User talk:Sitush

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Sadads's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Ilgrosso's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I don't know why my (1st) article was deleted, I was still working on it, I don't think it should have been removed, and I can't work out how to use this weird 'talk' system, so I hope you see this. I'd like to discuss the page with you. How do I do this and get the contents back?

Foodster — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foodster (talk • contribs) 14:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi. What article was that? The above message is the only contribution made using your Foodster account, so I presume you created the article as an unregistered user? Nothing wrong with that, by the way, but I cannot work out what you are referring to. Deleted pages can be retrieved by admins, so if you point me in the right direction then I'll see if I can find someone to assist you & I might be able to explain why it was deleted in the first place. - Sitush (talk) 15:10, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Strike the above. Found it now - Locations4Business. The article made no attempt to "prove" the importance of its subject, which is a necessity even for new articles. All articles need ultimately to prove notability of their subject using reliable sources. As I recall, your article had the appearance of being primarily an advertisement, which is also not permitted. I can probably arrange for an admin to retrieve it for you but it will not initially be placed in the mainspace of Wikipedia. It will be put in a "userspace" area where you could work on bringing it up to scratch, at which time it would then be transferred into the main area where everyone can see it. I am happy to advise you etc about how it could be improved but please do not that not everything is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. I have no idea if this subject is or is not until I see it again. - Sitush (talk) 15:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Chandigarh Capital Region proposal

I've opened a centralized discussion there to handle a number of the different articles related to CCR. I'd like your input to see if I've broken down the articles correctly and if you think it's a reasonable solution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwyrxian (talk • contribs)

Book you removed from NAIR page

You have removed this book [1] as ref in the Nair page & I don't understand why because it seems rather interesting (please read pages 303 to 312; for instance this: "Nayar chiefs and Nayar soldiers are first mentioned in three copperplate inscriptions, tentatively dated late seventh, mid-eighth, and early ninth centuries.... All these districts were famous Nayar chiefdoms in the later periods and persisted until the eighteenth century. The plates suggest that Nayar chiefs with private armies had emerged as vassals of the Perumals at least by the ninth century. By the mid-thirteenth century, at the latest, the greater Nayar chiefs had become independant small kings,..." page 303). Thank you.Rajkris (talk) 22:58, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure if it was me that removed it but I'll take your word for that. The odd thing is, it has been sitting here for a few days on one of my Firefox tabs as something that I need to take note of! I had a slight panic attack earlier today when Firefox crashed with 17 tabs open, but thankfully it recovered ok.

I am struggling through Fuller, Moore, Panikkar etc on caste & marriage issues at the moment but, I promise you, the thing is there in the tab and I will look at it. Sorry if I have done something wrong here as it seems not to have been intentional. This is a real mess of a subject and I am well aware that there are still big discrepancies in the article. I'm hoping that it is getting a little closer to where it should be but I still have some major concerns about sourcing and, in particular, about relying on so few sources for big chunks of the info. It is going to take me a while to wade through it all. - Sitush (talk) 23:16, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

ACtually, if you can spot the diff where I removed it then I would be grateful for it. I rather think now that I did remove it but put an explanatory comment about how it might be useful for other stuff (which would be why I kept the tab open). I'll dig for this but you might have already found it. - Sitush (talk) 23:25, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Here [2].
Another interesting ref: "The Nayars as the ruling and military castes, formed the core of this aristocraty..."' page 298.Rajkris (talk) 23:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Not a great edit summary on my part then, although it appears to be correct on the point that Robbie.Smit raised. The source must have some sort of hook which attracted me, otherwise I would not have kept the tab open. I promise, I will return to it. Give me a nudge if I do not ... but give me time to sort out the ongoing stuff also! I'm both trying to do my own stuff & also keep an eye on CarTick's edits to the article at the same time. It is quite exhausting because I am well aware that people are likely to get upset quicker than I can sort things out. I'm happy to have a debate but I am not remotely connected to India and so am having to learn stuff from scratch. I hope that this makes sense. I am supposed to be doing stuff on English bareknuckle boxers and defunct engineering companies of Manchester, but these subcontinent things seem to be taking over much of my WP time. Plus side: I am learning a LOT from it. - Sitush (talk) 23:52, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok I will watch your page.Rajkris (talk) 00:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll try to remember to include your username in the edit summary, so that you do not waste too much time. And remember that nudge: I am due in hospital soon for a heart repair job, so my mind is not always on the important things. - Sitush (talk) 00:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

All the best for this surgery.Rajkris (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your thought. It will be fine: bypass & valve replacement is, oh er, not too scary. But I am seeking a second opinion because I'd like to see 50. I shall amend my will and leave you something - all of my debts! ;) - Sitush (talk) 00:31, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

OMG, are you kidding? Do you think Wikipedia is some sort of volunteer project where you can just walk away for something trivial like surgery? Get your nose back in those books, good sir. </sarcasm> In all seriousness, good luck and good health. Don't worry--I'm sure that not only will the same subcontinent/caste-warring/reliable sourcing problems still be here when you get back, there will probably be dozens more, at least. So...something to look forward to? Qwyrxian (talk) 00:35, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Wish you successful surgery and speedy recovery.Shyamsunder (talk) 10:58, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Not kidding about the medical situation. Am kidding about leaving all my debts to Rajkris. I've actually left them to you <g> Seriously, the situation may change because my cousin (a cardiologist himself) has suggested a second opinion. He is of course tied down by medical ethics but feels that I should pursue all options. Which makes sense. - Sitush (talk) 00:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Carlos Slim

Hello. You have a new message at Free Bear's talk page.

