User talk:YellowMonkey/Archive77

Re:Viet independence movements

Is there an article anywhere about the independence movement of Vietnam generally. If there is, I can't find it. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 02:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Independence from the French? There's some info about that at First Indochina War, as well as scattered among the articles about various individuals in the movement. Badagnani (talk) 02:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was no single unified independence movement throughout French colonialism. I guess the best place to put it in would be in History of Vietnam. DHN (talk) 03:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was aware that there were lots of different factions doing different things, but there are a lot of books on the general independence struggle. For example, see Indian independence movement which also discusses a wide gamut of varying ideologies that were fighting for independence. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 02:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If there are similar articles on independence movements in other nations, I'd say you should start a stub for the Vietnamese one. However, the Vietnamese have had independence movements against various nations; I think you mean independence against the French. Does vi:WP have an article on this? Badagnani (talk) 02:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess Vietnamese anticolonial movement would be a good name for it, or you can gloss the Vietnamese phrase "phong trào chống Pháp". DHN (talk) 02:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Van Hanh

Can you help make an article for the ancient monk Van Hanh (maybe the diacritics are Lý Vạn Hạnh)? Badagnani (talk) 06:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The diacritics on Van Hanh are definitely correct, but I havent heard of this monk. Was he one of the emperors who renounced the throne? Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 06:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I learned about this via the great veg restaurant on Bolsa in Little Saigon (Orange County). Some articles here at WP say he installed Lý Thái Tổ in the early 11th century. Badagnani (talk) 06:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eamon Sullivan

What's the story with the continual adding of this copyvio (or at the least, unsourced) material? Is it a group of editors or just one persistent one. Is it worth protecting the article for a while? -- Mattinbgn\^talk 05:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that you're trying to make a gang around you to stop other people to submit articles and of course better, richer and copyvio-free articles.

Look, I don't care what you are or what your title is, all I know is what you do, and what you are doing right now is an absolutely sickening... not use but misuse of an undeserved power that you hold by trying to exert you own opinion on a subject.

The most recent edit of other version of Eamon Sullivan is an integral article and does not have any sign of copyright violation.

So before you start imploring other people to follow you in your heedless practice, have an honest and attentive look at the article and judge for yourself, or if you are too busy in your real life to respond swiftly to queries, you'd better kiss your unreal life goodbye and stick to your real life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyrusace (talk • contribs) 14:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnam in the time of the Second World War

You deleted an article of this title once as a copyvio: is the current version the same, and if so, what was the copyvio of? --Calton | Talk 02:49, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Old copyvio. Haven't checked what the new one is like. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MILHIST coordinator election

It's my pleasure to inform you that you have been elected to serve as an Assistant Coordinator of the Military history WikiProject for the next six months. Congratulations!

If you have not already done so, please visit the coordinators' talk page, where you'll be able to find some open tasks as well as reference material and discussions relevant to you. You might also be interested in a bit of advice that I have to offer.

Again, congratulations, and good luck! Kirill 00:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: templates and such: yes, and they're all documented on the coordinators' talk page. Cheers! Kirill 03:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!

Congrats on your election as an Assistant Coordinator of the Military history Wikiproject. In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. I wish you luck in the coming term. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:41, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good show and good luck, Blnguyen. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that Yellow monkey! Well done to you to and heres to a successful and productive 6 months ahead. Woody (talk) 11:23, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and congrats. Tell the Yellow Monkey I say hi and I hope he is enjoying the cricket action. Kyriakos (talk) 12:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! and Good Luck! --SMS ^Talk 16:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On being elected an Assistant MilHist Coordinator. Grant (lurking) 05:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MILHIST election thanks

		Milhist Coordinator elections
		Thank you very much for your support in the recent Military history Wikiproject elections. I went into it expecting to just keep my seat and was astonished to end up with the lead role. I anticipate a rather busy six months :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 13:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply] Haut-Koeningsbourg castle, Alsace.

Hello Blnguyen. Thanks for your support at the Military history elections. With your aid I was able to commision this ship to help plunder the coast of Military history for the third time. Na, just kidding. If you ever require any astance all you have to do is ask and you will see my ship on the horizon. Kyriakos (talk) 14:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC) [reply]

		Milhist Coordinator election
		Thank you very much for your support in the recent Military history Wikiproject election. I'm more than happy to serve the project for another six months! --Eurocopter (talk) 16:01, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply] Russian-Circassian War

YellowMonkey/Archive77: I wish to thank you for your support in my unsuccessful bid at becoming an Assistant Coordinator for the Military history WikiProject. Rest assured that I will still be around, probably even more than before, and I have the utmost confidence in the abilities of the current and new coordinators. I might also mention that I am already planning on running again in August. As always, if you need anything, just get in touch. -MBK₀₀₄ 21:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You did well and have contributed great. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 04:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I want to hear your opinions!

