This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The article Antony Anandarayar has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the ((prod blp)) tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Tentontunic (talk) 18:13, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done as you have said. Thanks for your guidance. --Jayarathina (talk) 18:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayalalitha_Filmography this filmography pade needs to be put in format. columns needed has been specified.Can you help?format this article with headings of 6 columns as Year,Film Name, Language,Name of hero,Director,Notes Column. Details have been provided only arrangement needs to be made. example it should look like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajinikanth_filmography but specified 6 columns are neededPaglakahinka (talk) 18:58, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Sure I'll, give me some time. --Jayarathina (talk) 19:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done as you have said. --Jayarathina (talk) 15:46, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

great work but you have put all those movies which i provided right? iam sure some of her movies were not listed in imdb. so may be some more movies needed to be added from citwf.com. also what about putting picture of jayalaitha from Paal Tamil Paal from Ragasiya Police 115.That photo would show the non Tamil viewers, how she looked as actress. another photo i recoemmended was from En ullam song from Raman Thediya Seethai.Paglakahinka (talk) 18:49, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I took the list from citwf.com only. But please do not trust that site. It has some errors. For example the film 'NEENGA NALLA ERUKKANUM' is said to have released on 1992, which is not true. I corrected the error. And by the way where did u take the Saroja Devi Filmography from? If the source is in HTML Table tag formet, it can be easily converted to wiki table format. --Jayarathina (talk) 19:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Saroja_Devi_Filmography - instructions for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saroja_Devi_FilmographyPaglakahinka (talk) 19:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Please see my reply to Jayalaitha filmography above at 19:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC) - --Jayarathina (talk) 19:25, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

http://www.indianactressinfo.com/tamil/filmography.asp?aid=69&tamilactress=Saroja%20Devi - Include all the films from this list. http://www.indianactressinfo.com/telugu-actress/profile.asp?aid=59&Teluguactress=Saroja%20Devi - telugu also use http://www.jointscene.com/kollywood-actress/saroja_devi/filmography.html http://citwf.com/person152928.htm - this site is to be used only to know the names of the films and not for release dates.Paglakahinka (talk) 20:47, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

use citwf only for film names and not for release dates whereas others for soureces. did u get it? ya so now u wont find it hard na?Paglakahinka (talk) 14:19, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jayarathina, The First WikiConference India is being organized in Mumbai and will take place on 18-20 November 2011. You can see our Official website, the Facebook event and our Scholarship form. But the activities start now with the 100 day long WikiOutreach. As you are part of WikiProject India community we invite you to be there for conference and share your experience. Thank you for your contributions. We look forward to see you at Mumbai on 18-20 November 2011

You have recently removed a weblink of http://www.vailankannishrine.org/home.php at the artilce Velankanni. There is no other website for Velankanni town than the one of the church. More-over, other than the church there is nothing in Velankanni town - if there is no church - there will not be any article here in wiki about the same.

I am planning to restore the website as the official website for the town... Whats your opinion? BrownyCat (talk) 11:47, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

First of all, thanks for asking my opinion in this regard. I am apposing the revert for the following reasons:

• The website is of a private organization (church), the article is about government jurisdiction of velankanni town.
• There is a separate article for the church itself :Basilica of Our Lady of Good Health. the website link is added there.
• If at all there is a website added, it should give demographics of the town, like how many people live there, statistics about them, climate, news etc., but this site talks only about the church and nothing more.
• The content of the article id mainly about the church which has to be improved.

Expecting your reply.

--Jayarathina (talk) 13:32, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that there seems to be a group of people with different agenda busy in section blanking the article Velankanni which we have developed as a team. Come on, its time for us to wake up and protect that valuable article and chase them away from here. BrownyCat (talk) 09:35, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.