A Barnstar for You

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For slogging through the muck, for spending hours and hours sorting things out, for suffering abuse and turning the other cheek, for your perseverance, for your patience, and for booting the baddie, I hereby award you this barnstar. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:52, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, sweet. Thank you very much, Anna. I rather think that you did more of what you describe than I did, if you are referring to the MKY saga. Hopefully we can all get back to doing more productive stuff now. Attracting abuse appears, by the way, to be something of a specialism of mine - water off a duck's back now. - Sitush (talk) 01:46, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Chandigarh Capital Region

I thought I sent this to you with the others. I guess I didn't click save. Anyway, I see you've responded at Q's. Here it is anyway, for the record. :)

If we can decide the fate of Talk:Chandigarh Capital Region, then we can pretty much wrap up User:Anna Frodesiak/Silver sandbox. There remains one or two non-Chandigarh Capital Region-related items there, but if we can sort out the CCR ones, then we can paste silver into a collapsebox at M's talk, and move on from this tragedy. Best wishes to all.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

resource request

Hi, I've uploaded the scanned pages of the India book as requested. You can find the link at: Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. Best, GabrielF (talk) 17:25, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Bennett Coughlin

Hi Sitush, I noticed that you were reverting Bcoughlin10 (talk · contribs) and discussing with him at Bears FC. That user has been repeatedly adding mentions of himself and his friend (Scott Kasouf) at numerous soccer articles, with claims that they are professional soccer players in the Bahamas, Guatemala, for Manchester United, etc. They appear to be high school boys wanting to have some fun with Wikipedia. So, if you see either of them added to articles, it's a hoax. Bennett also edits from an IP. You can see more at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Scott Kasouf. Just a heads-up, First Light (talk) 17:28, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Contacted mod about civility issue

Note here[3] I contacted the admin who did the PP yesterday, to let him know the discourse continues to be uncivil on much of one side. He's turning in for the night (as I expect our self-described foes are), but plans to contact them in the morning. The language has certainly been colourful, and I regret not keeping a running list of different communities I've been accusing of being on WP. I recall being called a "Wahhabi" or "Nadji" plenty of times on Islamic articles (for daring to imply that the Foo Sect was not the One True Religion And All Others Are Heresies). There are a couple other castes I've been accused of being that I had never even heard of: "Admit your agenda! You're a vile Foo shudra, and that is why you come here to defame my caste!" I believe I can chalk up Nair as accusations of my being a Nadar, so maybe I'll start the running list there. Do you have a similar list? We could start playing "baseless caste accusation bingo"! MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

LOL! I wonder if text-to-audio programs have a "bleep" function? I watched your thread at Boing's page develop - that page has been on my watchlist for quite some time now. As I've said before, he has always come across as being extremely fair and considered. That is exactly what is needed in this situation.

My dog is sat here at my side. He looks quite embarrassed that he is being associated with my mother in that way. - Sitush (talk) 20:02, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Nair pics, and neat milhist page

This page isn't authoritative, but it can lead us to some solid refs, and we may be able to scrounge up some history images: [4]. As a Portuguese speaker, I do want to dig around a bit and find if Nairos is the true Portuguese term. It'd at least be worth mentioning in the article under the Pt. period, and might be a keyword for digging up some Pt. refs.

Note also I added an already-WC pic of a serpent grove, a portrait of a (claimed, need to check her family's page) Nair aristrocrat showing attire, etc. If we can get someone local yet level-headed, I hope to get someone to take a photo of a Nair chow-spread from some festival or whatnot for the "cuisine" sub-section. If we're going to aim for GA or whatnot (which I think is looking more and more plausible), some good photos will help the cause. Plus they're pretty. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Gott mit uns, NSFW pic, first hit: [5]. Goshen, do I wish to add this to the article. What thinks? MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Woah! Which is as near as I can get to any non-English language <g> Images are not essential for GAs but they do break it up, if they're relevant and comply with the various policies. The Nairos point is an interesting one but you'll be on your own on that one (that is, I have barely managed to extend my linguistic capability beyond gibberish, so do not expect me to understand Portuguese sources etc). As for pictures of food, well, they make me hungry!

I am so pleased that you dipped your toe into this water. You have done a lot and it is appreciated. - Sitush (talk) 00:22, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries, no hurries. Just fielding an idea here, but I've been pondering it, and at this point I'm feeling a little less interested in trying to build up Deccan issues (now that I've pounded some of the POV out of them) as much as I'd be inclined to mess with some Karnatic issues. I speak Portuguese, and have some passing familiarity with using Dutch translation on Google (did a bunch of Indonesia topics), and that part of India just sounds a bit more interesting to me at the moment. I'd be willing to shift fire for a bit and stick with you on this Nair issue if you like, and if you have a next article down the road covering the Sweet Sunny South, I wouldn't mind joining in if you could use some backup. MatthewVanitas (talk) 00:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The watercolours are 1928 (and painter died 1944), so unfortunately not in the PD yet. But I found some other good historical Nair images, if not as artsy. Oh, BTW, Shannon did indeed get upset about my mentioning Nair undergarments. I wasn't going out of my way to add them, it's just what I ran across first and what seemed like it would be harder to find later, and then I did a bunch on jewelry. I suggested that he try adding content on other garments to balance it out. Would be nice if he does. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:07, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Shame about the paintings. As for recent events, well, Shannon is not going to be adding anything for the next 48 hours and I do not have much faith that he will add anything constructive after that. But we will see. Why people bring this on themselves is beyond my comprehension.

