requesting you to provide me the exact quote in the reference to which the sentence is referenced to. 3) if the kings who ruled present day TN and KE were called Kshatriyas, there should be preponderance of reliable sources that verify that claim. why only one? --CarTick (talk) 22:18, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I actually don't understand what you meant. In fact, as a post-modernist, I don't even believe it's possible to know what someone "meant"--all I can know about any given piece of text is how I interpret it, based upon the multiple discourse communities of which I am a part. For me, that sentence read as an obvious, bad faith attack on a group of people. My apologies if it was not; maybe in the future, you may be able to avoid misunderstand by not assigned the label of "stupidity" to an entire group of people (even if you believe those people don't even really have the right to call themselves a group).

As for all of the issue, I actually have no opinion at all. Literally, none. I'm not Indian, never been to India, and have no academic knowledge of it. I have no access to any sources that are not online (I don't have access to an English language library). My whole involvement with that page, actually, has been to remove even more extreme claims, what I assume are what you call "casteist" claims. I have gathered, in the last several months, that there is a desire among a very large number of tribes/castes/sects (I don't even know what the distinction is) to claim a high status, either by current achievements, or, more often, by tracing their lineage to some event or other group of people several hundred to thousand years ago. Am I correct in that this is the problem you were referring to? This had happened before on Tamil Kshatriya; take a look, for instance, at this version. In that case, I dealt with an edit war (ending up with 2 people temporarily blocked), and, since the sources didn't seem to have any connection at all with the Tamil Kshatriya, kept what appeared to be false information out.

Sorry, I know I'm wandering far afield here, but I'm trying to provide context for my involvement there, and what I do or don't know. Maybe we can continue this on the article talk page, but are you asserting that the Tamil Kshatriya is not actually a real group, or that the group isn't as prominent as it claims, or that the claims are wrong? If that's the case--if the sources don't actually support the existence of this group--then it's an NPOV problem, but rather that the article needs to be deleted. I'll probably have time to look at that article more closely tomorrow or the day after. If you can more specifically express your concerns on the talk page (that is, explain why you think those templates belong), then I will do my best to try to help. Maybe I'll User: Sitush to take a look: I've worked with him before, and he does extraordinary work in bringing articles like this into line--he's especially good at sorting out which sources are reliable and which are just puffed up exaggerations based on one line of a thousand year old mythic poem.

At the risk of just going on to long, I'd like to apologize again if I came on two strong. In part, I was reacting to past problems at that and similar pages, with people trading insults regularly. I hope you can understand why others might view your comments as extreme, and I hope we can work together on this issue. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:23, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

i called "casteists" stupid. it is a term used to refer to the extremists in any caste group, not all its members. i believe your reaction was in good faith. will explain the problem of the article in its talk page. --CarTick (talk) 02:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

pon dheepankar

The konguboy/kongu kavarasu gounder sockfarm is the latest handiwork of the long term sock master/pov pusher User:PONDHEEPANKAR. The IP you reverted in Tamil Nadu article adding the whole "nadu" thing was him.--Sodabottle (talk) 17:18, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

it is a shame. if these guys spend their energy in a constructive way, we would have been so much better off. --CarTick (talk) 17:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

What i dont get is this guy is the usual RSS akhand bharat, anti-dravidian movement anti-tamil nationalism kind. But he is edit warring with Malayalee RSS types over who (tamil/malayalee) is better or something of that sort. look at this message. How contradictory is this!!--Sodabottle (talk) 17:34, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

i actually havent been following this. let me dig a little bit. --CarTick (talk) 17:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

by the way, what was the basis for this map looks like a randomly drawn map. OR? --CarTick (talk) 18:02, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

yes total OR. look how it pushes into nilgiris krishnagiri and dharmapuri districts, karnataka and kerala. must be a kongunadu pov pushers wet dream.--Sodabottle (talk) 18:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

wonder what to do with this. WP:IFD? --CarTick (talk) 18:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Thats the way to go. He has uploaded a few more maps, we should do a combined FFD--Sodabottle (talk) 18:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

i have never nominated commons file for deletion. need to figure out. --CarTick (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hey, Glad to see you have some protection now for a few days. I hope i reverted things back the way they should be. Any idea why they went for you imparticular, or why all of a sudden they start spamming WP?? Hoping you are well Bailo26 (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

These are a bunch of SPAs that were involved in an unique POV that I along with a few other editors opposed. he will run out of steam eventually. thank you for reverting the nonsense. in case you were wondering, those were some random helpless rants in Tamil language. --CarTick (talk) 21:33, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I thought the characters looked interesting but i did not anticipate it being an actual language form. I will look into it as im rather interested now, and its not a problem! :) Bailo26 (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

நீ சோடாபாட்டில், சிடுஷ், ஸ்பேஸ்மேன் ஸ்பிப் எல்லோரும் ஒன்னுதான்னு இன்னும் தெரியாதுன்னு கனா காண்றியா? தைரியமிருந்தா உன் ஈ மெய்ல குடுறா => are you dreaming that i dont know that you, User:Sitush, User:Sodabottle and user:SpacemanSpiff are the same. if you have guts, give me your e-mail address. --CarTick (talk) 21:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

By the looks of it its a very complex language, would take ages to learn and to be honest all i can see is swirls etc haha Bailo26 (talk) 21:48, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

it can be hard. :) --CarTick (talk)