Thank you for your time,
the wub (talk) 17:36, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using Global message delivery)

Hi. By the by, Dhanvanthari has nothing to do with tamil script. I hope you agree. Because, he belongs to entire India, and if all state people want to add their script, what will be the fate of the page? No bais,OK?110.234.120.116 (talk) 05:06, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello Jayarathina, I've googled the singer Arthur Conley and found the transcription ஆர்தர கான்ல. Is it correct? The transliteration of கான்ல would be: kāṉl. I wonder why there is no ஈ (ī) or இ (i) at the end. Any help appreciated. Cheers --ᐊᑭᕈᐊᕈᖅ (talk) 05:40, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

If you are looking on how to write Arthur Conley in tamil, ஆர்தர் கானல். Which will be sounding like kaanal. There is no ஈ or இ because, the phonetics doesn't have ī or i at the end. Hope this helps. --Jayarathina (talk) 06:13, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

The table is named "Isolated form", now I know what that means ;) As far as I know the dot above the characters has to with silent letters. Is there a strict rule or are all three forms கானல, கான்ல and கானல் correct? --ᐊᑭᕈᐊᕈᖅ (talk) 14:36, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

The dot above the characters decide how the words are pronounced. They are consonants in Tamil. As far as Tamil is considered, the dot is very important. Without which the language will not exist. (I understand that you might probably confuse this dot rule with Devanagari based languages, but Tamil is not one of them). கானல will be pronounced as kaa-na-la , கான்ல is pronounced as kaa-n-la and கானல் as kaa-na-il. All three are indeed different. (ஆர்தர is not the same as ஆர்தர். ஆர்தர is pronounced as Arthura and ஆர்தர் as Arthur ) --Jayarathina (talk) 14:48, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Now I've got it ... almost. One last question: ta:ஜெனிஃபர் கானலீ is using a லீ for the transcription of Connelly. This sign, I've read, is a combination of ல் (l) and ஈ (ī). If the transcription is correct I presume it also can be used for Conley? --ᐊᑭᕈᐊᕈᖅ (talk) 17:08, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes. But you mentioned that The transliteration of கான்ல (Conley) would be: kāṉl. I assumed it to be the phonetic transliteration. I am not sure how to pronounce that word. Please do confirm whether it is kāṉli or kāṉlī or just simply kāṉl. In any case, kāṉl is written as கானல், kāṉli as கானலி and kāṉlī as கானலீ. --Jayarathina (talk) 17:23, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Both, kāṉli and kāṉlī, are correct. In IPA it's [kɒnliː]. Arthur Conley grew up in Atlanta, Georgia, but one single transcription for US and UK would be fine. I think I'll take கானலி. Thank you again! --ᐊᑭᕈᐊᕈᖅ (talk) 19:50, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that your contributions include edits to Devasahayam Pillai. Would you be able to provide an image for the article, e.g. by taking a photograph of a painting of the saint in a church building?

The picture would have to be free of copyright, so we can't use one from a book unless the publisher gives explicit permission. See Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 May 25#File:Devasahayam Pillai (book cover).jpg.

I wrote to the local church contact several months ago as stated on the diocese website, asking for permission to use the image on the website, and was disappointed to receive no reply whatsoever. – Fayenatic London 16:38, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I am sorry. I am not from that part of Tamil Nadu. I too was searching for his image for a very long time. Thru your comment i read the debate of the proposed deletion of the previous image. I would like to add that there is NO actual image of Devasahayam Pillai available. Everything is a painting of imagination only. There is anyhow a thumb nail size pic here: http://newsaints.faithweb.com/year/1752.htm#Pillai which might be compatible with Wikipedia license (see footer). I too have mailed the site masters of http://www.martyrdevasahayam.org for a pic of his. I will also mail some of my friends to see if they can get us an image of Pillai. --Jayarathina (talk) 17:58, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Well done for getting a picture, again. However, I fear that it may also not last. You stated that it's your own work, but this will probably be challenged as it is a photo of an official image. Also, it's not even a good photo, because of the reflections on the glass.