As for where I will go next, I have no idea. There is at least another week on Nair, and then some housekeeping to do with the numerous related articles. There may be some argument on at least one of them - Malayala Kshatriya. Regardless, your involvement is always welcome, anywhere where I am & there will be further work on South India. As far as other subject interests go, what do you know about 18th century English bareknuckle boxers? I have a big-ish plan for them <cackle>. - Sitush (talk) 08:55, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Google books --> alternate source

Hi Sitush, I recently heard that it's best not to use Google Books for obtaining information for articles, what I'm understanding is one of the major issues is the way the info is scanned in which may result in different page numbers depending upon where someone pulled up the article (U.S. vs. UK, for instance). (I remember your earlier comments about not using snippets, which I stopped doing after your comments.)

I've tried a couple of sources but an thrashing about a bit - teaching an old dog new tricks issue very likely. Do you have a recommendation of which source to use as an alternative?--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:39, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I saw that comment a day or so ago, being the nosey person that I am. TK and myself appear to be on divergent paths regarding various things, all of which have cropped up on your talk page & nowhere else. I remain unconvinced that FACs must use the citation format TK appears to insist is necessary, and although there are indubitably issues regarding GBooks (I'll find you a very good link to an essay later), the insistence on hardcopy versions is - in my opinion - extreme. Remember WP:AGF? Let me have a think, and perhaps a chat with some other people who have got stuff through FAC, but my gut feeling is that you are being steamrollered here.

Personally, if a book is available at www.archive.org or hathitrust then I would use that rather than a reprint etc. But that is just me, it is unlikely to be of much use in your current situation, and it may have nearly as many issues regarding "view-ability" as GBooks has. I cannot really advise you what to do in this situation because staying involved will be an extremely good learning exercise for you in ways unconnected to the which version of sources/how to cite palaver ... but it appears to be coming at a cost that, to me, would make me inclined to walk away. And on that point I know that I got a reply from someone fairly recently on another talk page about just where the line should be drawn. The individual concerned is arguably one of the best reviewers of articles around but is having his own issues at the moment. Nonetheless, I would (do!) strongly take his advice to heart, as do others here including college profs etc. I'll try to expand when I have dug about a bit. - Sitush (talk) 23:49, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually, Carole, I have just caught up on your talk page. Walk away, would be my decision. There is no honour lost etc and it is my own opinion that some people are easier to work with than others. If you are not gelling then it simply is not worth the heartache. It is possible for two people to hold different opinions and both be "right", in the sense of policy/guidelines ... even basic humanity. There are plenty of other people out there who have got articles through to FA etc, and you are not bound to work with anyone on such a project. You have demonstrated time and again your willingness to collaborate, so just treat this as you would in the real world: a personality clash, a blip. Go mix yourself a G&T/V&T/coffee & milk/whatever as long as it does not involve cyanide ... and relax. Let others be cranky if they so choose, not you.

Nonetheless, I will do as I promised in my msg above. It may be of use to you in the future. - Sitush (talk) 00:15, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the laugh, Sitush. For me it's a Seabreeze with vodka (hold the cyanide) - excellent idea!!! My take is that this is a culmination of a person's self-fulfilling prophecy - he's determined I'm a certain way and bound to prove it. And, I totally agree, life's way too short to be involved in a dynamic that is disruptive for all involved. You and I have both felt the pain. Off to seabreeze! (a new verb)--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I have seen that person in a similar mode previously. Don't fret about it. It takes all sorts to make the world go round and, hey, always remember that we're improving this world, the Wikipedia world, one article at a time. It's good that you have can see beyond the personalities: you are supposed to enjoy doing this, not feel obliged to do so. Enjoy the drink. The nearest I get to a seabreeze is a stiff northwesterly on the beach near Abergele ... and it is not enjoyable for me, although the dog loves it. - Sitush (talk) 00:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Talking about things approving one article at a time: If you don't mind I'd love to run an idea\project by you that I've been asked to be a part of to get your take. After the Seabreeze that is, tonight. Email to you by your tomorrow.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:44, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

OK, speak tomorrow. Here's a (hopefully) useful conversation involving Malleus (an unbelievably good reviewer etc, but has his moments like the rest of us) and Drmies (who recently attained tenured professorship in the US using, in part, his work on WP for his application!). Malleus plays a very straight bat and that may have "cost" him an adminship (not that adminship is the be-all, end-all of life here), while Drmies has recently become an admin. Oh, I'm in there somewhere, being my usual dimwit self. The thread - Sitush (talk) 00:51, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

... and the essay - User:Uncle_G/On_common_Google_Books_mistakes - Sitush (talk) 01:01, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for both. What a nice collaborative thread you shared! The only thing I personally have been interested in pursuing is GA or FA status for Still life paintings by Vincent van Gogh (Paris) - and at the moment even that has soured a bit for me. Oh, and Langlois Bridge at Arles (Van Gogh series) is up for GA review now.

