User:Riana dzasta/Talk header

Greetings Riana So this controversy about Vasant Rai! Vasant Rai was indeed a very famous musician who unfortunately passed away in 1985. If you go to his website, and go to the photograph section, there are photos of him playing a duet with Ravi Shankar. This is absolutly not a publicity act, just type his name on google and see who he was. Its comprehendable that some young indians may not know him, however here in the U.S he is pretty synonomous with the Sarod. As far as the fact that many musicians considered him the best sarodist is also true, as it is true with many musicians. thanks if you have any questions please feel free to email me at kaasamir[at]yahoo.com regards Anjana Patel

While I don't doubt that Vasant Rai is certainly a well-known sarod player, I feel compelled to remind you about Wikipedia's neutral point-of-view policy. Statements like 'one of the world's best sarod players' should be avoided, as I'm sure that there would be many willing to dispute that claim. Since you seem to know a great deal about the subject, Anjana, do you think you can find some books, magazines, old newspaper articles, things that could be used to source the information in the article? Also, if some photographs could be acquired under an appropriate license to spruce up the article a little :) Thanks a lot! riana_dzasta 15:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, welcome back Riana :) Hope you had a great time travelling, and a nice relaxing break from the weird world of the wiki :P It's great to have you back. Thε Halo ^Θ 11:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back from me, too, Riana. It is nice to see you back on deck. I hope you had a great Christmas and New Year and an awesome holiday. All the best for the new semester. Cheers, Sarah 12:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Had great holidays, thanks very much. And the wiki-drama isn't getting me down so much, as it has made me more and more busy :( Ah well, huh ;) You take care as well, and hopefully I'll be around more once everything sorts itself out. Bye for now. Thε Halo ^Θ 15:48, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back Riana! Hope you had a good time, and glad to see you back :) Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 09:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are back, how was your trip? this is Seadog, I wish you happy editing! Cheers! ~ Arjun 14:20, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

	Welcome back from your good old friend S.D. (Sd31415). I know you just went to India, but here's some more Indian food. Bon Appétit! S.D. ¿п? § 15:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From me too, good to see that your back with us. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 21:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alack, no, Riana; my passions are made of nothing but the finest part of pure honesty. You cannot call my winds and waters sighs and tears; they are greater storms and tempests than almanacs can report. This cannot be cunning in me. If it be, I make a shower of water as well as Jove.

Hmm, I see what you mean. Y'know, the great thing about this online communication is that I get to look up my Shakespeare adaptations, rather than have to deliver them completely off-the-cuff. Enjoy the reading and look after yourself as well. Cheers, Moreschi ^Deletion! 16:27, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hey Riana (like your name) fair enough. I am in the process of attaching a few licensed photographs. thanks Anjana == = ==

<smart-aleck comment about father-to-be omitted> :P At least you spell favourite right. :P The explosion is gone—a little Mozart for mental stress and Schumann for resulting headache (not to mention the actual Schumann article for wikistress, check its history after clicking next 50 :O [amazing]), and I'm back to my normal good self. :) So how did your trip go? Some day soon I will do a lot of traveling, after not haveing traveled much at all for a long time due to monilessness. ;) —  $PЯINGrαgђ  23:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Riana dzasta, just thought I'd flag with you that Palm Island is the current Collaboration of the Fortnight, with the great work you did on the Torres Strait Islanders Collaboration I thought you might be interested in participating, or even if you would just like to leave your opinion here as to what needs to be done :) Thanks, Alec ^{-(answering machine)} 14:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been very busy lately, but if I don't get a chance to help during the COTF, I'll still have a look later on :) riana_dzasta 08:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate! This one has been a bit crazy with a record 160 edits so far, it's unbelievable how much the article (now articles) has changed so far :) look forward to seeing your work when things slow down a little in the outside world. Alec ^{-(answering machine)} 12:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like a cookie? -Amark moo! 00:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to hear from you :), sure I guess. Talk to Husond, he knows all the details, Nishkid64 is also nominating me. So I would say sure...I would be honored. ~ Arjun 03:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like your new sig by the way, pretty cool :p. ~ Arjun 03:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't think that 4 nominators could cause much more "damage" than 3 hehe. :-) Join in! :-) Regards, Húsönd 03:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, you should start thinking about your own RFA. :-) And if you plan to cut nominators to just 3, I hope I'm one of those who'll have the honor. ;-) Húsönd 03:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would highly reccomend you co-nom Arjun01 as you had planned too. Many co-noms just shows the communities excellent trust in an editors. Actually, a very recent rfa with 7 conoms made WP:200! Arjun seems to have no issue with it as far as I can tell either. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 04:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to stick my nose in here, but I came here to email Riana and just noticed this comment. I don't know anything about this nomination you're talking about, but I would very strongly caution against using Daniel's RfA to support the idea of using multiple co-noms. Daniel's RfA did so well because he has worked very hard for a long time and earned a lot of respect from a lot of people, the co-noms had nothing to do with the result and in fact, it went against him. He received an oppose and neutral !votes due to the number of co-noms and even some of the supporters commented that they felt it was a negatie factor. Also, there was a discussion on the RfA talk page where a lot people said they find multiple co-noms a big turn off and will oppose people on that basis. Again, I don't know anything about the nom you're talking about but I just wouldn't like to see people thinking that Daniel's RfA is a precedent for using lots of co-noms because it does have the potential to backfire. Sarah 06:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]