Assuming that you can get a better one to replace it, please give as full a description as you can of the source of the image next time. – Fayenatic London 13:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I understand that it is not a good image, it was taken in a hurry because of a situation I was in. I too have couple of more pictures, I'll upload them too, but since they are work of 3D in nature, I am hoping they will stay. And I don't understand how much more descriptive I can be that saying I took it. I chose "These files are my own work." and ownwork tag was added automatically --Jayarathina (talk) 18:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	for the work done on the catholic portals Harishrawat11 (talk) 01:12, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much.... --Jayarathina (talk) 15:01, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Totally appreciate your work on Catholic community and related articles (Alex.mathews (talk) 01:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC))

Thanks a lot.. --Jayarathina (talk) 04:55, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for consensus for editing Template:Catholicism, but I am in Phoenix, Arizona where my father is about to take one of the steps needed to become a saint himeself. Life. What a strange place to live. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:25, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I`m a German user and you can find me here: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Altera_levatur

2 years ago I made (under the Username "Joachim Specht") the German Wikipedia article about Devasahayam Pillai. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devasahayam_Pillai

The pictures I uploaded/put in originally were removed and deleted by others. Now I found yours and put them into the article. After that I saw, that you had also some difficulties with them. Please let me know, if you get a picture with a proper permission.

My wife is descending from Kollam, where is buried bishop Clemens Joseph Colaco Leitao (1704-1776), who wrote the contemporary report about the martyr to Rome, which was now the main-source of Pillai`s beatification. I visited that old bishops tomb in Kollam a couple of times. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clemens_Joseph_Colaco_Leitao

Best regards from Germany --Altera levatur (talk) 14:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, please read WP:INDICSCRIPT. This was the reason why I removed it from several articles. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:00, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh... That's great. But please add that in edit description when editing so that people who watch that page will see that in their Watchlist --Jayarathina (talk) 11:04, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I normally do. I forgot to do so last time. Sorry about that. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:14, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Jayarathina, and thank you for your contributions!

An article you worked on Maria Guadalupe Garcia Zavala, appears to be directly copied from http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/saints/ns_lit_doc_20040425_zavala_en.html. Please take a minute to make sure that the text is freely licensed and properly attributed as a reference, otherwise the article may be deleted.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on Maria Guadalupe Garcia Zavala if necessary. MadmanBot (talk) 10:16, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done rewrote the entire article. --Jayarathina (talk) 10:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Pardon me, but the other vacancies are shown as beginning on the dates the previous papacies ended. Why are you promoting a differance for the current vacancy? If you're going by the canon law source, then you'd have to change all the dates listed. By singling out 'just' the current vacancy, you're creating confusion. GoodDay (talk) 06:32, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I am sorry. I should have first discussed it in the talk page. I apologize for that. If the other vacancy periods are from the death date/resignation date then they should also be corrected. I also want to make another point, which also should be made clearer in the article. The see becoming vacant and the period of sede vacante are two different things. More over one can assume that this is my own interpretation of the Canon law, but the catholic church officially calculates the sede vacante period from March 1 only (please see this new article - 5th para). Since if I edit it back, it might be considered as edit war, i request you to do so, if you are convinced. But if you are not, at-least mention that the date is calculated as 1 march by Catholic Church some where in the article. Thanks --Jayarathina (talk) 06:50, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I've restored the canon law reference and made the adjustments to all the starting dates, for consistancy. GoodDay (talk) 07:04, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for editing. --Jayarathina (talk) 11:22, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Jayarathina. You have new messages at Template talk:S-start.
Message added 16:48, 8 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

The AWB bug you reported has already been fixed. Please check Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Bugs/Archive_24#Category_sorting_problem_in_non-en_wiki_sites. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:22, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Magioladitis, Thank you. When will that update be available? I tried check for updates but none was available. --Jayarathina (talk) 15:46, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Probably during the week. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:56, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank You.. --Jayarathina (talk) 17:01, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

If you want to call someone a saint, you need a clearly reliable source per WP:RS - not images with halos. Dougweller (talk) 17:08, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Moved to User talk:Waddlesplash § Regarding your edits to Template:Catholic saints and related articles

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Joan of Arc Canonization.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:36, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Judas the Zealot may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• stub|auto=yes|date=December 2009))