Regarding the Google books: It seems to me that through you I learned most everything in the Google essay - I especially remember the reprint dates issues when dealing with old historical books for the Welsh articles. The only thing that was new in concept for me was the pagination issue - which makes more sense now when I remember you saying you would have to check page numbers on references to ensure they were the same. Yep, I remember WP:AGF. I guess I was dumbstruck to hear about GoogleBooks being such a serious issue at this point and why didn't it come up like 30, 40, 60 articles ago. I guess in practice what to do about this is to find something in Google books (just love using it - searching is so easy), I could use another source to go and double-check page numbers, etc. And, I can always go to the main library and double-check books. I'll check out the two sources you mentioned above.--CaroleHenson (talk) 05:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, what fun I just checked out www.archive.org! I remember you used www.archive.org for some of the Welsh articles. Yes, I liked this, the pages are easy to read and navigate and I know how to use it: win-wins all around.--CaroleHenson (talk) 06:01, 7 June 2011 (UTC))

GBooks is not a problem per se. As long as you are aware of its limitations, as you are. The significant point in the Drmies/Malleus/Sitush conversation, in terms of this conversation, is where Malleus effectively say "do not be bullied by a reviewer: if you think that the style you have used is right then don't change the article just to suit the reviewer - seek consensus instead". Oh, and where he says that as far as he is aware (and he has much experience) no article has ever failed GA/FA purely because of WP:MOS issues. The format of citations falls in that category & this is what I have been saying to Modernist/TK etc for some time on your page. The policies specifically accept numerous different citation styles, so anything that those users say to the contrary is just plain wrong. I think that the link-through method to a bibliography is preferable to the non-linked version; it is fine if others disagree; it is not fine if they appear to be deluding you about the policy. The important thing is to be consistent throughout an article; being consistent from one article to the next is entirely up to you. I rather think that the first time I introduced citation templates to you I said that "this is how I do it", not "this is the way it must be done". - Sitush (talk) 08:42, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you said it like that or - "you might find this helpful". The discussion about the VvG was a really hurtful conversation and I realize now that as soon as I realized 1) what I typed was not being read (for which there was already some prior history), 2) that instinctually I felt like I wasn't wanted to be part of the group and 3) there were wild assumptions made without civilly bringing it forward - I should have stopped typing, kept my hurt to myself and moved on. That's my lesson from this.--CaroleHenson (talk) 13:55, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Ban discussion of Maheshkumaryadav on WP:AN

I have opened a discussion on WP:AN in which you are mentioned. It can be found at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Community ban discussion for Maheshkumaryadav. Please feel free to comment there if you wish. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Temple Entry Proclamation photo ideas

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Talk:Temple_Entry_Proclamation#Photo_ideas.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:44, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Finding a bunch of PD photo sites, interested?

Oi Sitush, I've stumbled across a few awesome archives of historical India images. Are you interested in raiding these as well? Here's just one of several: http://www.oldindianphotos.in/2010/10/photograph-of-two-men-and-two-women-of.html . MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:12, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

That looks like an excellent discovery. Images are not really my thing - I use them when I "have to", but when I do have to then I do the research as best I can. Having said which, I'll be delving into that site a lot. Fascinating. - Sitush (talk) 23:01, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:Articles for deletion/Burndennett Cricket Club

Thanks for leaving the note on WP:Articles for deletion/Burndennett Cricket Club, I was doing the same thing at the same time. I have also left a note on the other open Irish Cricket club AfD's. Mtking (talk) 23:32, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Something about "great minds", perhaps? It is a messy situation. I do understand the desire to perpetuate articles. I also understand that AfD can actually assist in articles surviving (I should do, since I took one from AfD to GA in a couple of months or so earlier this year). Indeed, the AfD for Burndennett has at least produced something extra beyond what was a single sentence.

What I am struggling with is "everything but the kitchen sink" being thrown in there in an attempt to assist GNG. I really, really do believe that reports of arson attacks etc at a minor cricket club etc are tangential to the article's subject. As someone at CRIC has pointed out, if they fail the CRIC guideline then from CRIC's POV the only basis for existence here is if they have some historic basis. Tbh, I can see every club article in that particular league being deleted under GNG criteria. But that is just me, and if I am found to be on the "wrong side" of consensus then so be it. - Sitush (talk) 00:26, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

All Saints' Academy, Cheltenham

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from All Saints' Academy, Cheltenham, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! TerriersFan (talk) 02:34, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Links to references

Hi, do you mind sharing a link to an article that you worked on that has the link from the reference to the bibliography? I remember the concept but not the syntax for the two components (brackets + ref name in the source) and I cannot find the article that has an example you added. I'm trying to do that for User:CaroleHenson/List of Works by Frank Weston Benson, where there are links to similar reference information. Also, it's a little weird because the reference sources are web pages - but with info about a lot of paintings - so I'm treating the sources kind of like a bibliography. Thanks!!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 05:51, 10 June 2011 (UTC)‎

Gwladys ferch Dafydd Gam ? I am also using now at Nair, where I include the year of the publication in the Refs list - see, for eg, the 1st two citations. - Sitush (talk) 08:19, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I tried it an it works like magic!--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

TIBCO Hawk

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from TIBCO Hawk, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! TerriersFan (talk) 16:48, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Why? I sort of understand the other one that you did, since it could be construed as controversial (my bad judgement, sorry). However, I do not understand this one - there was no attempt to assert notability. I can't recall the last time someone reverted two of my prods inside 24 hours, so I am curious. - Sitush (talk) 16:54, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Cancel that. It had been prod'ed before. - Sitush (talk) 16:55, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Nair revert

You beat me to the revert of that section. I noticed that the user created an account specifically to make that reversion. Do you want to check for sockpuppetry? Ryan Vesey (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I would, if I could work out the likely sock owner. It could be one of several, but most likely User:Robbie.Smit or User:Shannon1488. - Sitush (talk) 17:20, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I am also concerned about the username - RacistToddyTapper could be insulting - and the text on his/her talk page, which I cannot translate but is probably abusive. - Sitush (talk) 17:21, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Reported per username. Ryan Vesey (talk) 17:25, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