Dear Blnguyen!

I know that your are a member of WikiProjectBudhism and you are also an Asian. In last days, in Religion in China has had controversies between me and Saimdusan (strong anti-Buddhism and Chinese religions). Please give us your opinions and let people know more about the truth of Asian culture. It's really needed!Thank you so much!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Religion_in_China#The_heavy_influence_of_Buddhism_-_Chinese_religions_among_various_East_Asian_civilizations

Thank you so much! Good luck

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 11:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 05:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 25 DYK Medal

Thanks for this beautiful medal, I will print it out and wear proudly on my chest. I did not even count my DYK's. Greetings. Tymek (talk) 22:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Euryale ferox

How did Euryale ferox get on DYK? I thought DYK articles have to have been written in the past 2-3 days. Badagnani (talk) 05:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's acutally five days, but if the article is 80% new content, then it qualifies as being effectively new and is elegible. So if you turn a 1k article into 6k article, it is eleigible even if it was first created five years ago. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 04:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Very nice, thanks.

I'm doing decently well, thanks for asking - I haven't had the kind of time I'd like to devote to writing articles right now, but I've got a few redlinks I'd like to start working on in the next week or so. So you'll maybe see me hanging around DYK more again in future. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 05:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leo J. Meyer

Please have a look at the DRV for Leo J. Meyer (currently seen at User:Meyerj) located at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 March. Its my opinion that the article met the standards for verifiability and notability. I would appreciate your input into the matter. Mrprada911 (talk) 18:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. It seems like colonel is a high rank but why isn't he listed as commanding this troops in doing anything? Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party has been accepted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/John Howard.

For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 19:45, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Grumble. Again. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review of Ian Browne (cyclist)

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth | Talk 16:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noted thanks, Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New! BCAD drive from Milhist

Can I invite you to particpate in our new assessment drive? It's strictly for experienced wiki-gnomes and has a degree of friendly competition built-in. It involves re-evaluating around 3500 Milhist B-Class articles to ensure they match our new criteria. As ever, we're offering a range of awards as our way of expressing our thanks. The drive doesn't start until 18:00 (UTC) on March 10 but you can sign up in advance here. It would be great if you can spare the time, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 05:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One Stripe (200 articles)
Two Stripes (400 articles)
Three Stripes (600 articles)
Chevrons (1000 articles)
Golden Wiki First place

Vijayanagara musical nonet

There are a few copyvio problems with this article too. I request you take appropriate action to ensure that these problems don't exist in the article's locked state.

Material from this article on the Samskrta Text ‘Sangitasuryoday of Bhandaru Laksminarayana’ published in ‘Sangeet Natak’ Journal, vol.XXXVI, No.2, 2001, pp.30-38. is here is where the problems stem from. For example; the article here states "At the height of the Vijayanagara empire great saint-composers like Purandara Dasa, Sripadaraya, Vyasaraya, Vadirajatirtha, Kanaka Dasa, Tallapakam Annamacharya and his descendants, and Nijagunashivayogi flourished. Musical forms, the Kriti, the Suladi, the Ugabhoga, the Dandaka, the Urttanama, the Namavali, the Mundige, the Gita, the Thaya and the Prabandha developed and found wide currency during this period." while the source states "...that great saint-composers like ^Sr¶pdarya,Vysarya, Purandaradsa, Vdirja, Kanakadsa, Tüüapkam Annamchrya and his descendants, and NijaguÄa½sivayogi flourished. The most influential musical formsK¾¤ti, Sµuldi, Ughoga, DaÄÎaka, U¾ttanma, Nmvali, MuÄÎige, G¶ta, ¡Thya and Prabandha developed during this period."

NB: The source in the link provided is a PDF file that is zipped. Upon unzipping the file and opening it, the text would appear a little more identical, as it seems there are some extra characters in the version I have quoted.