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:24, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Why did you undo my edit at Zephaniah? It is self-evident that there is no date given in the first verse of Zephaniah. Maybe you are thinking of the book of Zechariah?? (And the grammar of the sentence you restored is atrocious.)--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:14, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I noticed afterward that your sentence is not quite the same claim as that I originally removed. However, the claim remains false, as the opening verses of several of the 'prophetic' Bible books indicate more 'precise' periods.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:31, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

@Jeffro77:, Then can I remove the word precise and use: Zephaniah is the one of the few prophets whose chronology is can be deduced to a period using the introductory verse of the book. --Jayarathina (talk) 07:55, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Several of the 'prophets' indicate a specific period, so the opening verse of Zephaniah isn't special in this regard.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

@Jeffro77:, Thanks for the clarification and pardon my atrocious grammar. I am not a native speaker of English. I would like to know how the sentence should have been formed. I am not asking about the validity of the facts but from a grammatical perspective. Will this be ok:

Zephaniah is the only one of the few prophets whose chronology is can be deduced to a precise period using the introductory verse of the book.

--Jayarathina (talk) 08:08, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the grammar (and ignoring the factual problems):

• is the only one of the few prophets... is very awkward. If you were talking about something unique, you would change it to is the only one of the prophets... or is the only prophet.... If there is a small number, but more than one, you might change it to is one of the few prophets... or is one of only a few prophets.
• can be deduced to is awkward because deduce is a transitive verb, so it doesn't work well in the passive voice (and to doesn't belong there at all), and it also needs to be reordered. It would be slightly better to say [the introductory verse] can be used to deduce [a period], but that's still not great. It would be better to change it to indicates.
• prophets is ambiguous because it could be referrig to the person or the book. Sometimes this can be indicated by capitalising Prophets to indicate those books (of the Bible). Additionally, whose implies that it refers to the person, though the statement could be about the prophet or the book.
• The overall statement could be rephrased to something like: Zephaniah is one of the few prophetic books where the introductory verse indicates a specific period.

I hope that helps.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:34, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Alternatively, it might be that you want to say something like, Zephaniah is one of the few prophets whose ancestry is provided in the introductory verse of the book bearing his name. (Though that isn't unique to Zephaniah either.)--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:42, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

@Jeffro77:, Thanks for this explanation. I will try to avoid these mistakes in the future. I have a long way to go... :( --Jayarathina (talk) 10:26, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello. You have a new message at Template talk:Vietnam War graphical timeline's talk page. Message added Infoman99 (talk) 06:18, 2 January 2014 (UTC).

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Christianity in Puducherry may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• >http://www.archdiocesepondicherry.com/History_%20Archdiocese_1.html Archdiocese Official Website]</ref> They are:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:48, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Nice job removing all those links in this entry. I'm sure that's helpful to Wikipedia's readers. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 14:59, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

@Bmclaughlin9: Hi, I am really sorry, I wanted to put the links back, but there was a edit conflict (probably by you). So I was waiting for you to finish your edits. It was my mistake, I should have checked the history first for recent edit. Please don't hesitate to undo my edits. --Jayarathina (talk) 15:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions. One of your recent contributions to Pietro Parolin has been reverted or removed, because it contains speculative or unconfirmed information about a future event. Please only add material about future events if it is verifiable, based on a reference to a reliable source. Thank you. These prelates are not cardinals until the consistory so please do not add cats or infobox fields until then. Elizium23 (talk) 15:19, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Instead of tagging and questioning on the page. Just read the sources.

British constructed the caste system, that it became legal under them. "Lower caste", "schedule caste", "criminal caste" they are not the part of any hinduism. Neither the caste(bad term) is unchangeable as per manusmriti, it can be changed. Manusmriti was wrongfully translated by british as well. Bladesmulti (talk) 09:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

@Bladesmulti: Are you saying that the system (NOT hierarchy but division of varnas) is done by British? No right? All I am asking you is to make that point clear. The statement in its current form looks as if the system (including the varnas) are proposed by British completely 100%. Also please name the scholars rather than using the Weasel words like " various contemporary scholars". Is this too much to ask??? --Jayarathina (talk) 09:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Varna and caste are highly unrelated. There are number of scholars who have written the books, regarding the british construction of caste system.. [1], [2], [3], [4]. But i don't think i can link to all of them, so the most related source was added. Bladesmulti (talk) 09:22, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