That was quick. I was still reading the instructions! There is a lot of flak flying around the Nair article and an admin has been keeping an eye on things. Thanks for your help. - Sitush (talk) 17:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I used Twinkle. I have a lot of respect for Boing! said Zebedee, that's why I took an interest. Ryan Vesey (talk) 17:32, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Me too, two. That is, respect for Boing and use Twinkle. I've never used TW for UAA before, though. Must look that one up. - Sitush (talk) 17:35, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sitush

Hi wanted to express my apology for what I was rude to you, that efinitivamente not my style, but you took me out of my boxes. I understand that your mission in this website is trying to provide the correct information. I admit I go, and I apologize a thousand ways. I hope to be friends and not have any problem from now on, I promise not to mess with you, let alone in failing in this regard. Good Night and Do u speack spanish?--Marleshy (talk) 01:40, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikify Nair

Presently, the Nair article has no logical sequence. It seems like a collection of scattered information. Many of the matters mentioned there are irrelevant to the article, and can be removed to make the article a more specific one. You are putting as much information as possible to give others an impression that you are 'improving' this article, I am afraid. --KondottySultan (talk) 11:09, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

You can think what you like about it, no problem, but you do not have consensus for some of the things you are doing. I realise that the talk page is very long but in there you will find agreement to extend and then split the article, and to formulate a lead section after the body has been sorted out. Even non-contributors to the page have recognised that there are considerable improvements.

I am not the only person who is aware that it is a bit "choppy" at the moment but your changes are (mostly) not improving anything. All they are doing is making it harder to hit a target. The plan is for this to become a Good Article, which is something I have experience of achieving. Have you? - Sitush (talk) 11:13, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. This article is now elaborately describes many things that are not related to Nairs. Eg: Origin of Caste system, supernatural beliefs, Serpant groves, kuttichathan theyyam, etc etc... If this is what you call achieving, then you can go on with your idea and later rename the article to something relevant like "Hinduism in Kerala" or "Communal history of Kerala" or so. --KondottySultan (talk) 11:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Copying to article talk page. - Sitush (talk) 11:30, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Edits made by Kondotty Sultan.

Hi, this is in relation to the edits being made by user KondottySultan, on the Nair Page. I have a strong hunch, given his username, and the nature of his edits, that he might have some religious propaganda - again just my feeling.

Regardless, seeing the spate of edits and the tone he adopted I had to revert back to, just before where he went off earlier today. Please feel free to add whatever you might have added in the midst of that fracas. I also feel we need to get some Admins or the likes to issue him a warning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SumerianPrince (talk • contribs) 13:56, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Your message

email You have emailed me. I cannot read Malayalam. - Sitush (talk) 08:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

The message which you have received on mail was an automatic alert sent by ml.wikipedia.org when a message appears on a "discussion page" . If you dont want to receive email from wikipedia, you can uncheck it from your preference setting. Feel free to contact.Thank you. -- Raghith 09:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Tamil Kshatriya

I need some more days to add my conclusion. I will do my best to add it before next sunday. I'm very busy that's the main pb... But fyi, I really don't think what i'm going to add will change your position on this article.Rajkris (talk) 00:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey, take a long as you need. Real life is important! It took me several weeks to do what I promised to do, and you'll get the same respect that you extended to me. I would like to think that despite our differences of opinion about some things we are, nonetheless, friends. I certainly value your input & have learned from it. . - Sitush (talk) 00:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey here is the ref you were looking for [6](regarding the paravars' quota). Hope you find it useful.Lindamd90 (talk) 12:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. We had looked at that one but it contradicts other information published by the TN government and which is dated. There is a discussion about this somewhere in the article talk page but it has probably got archived by now. - Sitush (talk) 14:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

kshatriya

i removed wronly mentioned community and put largest chandravanshi community.my edit is completely wright you need to do research before deleting and have some patience — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ancient indian historian (talk • contribs) 14:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

You need to discuss it on the article talk page first. You have been warned and blocked for doing this previously. - Sitush (talk) 14:34, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

AIH, you removed multiple published book citations and replaced them with "sishri.org" or whatnot. That's not a very convincing cite to replace multiple published books. If the theory you support is well-documented, you should have no problem finding references for it on GoogleBooks (and please cite them with RefTag instead of pasting bare URLs, or doubling footnotes). MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok i wll tyr next time with source but you are both supporting wrong information and spread corrupt knowledge from wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ancient indian historian (talk • contribs) 14:46, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

No, don't try with a source. Take it to the talk page & use your source there for now. Any further edits to Yadu, Yadav etc in the next 24 hours or so are likely to see you blocked anyway. Calm down and do things properly . - Sitush (talk) 14:49, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Somerby

Quick request Can you check out my write up on Somerby I am not sure if its okay to include ref to Vineyard. It does include ref to ancient finds - but is also a commercial site, Since theres not much else there, it seems reasonable-ish to include, However dont want to go wrong now and I dont mind losing it, I only included it to fluff the page out a bit. Also wish to disambig Old Somerby near Gainsborough and Somerby Leics, and don't know how. Since I wish to sort it sooner rather than later I am also posting this on Acabashi page so apologies if you go and look and its already done. Many thanks Panderoona (talk) 15:40, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Somerby is already disambiguated via this page, so I am unsure whether you have missed this or mean something different. I've tided things up a little, mostly fiddling with things (including the vineyard issue). Are you sure that GENUKI is a reliable source? I am not 100% sure that either the vineyard or GENUKI are great as sources for anything, but in the absence of better ones I guess that they will do. - Sitush (talk) 16:14, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

input greatly received. Some pages have a note at the top to say "not be be confused with xxxyyyxxx" I will try and think where I have seen an example of this, I know I have.