P.S. Thanks for your note earlier - will keep that in mind. Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I locked it for a short while to calm things down over an edit war which is my opinion doesn't have any real effect on the content except to make people angry. (The content is the same irrespective of the tag). Hopefully we can move forwards. Take it easy, everyone will be here for a while so it's good to feel comfortable in each other's presence. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 05:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A present from Baldy

		The Vietnam barnstar
		For your outstanding work on adding valuable content related to Vietnam and having an incredible 200 DYKs and generally being a nice editor. The articles seem to be coming in the bucket load which is awesome!! Nobody appreciates your work on that country more than me. I am one of the advocate sof even world coverage on here as you may know. The Bald One is proud of you. Keep it up! ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 22:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou Blofeld, the most important thing is that you're back in action. And yes, the coverage of Asia generally on Wikipedia is not very good. One of the reasons is that there is not much Asian participation. A lot of what is there is written my non-Asians; the % of content by people not from a given country is very high among Asian areas of Wikipedia. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 04:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

International Mathematical Olympiad

Hi, Blnguyen! I've addressed some of the issues you brought up. Would you take a look over the ones I've responded to on the talk page? Cheers, Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 02:40, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I can have a look, although I have a personal policy of not reviewing the same article for GAC twice, since only one person is reviewing, it's good to mix up the variety of opinions among the reviewers. So that there are less extreme review results. I am one of the tougher guys out there, in terms of content expectations. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 04:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quietly Confident Quartet

Take all the time you need, my friend. I've been quite tied up as well as of late, so I completely understand. After all, there are no deadlines on Wikipedia. :) --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:47, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Ganeshbot

I just e-mailed you the source code. It needs Python Wiki Framework and Python installed on the computer. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 03:48, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfB

Banana, banana, banana; banna banana? Banana banana "Banana" banana RfBanana, Banana, Banana!

In English, I wanted to personally thank you, Blnguyen, for your support in my recent RfB. I am thankful and appreciative that you feel that I am worthy of the trust the community requires of its bureaucrats, and I hope to continue to behave in a way that maintains your trust in me and my actions. I have heard the community's voice that they require more of a presence at RfA's of prospective bureaucrats, and I will do my best over the near future to demonstrate such a presence and allow the community to see my philosophy and practices in action. I hope I can continue to count on your support when I decide to once again undergo an RfB. If you have any suggestions, comments, or constructive criticisms, please let me know via talkpage or e-mail. Thank you again. -- Avi (talk) 15:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FLRC

If there's a separate section for FLRCs, you might want to consider splitting the FLCs into their own section as well. Cheers! Kirill 02:04, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

done, Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for getting to DYK - I was just about to save the page when you got in before me :). I'll help with the recognitions if you like - I'll do the article talks. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the trouble to add the extra hooks. Not sure what happened there - when I looked at the mainpage, there was only room for six hooks, so I guess at the last moment someone lengthened the ITN section or shortened the FA section :) Gatoclass (talk) 07:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All the notifications are done now I believe. AD did the articles and I've done the user and nominators, but I see you've done the last three. Gatoclass (talk) 08:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia statistics

Hi Blnguyen. In User talk:Blnguyen/Archive58, I was talking about some graphs you made. Are those graphs still around, or have they gone walkabout? Don't worry too much - I'm just curious. Thanks, Andjam (talk) 08:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still around and not updated for ages In the May 2007 section. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 08:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Andjam (talk) 08:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indian cricket team

I'd strongly suggest using a sub userpage to list these. That way keeping a record would be easier. I can do this for you if you like. -- Cat ^chi? 14:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

It's all good. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

question

User talk:Redthoreau (the Che Guevara editor) has taken to insulting me. I have warned him twice. Several times I did not bother. Would you mind putting a note on his talk page about commenting on content and not on editors? Sincerely, Mattisse (Talk) 02:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now he has warned me about vandalizing his talk page because I put a warning on it. He is posting on my talk page although I have asked him not to. I'm sure a gentle note from you would do the trick. Thanks! Mattisse (Talk) 02:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think everyone has gotten the message by now that perhaps by trying to have the last word over and over, then we'll be stuck. It seems to have blown over. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 07:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully you are right. I have not responded except to put personal attack warnings on his page yesterday for the first time. I have ignored the personal attacks for some weeks now and it did drive me away from editing the article. However, I want to edit the article again, and I will template him or seek further help if he continues. I have asked him several times to only respond on the article talk page and to comment on content and not on editors. He has virtually "owned" the Che Guevara article since December 2007. Thanks! I will hope for the best! Mattisse (Talk) 13:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with the Falun Gong article