@Bladesmulti:I understand your point. I am NOT questioning that. But that distinction between caste and varna is NOT mentioned in the article. If they both are different., i.e, Jātis/varnas are NOT same as caste then why is the article's first four para is talking about varnas when the article itself is about caste? It looks as if the article assumes that caste and varnas are one and the same. So change the wordings. Specify that they both are not one and the same. And say that scholars like X, Y, Z and many others say that British made up the caste system. (Obviously they did not make caste out of thin air, they used the existing varna to classify the caste system. didn't they? )--Jayarathina (talk) 09:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Article is about "Caste system" Not varna system. No where in whole Varna any "british" are mentioned. British did constructed the caste system, that they made it legal and unchangeable, and many other castes like "schedule castes", "criminal castes", etc. I guess we are done with this one now. You should revert your change. Bladesmulti (talk) 09:34, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

@Bladesmulti: British created caste based on varna. They grouped different existing Jātis into castes and gave them names like "schedule castes" etc., British made it leagel and codified existing norms among caste Hindus that caste is unchangeable. That is even before British came to India it was impossible to change caste. That is the main reason for people like Ambedkar to revolt against caste Hindus and NOT British. I am asking you to make this point clear in the article. The current wording looks as if british made the caste system out of thin air without any precedence before them to do so. It looks as if bristish created and randomly grouped people into different caste. P:S Also regarding your comment that British translated it wrongly, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar and Mahatma Gandhi would beg to differ with you (But this is out of scope of this discussion). --Jayarathina (talk) 09:49, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Ambedkar wasn't a scholar of Hindu studies, he didn't even knew when manusmriti was written. So he can't be used as a source. Neither he said that british did anything better with the castes, but actually made it rigid. Manusmriti was badly translated by british, it is already evident. Avari regarded:-

"The text was never universally followed or acclaimed by the vast majority of Indians in their history; it came to the world's attention through a late eighteenth-century translation by Sir William Jones, who mistakenly exaggerated both its antiquity and its importance. Today many of its ideas are popularised as the golden norm of classical Hindu law by Hindu universalists. They are, however, anathema to modern thinkers and particularly feminists."

Caste system wasn't made for just hindus, but for all indians, be it sikh, muslims, christians, jain.. Bladesmulti (talk) 09:59, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Moved to Talk:Caste system in India § Clarification needed for the claim British Created Caste System

 – To get others opinion --Jayarathina (talk) 11:57, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Litany of the Saints, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prostrate (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:02, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jayarathina, thank you for your work on replacing raster images with their vector equivalents. I have reverted one of your changes to Travancore, however, because it replaced the image File:A Canal Scene, Travancore.jpg with the non-existent File:A Canal Scene, Flag of Kingdom of Travancore.svg. I understand that this was probably semi-automatically replaced because the file name contained "Travancore.jpg", and I wanted to let you know in case you encounter similar situations with other articles. --Joshua Issac (talk) 16:32, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peter Abir Antonisamy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi,in "Finnegans Wake"-James Joyce,Livia is mentioned many times.He even gave her a special soliloquy-'Anna Livia'.Thought you should know if you don't know already!kind regards,signed,Shiva.Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page)."Finnegans Wake",by James Joyce.Penguin Books1992;ISBN-13:978-0-141-18311-4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.233.64 (talk) 08:18, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to P. A. Sampath Kumar may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:24, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

I like your change to the "Weekday before date" and "Weekday after date" templates, in concept, but unfortunately they have broken the infobox on pages such as Giving Tuesday. I tried editing Template:Infobox holiday/date to fix this problem, but I got all sorts of errors and undid my own edit. Perhaps you have the time and inclination to do it correctly. Leegrc (talk) 13:09, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Leegrc, Thanks for letting me know of this issue. I think I have fixed it now. Please do check and confirm. If you find any more errors. Please let me know. --Jayarathina (talk) 13:15, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Looks good. Thank you for the fix and for the original improvement to these templates. Leegrc (talk) 13:20, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.