Personally, I only use GENUKI when all else fails. I consider it reasonable if nothing better can be found, but always try and back it up with better citations if I can find them. In this case its fairly well apparent from the Church memorials and the Monument that the Weston family did indeed live in the area. Since Somerby Hall is gone its not on British Listed Buildings. There are instances where someone has informed GENUKI of something such as a date for a church demolition where other sites like Lincs to the Past/British Listed Buildings/Pastscape can unfortunatly be either out of date or vague as to when this occurred. With lack of better citation I use it in instances like that. As an example see Little Carlton - where its obvious from the photograph that GENUKI is accurate in that the church has been demolished. Otherwise - with most of my little Lincolnshire Village edits, I use it as a starting point in my notes and then go and use other citations whereever I can. Panderoona (talk) 16:34, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

That's ok. I've added what is called a "hatnote" to the article for disambig purposes. There are numerous versions of such things, but the one I've used will suffice. - Sitush (talk) 16:36, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Excellent - thanks :) Panderoona (talk) 16:38, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

PS just noticed your disamb needed for Saint Margaret. Hmmm I wonder which St Margaret it is? It will have to stay for now as I dont know. :/ Panderoona (talk) 16:43, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

There were more than I was aware of - Somerby near Brigg (West Lindsey) Somerby near Gainsborough (also West Lindsey) Old Somerby near Grantham (Kesteven) Somersby by Spilsby (East Lindsey) Somerby Leics. Please see User:Acabashi Talk page re same subject Panderoona (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Going to work on the varied Somerbys tomorrow as I like to do things like that fresh when Im not tired to avoid confusing myself. I did make hand written notes on the many Carltons to be sure which one was which and will probably do the same again. Panderoona (talk) 18:33, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

That's ok. It is very confusing stuff. Old Somerby is mentioned in Domesday and, as you have discovered, there are at least two others + a Somersby. I can see this being a bit of a nightmare when it comes to extending the articles, and also a nightmare to police because someone else will come along in 12 months and add the wrong info in the belief that they are doing the right thing. I strongly suggest working on it in your userspace first. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Believe me I have no intention of a new article without being cast iron sure of what Im doing - I will make handwritten notes tomorrow and back those up with a draft (the kind I always do in my notepad) prior to creation of any article. I will be as sure as I can be info is in the right place, and then even though Ill be sure I will ask you and Acabashi to come along and double and triple check it. It may be worth leaving a note for further editors on the talk pages once we have finished, pointing out such pitfalls (although they may not take time to notice hopefully someone who patrols new edits will) That might well be worth doing on the many Carltons while I think about it - what do you think? Before I create a page on any other Somerby I will ask Keith D who works on Lincs articles for the right way to go about creating page names - we already have Somersby (the place associated with Alfred, Lord Tennyson - I have paddled in his babbling brook!) and since that page pre-exists I think we can concentrate on what we are doing with the three Somerbys. (I do not intend to worry abt the Leics one, at least at this moment in time), but great care must be taken with the Somerby near Gainsborough as they and the one near Brigg are both West Lindsey, and Old Somerby will hopefully distinguish itself by being in Kesteven. By the way feel free to double check the Carltons (North South Castle Great and Little all can be found on my User page). I have similar issues in the pipeline with the many Toyntons and Thorpes. Have a good night Panderoona (talk) 19:05, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

One way to assist with future issues would be to set up stubs for the other Somerbys . As long as there is some sort of reference - even a coordinate - then they will not be deleted. That way, the disambig page can reflect all of the variants. I'm not good on article naming conventions but it sounds like you know someone who may be, so it would make sense to suggest this as a part of the plan.

It is easy to do an article in your own userspace and then move it over when you are happy. There are a few benefits to it compared to using pen/paper but, most important, it means that potentially confusing stuff can be worked out and even reviewed before it goes live. Even the page names do not have to the same, so you can create drafts using any name you like and then re-name when you move them into mainspace. It is a neat, simple process. - Sitush (talk) 19:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Keith D works heavily on Lincs projects I dont know him that well but have asked his advice before and trust his advice. I could certainly set up stubs for the others. Know I should get "with it" and do everything online but I cant lose the habit of pen and paper. Be assured I will take yr advice but not tonight as am a bit too tired to be sure of getting things the way I want. Tomorrow - Carpe Diem. As long as I dont get sidelined by impending birth of grandson/results of daddys bone marrow aspiration. (as per email). Best wishes as always. Panderoona (talk) 19:32, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Real life is far more important than WP. Put that stuff first, always. - Sitush (talk) 19:44, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I have moved the Somerby page as per suggestion by Keith D who found it was called Somerby (Juxta Bigby), Lincolnshire, and created Somerby, West Lindsey for the one near Gainsborough.Panderoona (talk) 14:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at GaneshBhakt's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