Please have a look. [1] [2] [3] [4] Four reverts in 24 hours, pushing content that clearly violates the Wikipedia standards. Linking to James Randi's personal website, which does not qualify by Wikipedia:Sources. Making unreferenced allegations, or insisting on personal elaborations on the provided references. User:Mrund has been reminded of Wikipedia policies and guidelines on the article's talk page, but he has almost completely ignored these lengthy discussions. ✔ Olaf Stephanos ✍ 19:58, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another revert. [5] ✔ Olaf Stephanos ✍ 20:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

already dealt with. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 02:51, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Autoblock for you to check out

Can you look into this: [6]. Normally, when an autoblock appears to have effected someone as possible innocent collateral damage, I will unblock without comment, but as the initial block was related to sockpuppetry, I thought I would bring it by you for further review, since you are more familiar with the sock master... Could you check into this and see if it is the same person, or an innocent caught by an autoblock? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:34, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's not teh guy who was socking on Arab topics. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 03:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Any chance you could post the update? It's four hours late. Gatoclass (talk) 04:10, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, Royalbroil says he'll do it. Thanks anyhow :) Gatoclass (talk) 04:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Bob Windle

The article Bob Windle you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Bob Windle for things needed to be addressed. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 16:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I have replied on the talk page with some thoughts. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 13:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, thanks, Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 05:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Bob Windle

The article Bob Windle you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:Bob Windle for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 20:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thanks

		Thanks for the support
		First, I gotta say wow, and for you to keep it up. Great work on the number of FA's and GA's you have. Thanks for your strong support on my request for adminship, which passed 92/2/2. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films coordinator elections

The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 10:01, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

user:Kumarrao and User:Dineshkannambadi

Sir, this user continues to peddle false information in some Telugu/Andhra Pradesh related articles without any scholarly evidence/citations to back it up. You had at one time banned one of his sock-puppets also. When asked for a citation, he provides false citations which do not add up after verification in google search. I just want you to be aware of this. If he continues, a warning may be necessary. Points he wants to prove,

The Chalukya dynasty originally are from Andhra Pradesh--->Totally unsubstatiated. fails WP:UNDUE.
The Kannada script originated from Bottiprollu script in Andhra Pradesh.-->Totally unsubstatiated. Both citations he has provided so far dont even discuss the issue. I have removed it.
The Vijayanagara empire originated from Telugu people--->Controversial. I wrote the FA containing both popular theories of Telugu and Kannadiga origin and this info exists in the very first paragraph after the lead.

Over the past 6 months I have tried to remove any unsubstantiated info introduced by him, but he prefers to continue to add it back silently, to sub-articles and such. He does not exactly alter info in FA's, because he knows that will not stand, so he adds his theories to a plehora of minor articles which could be misleading and cause edit wars on FA's in the future.thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This User deletes any information which does not confirm to his ideas.

1. Input regarding the origin of Chalukyas as gathered from a well-known history professor (Durgaprasad) who has dwelt upon various theories of origin is consistently deleted by him under the garb of undue importance. I challenge this as intolerance of divergent views. (http://igmlnet.uohyd.ernet.in:8000/gw_44_5/hi-res/hcu_images/G2.pdf)

Can you show that this publication is a endorsed academic publication of any sort. Because the publisher seems to have this book published at a high school college printing office, rather than a univeristy printing press, which is the standard for a proper academic reference. Also the author's preface said that the book is intended as a study guide for exam cramming. (And the cover looks cheesy as). Does this guy have a PhD to start with? Which page are you reffering to anyhow? Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does not meet WP:UNDUE. I have 10 citations to claim they were from Karnataka. More over, Durga Prasad does not say Chalukyas are from Andhra. I have read the web page from this author.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2. The origin of Telugu-Kannada script is universally accepted as that from Asokan brahmi script the variant of which was found in Bhattiprolu. This is also known as Bhattiprolu brahmi script of 3rd century BC (Row 3 in Table 3.1a on page 79). The source I cited is from a book written by the foremost authority on Dravidian languages and scripts. He is Bhadriraju Krishnamurti. In table 3.1a on page 79 it was clearly indicated that Salankayana Telugu-Kannada script (row 7) evolved from Bhattiprolu Brahmi script. Verify this and take suitable action against the user for reverting my inputs. I consider his reverts vandalism.(http://books.google.com/books?q=dravidian+languages&btnG=Search+Books) The user should learn to respect the views of authorities on the subject matters. Kumarrao (talk) 16:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are giving false information here. The origin of Kannda-Telugu script is from Mouryan Brahmi and is clearly shown in the chart on those pages you cite from. It may have made its way through Bhatiprolu, but that does not make it that the origin. This matter needs to be settled now.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The prof's opinion in his book is that B. Brahmi is the second phase, not the 1st origin of KT. So "originated from M Brahmi through various phases including B Brahmi" is more accurate. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading

1. Durgaprasad clearly says on p. 86 that Chalukya Vishya comprises ceded istricts of Andhra (Kurnool, Kadapa, Paalamoor districts ceded by Nizam Nawab to British) and Chalukyas were original inhabitants of this region and served as vassals of Satavahanas and later Ikshvaku kings.

Conjecture info again. Durga Prasad starts with Like the Kadambas and Chutus, the Chalukyas were an indigenous tribe. The rest of the para is unclear. Where do you think these clans are natives of? Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:50, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does this have to do with the disputed edits? Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! this is the second dispute. An old issue. Kumarrao wants to prove (with one single confusing paragraph) that the Chalukyas originated from Andhra. The multitude of citations I have provided in the FA is not good enough for him.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:54, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The FA (Chalukya dynasty) clearly says the earliest origins is shrouded in legends and myths. What is clear is that the founders of the empire were natives of Badami in Karnataka. Any attempt to prove that they originated from Andhra or Persia or Karnataka, going back to the 2-3rd century, is mere guess work. I want Kumarrao to stop peddling his one angle theory from one unclear text book. This will solve the problem. Straight and simple.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 00:15, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2. Asokan brahmi is the original script (row 1) that travelled from north India to Andhra along with buddhists. Its first and oldest variant (3rd century BCE) was found in Bhattiprolu and is hence named Bhattiprolu Brahmi (Row 3). This script over time evolved into tamil, Telugu & Kannada scripts. It is universally accepted. It is amazing how some persons are immune to reason and logic.

Are you using Asokan and Mauryan interchangably? By your reasoning, it seems to imply that Gautama Buddha is not the root teacher of Buddhism. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the Kannada-Telugu script had their origin in Ashokan Brahmi script (Mauryan Brahmi), which I believe it did, why are you claiming they originated from Bhatiprollu? What if the script had briefly visited Sri Lanka. Would the Kannada-Telugu script have originated from Sri Lamka also? How many origins can anything/anyone have?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:50, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the pages yourself rather depending upon misleading comments of biased Users.Kumarrao (talk) 16:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's all this got to do with the edits on Kannada script? see below. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response

I presume I am supposed to be looking at Kumarrao (talk · contribs) recent proposed edits to Kannada script. Well,

Source 1, the Buddhist Andhra archaeology website talks about Brahmi being present on the Asokan/Nagarjuna Buddhist artifacts, but says nothing about Kannada, although Kumarrao has added this as a source for a sentence claiming evidence of Kannada evolution
Source 2, teh comments by the prof in The Hindu artilce talk about Old Tamil and Telugu, not Kannada. "Dr. Sastry says Telugu and Tamil had evolved from the inscriptions on crystal caskets in which the Buddha's relics were preserved at Bhattiprolu in Guntur district."[7]
Kumarrao says "The script also travelled to Rayalaseema region, the original home of Chalukyas." - Page 168 doesn't say this, the closest reference id "Rayalasima" on pg 170 and 205, which are about 14th century Andhra groups battling it out with Muslims. The section is about religious warfare etc, not about linguistics
Can you show that Dr Krishnamurti's interpretation is widely accepted? Doing a comparison and colation of academic views would help. Also, a source to say that modern Kannada comes from old Telugu-Kannada also helps.

Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Dear Blnguyen,

Please take an objective view of the matter by carefully reading the sources (Durgaprasad and Bhadriraju Krishnamurti). The former is a Professor of History in the University of Hyderabad, a Federal government university. The latter is a greatly respected professor, researcher and foremost exponent of Dravidian languages, scripts and their history and evolution.

You have seen the wrong pages (168, 170 and 205) in Durgaprasad’s book instead of the page # 86 as indicated by me. Durgaprasad clearly says the Chalukyas were an indigenous tribe (meaning not immigrants from North West India/Persia etc). They were vassals of Satavahanas and later Ikshvakus who ruled Andhra country. The belonged to a region known as “Chalukya vishaya’ which historians ascribe to the present day Raayalaseema (Kurnool, Kadapa, Anantapur districts) region of Andhra. This is one view expressed by a reputed historian. What is the harm in mentioning this? Since the matter of the origin of chalukyas is anyway controversial it would only add another divergent viewpoint.

