Did you notice this? [1] I was under the impression the user had been banned. Buddhipriya 05:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They (I use the plural, as in 'sockpuppets') were unblocked. You can see the discussion here. While 'Past Performance Does Not Guarantee Future Results', I wouldn't be absolutely stunned to see another block based on current performance. ॐ Priyanath talk 16:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request your valuable contribution for Wikifying the artcle on Swami Sandeep Chaitanya —Preceding unsigned comment added by Liberal Democrat (talk • contribs) 14:26, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but there are too many articles on Wikipedia and too little time in my life right now. ॐ Priyanath talk 03:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have filed an RfC for the Toda Image. Please add your comments to it on the Talk:India page. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:16, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Priyanath, In spite of my brusque tone every now and then, I am not against all your suggestions. I feel you are someone I can do business with. I think we can arrive at some compromise position. I am willing for three photographs provided a subsection on Folk and Tribal Culture (the so called "Little Tradition") is added as well. During the interim I feel that only the Taj image should remain. I am sure we could come up with a tolerable first draft in a week, so it won't be too long a wait. Right now, I feel that the culture section is big on the "Great Tradition," and has nothing to say about the "Little Tradition." Even the BJP era high-school chapter ("Culture in India") that I added to the Talk:India page has more complexity and methodology at work than the India page culture section, or indeed the WP page Culture of India

Contrary to what people might think, I am not attached to the Toda picture per se, but I am attached to the idea of diversity, to the protection of minorities, to expressing complexity in terms of broad themes (in any description of culture), and to quality pictures. The first two are also the broad principles of the Indian constitution. As for your suggestion about having more religion, I feel that it is a tricky thing to add at this time. The article and especially the culture section needs to be stabilized first. Also, for a country that is still 67% rural (according to the 2001 Census), many other sections need to have discussions of rural issues: Demographics, Economy, Politics. I think those issues are more important than having a section or even a subsection on Religion, which is again a "Great Tradition" issue (for the most part). Anyway, I will write something in the talk page soon. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 08:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm all for an image representing the diversity and complexity of India that includes the tribals/minorities. I haven't heard any one opposed to that idea. If there's a representative image in the appropriate context, that would end all of this wasted time. I think an example of folk art, dance, or festival would be a much more lively and attractive image. I'm against diluting the images down to just the taj image, even temporarily. It's actually one of the least representative images there is, since it doesn't 'represent' anything more than one man's devotion to his (dead) wife. Amazing and touching as it is, it's not a 'typical' example of anything. But it is such an icon of India that it will probably have to stay.

The Tagore image truly is representative of the widest swath of Culture. This isn't a cultural, regional, or religious bias on my part. And Tagore in many ways is not part of the "Great Tradition", at least not originally. He was abused by one journal as a "pigeon-poet who sold his cooings in print for a rupee." If it's only a week before you have a proposed addition to the Culture section, then we should keep it as is for now - taj and Tagore - and end all of the useless bickering while we all look for a better tribal image and placement. In the meantime we can put out the word for people to suggest alternate images that are more representative of the tribal or minority demographic.

Regarding the new sections and ideas that I and others have mentioned - Wikipedia can be chaotic and messy while the work is being done. Different editors have different interests and backgrounds. While the construction is going on, there's alot of dust and mess. It isn't right to tell other editors to wait on their good ideas, just because it's going to get messy. I do hope we can, if not 'do business' together, at least keep a civil tone through it all. None of this is worth getting upset about, or being uncivil. Your 'brusque' tone has alienated way too many editors and makes it almost impossible for them to work with you, and vice versa. It really makes for alot of wasted time and effort.ॐ Priyanath talk 15:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We had an edit conflict. I think I added all your edits to my copy. Sorry If I missed any. Thanks for your sharp copyediting. Its tough dealing with Inglish.-Marcus 07:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the big improvement to the lead, and throughout the article. With the mix of Americanese, Inglish, British English, European English, on WP it can be tough to figure out what to do sometimes. ॐ Priyanath talk 16:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your involvement and for your kind comments. I hope, and look forward to, for your continued involvement in the editing and improvement process.
With regards and good wishes,
Havelok 17:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]