2011 Indian anti-corruption movement

Thanks for all the contributions! Since we cleaned up the article, I am removing the {{cleanup}} and {{pov}} tag. GaneshBhakt (talk) 17:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I have nominated the article for peer review. Please continue editing the article to make it look even better. GaneshBhakt (talk) 18:06, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I would de-nominate it for now, if I were you. It is better but it needs a lot more work. In particular, the standard of writing is quite poor in places and the organisation is chaotic. I am not even sure that using a timeline as it does is the right way to do things - it means that a lot of stuff gets repeated. - Sitush (talk) 18:09, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually, peer review does not have to be solely pre-FAC phenomenon. Articles can be peer-reviewed to see if tyhey meet B-class criteria, for example. However, the peer-review quantity restrictions still apply. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:22, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, I was aware of that. Effectively, I am doing my own peer-review of the thing right now. It is a pretty poor article, despite the copious footnotes, and I am quite concerned about copyvios and close paraphrasing etc. It will take me a few days to sift through it all because there is a dreadful fight brewing again at Nair & two editors come off their blocks on Saturday! . - Sitush (talk) 18:25, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Alright. Point taken into consideration, since you are far more in experience. Tell me when you think that the article is ready, and we both can nominate it for peer review! GaneshBhakt (talk) 18:30, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Ganesh. I may not be as experienced as you - if you are basing it on number of edits, well, I may have just added and then taken away a comma from a single article 18,000 times! I haven't, but edit count is not everything. If you want to put it to peer review then that is your prerogative, although another issue with that is the reviewer might have a hard time hitting what is a moving target: it is difficult to review something that is changing frequently.

Have a think about the timeline/layout issue. Is there a "neater" way of doing it? I think that we need to ask on the article talk page. - Sitush (talk) 18:35, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Minimal things to do...

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long – consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.^[?]
• This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, then an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.^[?]
• There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
  • it has been
  • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).^[?]
• Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: organize (A) (British: organise), organise (B) (American: organize), criticise (B) (American: criticize), ization (A) (British: isation).
• The script has spotted the following contractions: didn't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas.

GaneshBhakt (talk) 19:03, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. One of those issues is something I raised on your talk page earlier, ie: short subsections. There are numerous minor problems relating to consistency of place names etc, numerous issues with WP:MOS generally, several POV issues, probable copyvios, too many sources, incomplete citations, overlinking ... Ultimately, these and more need to be addressed & asking a peer reviewer to spend their time checking it over when there are "better" articles waiting for such a review seems like a waste of resources. However, we will get there. It would actually help if the protests stopped, then the article would settle down! (Joking: I do understand that they have popular support). - Sitush (talk) 19:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

• Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Some help over Nair regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sitush. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket.
Message added 11:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for spotting the mistake ! Mtking (talk) 11:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Is there a name for this argument/fallacy?

We've been seeing this a scattering of times now, the declarations that basically amount to: "I am very upset and you are totally wrong, but I am an extremely busy and important person and can't be bothered to gather evidence to support my very true claims of your very real stupidity, so I bid you good day, sir." Is there a particular term for this "argument"? Lacking any official term, and admitting that I don't know Latin and am using GoogleTranslate, maybe argumentum relinquendo ("argument by leaving") or argumentum omisso ("argument by giving up")?

I'm almost seriously thinking this is something I could take to some WP discussions to see if we already have a WP: internal article on this, and if not try to hash out the proper term and describe it for our reference. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:48, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

There probably is an essay somewhere, since many admins come across the issue. However, there may be a more simple approach. If we link the word "claim" and its synonyms to Wiktionary, and if Wiktionary has Tamil/Malayalam/Hindu etc variants then link to them also ...

The indignance expressed along with the use of words such as "sir" etc can be awkward to deal with. Indian English is quite different and seems not to have evolved much from Victorian/Edwardian times, although there are jarring uses of more modern words/constructions. I don't laugh because that would be wrong, but it does sometimes amuse. "You're the bastard son of a cur, sir" has a Holmesian ring to it. If you look at some Indian newspapers then you'll get the idea: "cops nabbed X and put him in the city clink", was one I seem to recall from The Hindu.

The problem we are facing of late is, fundamentally, that India is acknowledged to be an often chaotic place & this is reflected in many contributions. Plus, they have a very strong reliance on oral tradition above the written word. Remember, something like 80% of the country live in abject agrarian poverty and literacy rates are very low outside of the cities. (I have the figures for these, somewhere). Factor into that scenario the issue of English as a second language & a strong sense of honour, and we have the present situation. It is going to get worse, not better, because of the WMF "push" for more involvement from that country. - Sitush (talk) 18:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm less fascinated (in just this case) with the Indian English issue, and more of the cultural (face saving?) argument fallacy of "you're wrong but I'm too busy to explain why... moral victory!". I do sympathise (to a certain degree) at the frustration of not seeing oral tradition sufficiently analysed by the academic community, the reliance on earlier Brahmin/Imperial/Western/Christian sources largely due to their extensive writings, etc. That said, there are thousands of places on Wikipedia where, by the nature of the beast, collective wisdom and even common sense take a back-seat to whomever happened to write things down clearly, and happens to be scanned into gBooks. But for better or worse, here we are.

So far as the WMF push to India, it puts me in mind of the Simpsons line:

“ Lisa: You know, Dad, the Chinese have the same word for "crisis" and "opportunity".

Homer: Yes! "Crisitunity"!