Are you referring to Chalukya dynasty because I don't see an active dispute there. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 02:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kumarrao has been generally writing about the origin of the Chalukyas in other articles using the web link from Durga Prasad. I tried to reason with him that only a majority viewpoint should be carried forward.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this user nneds to understand what WP:UNDUE means. As such, I have again and again tried to point out the very first line Like the Kadambas and Chutus to this user who seems to be ignoring that part of the paragraph. Speaking about objectivity, if he wanted to be objective, he would not have written about only Durgaprasad's view point in several articles such as History of Andhra, Telugu script, Telugu language, Bhatiprolu etc. giving scant regrad to the majority view point. Why is he trying to spread such a small minority vew point?. He can't claim ignorance of the majority view point because he has already edit warred on the Chalukya dynasty article. Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a example in objectivity. Lets consider the same pdf that Kumarrao has provided (Durga prasad) and jump to the Satavahana empire, who also call themselves Andhras. A Kannada origin of the Satavahana kings from Bellary has also been proposed by one scholar which Durga Prasad rejects. Do you see the Karnataka work group jumping all over that page and plastering it all over wiki calling the Satavahana's Kannadigas. No, because its a minority view point. This is objectivity.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The proposed edits in Kannada script are relevant to the article simply because both the modern forms of Telugu and Kannada scripts share the same origin in Telugu-Kannada script of 6th century. This script evolved from the original Asokan/Mauryan Brahmi script of ancient Bihar which travelled southwards to Andhra along with Buddhism and gave rise to Bhattiprolu Brahmi script of 3rd century BCE. It is unequivocally agreed that all scripts of India and also those present in South East Asia and South Asia had their origin Brahmi script. Since we are concerned with the scripts of Dravidian languages as they exist In South India, their origin is traced from Bhattiprolu Brahmi script (South India) which anyway had its source in Brahmi script. Hence, the sources # 1 and 2 are relevant. However, I have no objection if these sources are removed and substituted by Krishnamurti’s book citation.

If a script made its way through Bhatiprolu, it does make it native to Bhatiprolu. How simpler can logic get. It is widely accepted in the world that South Indian scripts evovled from Ashokan Brahmi of which there are 14 inscriptions in Karnataka itself from the same time period as the Bhatiprolu script.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a paragraph from E.P. Rice (Rice, E.P. [1921] (1982). Kannada Literature. New Delhi: Asian Educational Services. ISBN 8120600630.): The written character which is common to Kannada and Telugu and which spread over the south and was carried even to Java through that of the cave inscriptions of the west of India, are that of all his inscriptions except in the extreme north-west of Punjab. It belongs to the period of about 250 B.C.....

The origin of Kannada and Telugu scripts are the Ashokan Brahmi. Bhatiprolu may have been an intermediate point, but you can't draw a line there and say the script originated in Bhatiprolu.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 12:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other Sources which indicated that Telugu-Kannada script evolved from Bhattiprolu Brahmi script:

i). Indiain Epigraphy: a guide to the study of inscriptions in Sanskrit, Prakrit, and the other Indo-Aryan languages, by Richard Solomon, Oxford University Press, 1998, p.40, ISBN 0195099842 ii). Indian Epigraphy by Dineschandra Sircar, Motilal Banarsidass, 1996, p.46, ISBN 8120811666.

Thanks. Kumarrao (talk) 10:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regrets

Dear Bnlguyen,

I deeply regret for bothering you. I thought I could get a hearing from you. I was not prepared to hear proxies replying to my appeals on your behalf with lame arguments. I faced enough of it earlier. If other users can use your talk page in the manner it is used in this instance and if Wiki guidelines permit it, so be it. I know what would happen if I keep insisting on my view point. Suddenly, four other users will get activated instantly and badger me turn by turn. So many others were victims of this group like me in many articles. I again apologize for wasting your valuable time. Bye.Kumarrao (talk) 14:33, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't know why you would expect people to not try and rebut your claims, given that they are in content dispute with you, It's natural. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 03:01, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK update

Looks to be ready if you want to post it. Gatoclass (talk) 08:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Bing :) Don't worry about the notifications, I will do them. Gatoclass (talk) 08:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]