”

While these sort of hassles are going to be unavoidable, and are going to unfortunately result in blocking smackdowns and heavy page-locks, getting more eyes-on should have some benefits. Further, if it stirs more folks to get more sources scanned into gBooks, Indian archival sources more available, etc. that'll be great. Further, there have to be a portion of educated Indians who are going to be more receptive to the Western-style mentality involved in verification, sourcing, NPOV, etc. Again, not to condescend, not saying that Indians can't be logical, but that the Wiki system originates in certain very acculturated (in the sense that editors in Stuttgart and San Diego probably have remarkable similarities) portions of Western society, and some cultural disjunct is feeding into this.

In the meantime, this is "interesting" and I'm learning a lot about India. There are probably warrants out for my username by now, but overall a constructive experience for me. Out of curiosity, now that we're getting some better high-level support, how are you feeling on timeline? Is the goal to put at least a pin in this in the next month or so, shift from expansion to maintenance and fine-tuning, bring in copyeditors and peer reviewers, etc. ? MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the timeline. As far as GAs are concerned, the article has to be stable. This is going to be a problem even when we have exhausted the sources, unless all the warriors go away. The same pretty much applies to a peer review: if there is edit warring going on then it makes the reviewer's task one of hitting a moving target, which is never a good thing. So, there isn't really a timeline as such. We're just going to have to feel our way.

Regarding Indian issues generally. There are indeed some very good contributors from the country, many of whom are doubtless much better than me. What we are seeing, however, is the effects of the majority and, yes, a massive culture clash. Much of this is fuelled off-wiki on Orkut etc. Something will have to change, somewhere, but I do not have any answers. - Sitush (talk) 20:38, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

If you ever run across any good links (in English) to this Orkut canvassing, I'd be interested in seeing it, from an academic standpoint! Must be some interesting riling up of folks. Out of curiosity, is an article being locked to all but established editors a disqualification for GA? Do you have a guesstimate as to how high of a rating we can fairly get while still dealing with some whack-a-mole? MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:22, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The orkut message boards usually get purged very quickly now. After the recent Tamil Kshatriya discussion, thing started up again, i went to find the old archives to see the old discussion where Nadar caste guys were being egged on toward wikipedia (CarTick and the upper cloth revolt article were the targets then) and discovered that most of them have been deleted!. I think google started playing safe after incidents like this--Sodabottle (talk) 22:22, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

And there ^ is one of those better editors than me. - Sitush (talk) 22:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Quick question: self-published?

Hi Sitush, Do you mind looking at this and letting me know if you think it's a self-published book?
{{cite book | title=From the grave: a roadside guide to Colorado's pioneer cemeteries | author=Wommack, Linda | publisher=Canton Press | location=Caldwell, Idaho | year=1998 | isbn=0-87004-390-0 | url=http://books.google.com/books?id=nB0dLs8N6OkC }}. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:23, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I have got the feeling that it may be. The typo right near the start (Foreward, rather than Foreword) is not a great sign. However, the author says that she has had input/advice/review from a History professor and there are footnotes for some bits. It does not appear to have been cited by scholars etc, in so far as GScholar covers the ground, but then again it is pretty niche stuff.

So, not a great source but I would be inclined to go along with it in the absence of anything more concrete ... or marble, or whatever headstones are made of over there. Just don't base an entire article on it. - Sitush (talk) 20:32, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I'll add a comment in the reference info that it's possibly self-published.--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations

Your actions in the Nair page has encouraged a number of anti-Nair fanatics. So congratulations. See this user: User:The Tiger's Tail Caught By The Dog. A corruption of popular saying "Pulivalu pidicha naayar" (The Nair who caught the tail of the tiger). This is the same user who came earlier in different names such as Kondotty and Chekon. So, congratulations, you have found your successors. 143.205.176.60 (talk) 08:28, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Oi Sittush, the IP raises a (one) valid point; those three usernames seem awfully close in behavior. Worth asking for an IP check for that user to check for socks? He's not always a bad contributor (if it's one person), but should be validated in mucking around with multiple accounts if indeed that is the case. MatthewVanitas (talk) 09:05, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I had already noticed similarities, just as I had noticed similarities among editors among the pro-Nair group. Since neither "side" are really getting their way and none of them stay for long, an SPI may not reveal anything. This is pretty much what Boing said a few days ago. - Sitush (talk) 11:02, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I have added a note on the pages for the user mentioned above and Chekon. Chekon is not happy with me. Of course, the IP who started this section is also known to us - unless there is a sudden concentration of interest in the Nair article from people in Austria ... - Sitush (talk) 12:51, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

reply

Dear , i have answered your query regarding debut in talk page. If you have any more questions directly ask me. As far as recent edits are concerned, al i can say is history wil prove that whatever i had added was very much right.Paglakahinka (talk) 15:35, 19 June 2011 (UTC) ahul raj

History is irrelevant to Wikipedia, I am afraid, unless it can be cited to reliable sources. Just making a statement that "X did Y, and that is true" is not sufficient. Many people have tried to explain this to you and I am not sure that I can add anything more to what they have said. If you really do not understand this then I am prepared to try but it would help to know what bit of the comments by others you are unable to grasp. - Sitush (talk) 15:57, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

reply

I have complete book of social history of kerela. Its(2 additions like kkannu rajan and rahul raj) also there recent sunday suplement from newspaper kerala kaumudi. rahul raj is son of cousin sister of actor Devan also listed in there

Just because someone appears in one book does not make them notable. Furthermore, you need to say what page they appear on in Sadasivan's book. - Sitush (talk) 19:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

there has been no census based on caste since independence. all we have is which is cited in the article which is referenced properly.Keralone (talk) 17:06, 20 June 2011 (UTC)