User talk:Fyodor7

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010

Please do not attack other editors.[1] Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. El on ka 21:00, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on Mathenkozhencherry page

Just noticed your comment to me on Mathenkozhencherry's page. I did run across some folks traveling though America who were from Kerala. One was a PhD who happened to be Catholic. I talked to her about some of our difficulties and her attitude was (as you suggested) "who cares?" Polite of course! So I can appreciate the attitude. What we are trying to do here is to link everything together and check it out.

Westerners have had problems too (nothing like this!). We've learned a lot on the Crusades articles for example. Some positions were way overstated, others (to our shock) were more or less accurate. So there is learning going on on all sides.

I was disappointed to learn from you that the Goa Inquisition and its fallout in Kerala succeeded only too well in burning most of the palm leave records. That is a tragedy that tends to promote myths, unfortunately. We'll keep plugging away! Thanks for your support! Student7 (talk) 15:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New article

Looks nice. Always good to have a picture. Looks like you have done a pretty good job for a brand new article.

Select categories using other catholicos as a guide.

"Morthsmooni and her 7 children suffered martyrdom". Not linked. rm. not really germane to this article. Needs to be in her article and place article (which probably don't yet exist).

I guess you have as many links as you can? Does his consecrator have an article?

Rm "holy father," "saintly" WP:MOS - honorifics not allowed. WP:POV. What is "Episcopo?" Needs linking if possible. I am not familiar with this specific word; there are a number of Greek/English derivatives.

Does your editor have an English spell checker? This would be useful to have. It would flag mispelled words. "tavelling" should be "travelling" (nevermind. didn't flag red on my Firefox! but it is spelled wrong nonetheless).

This is a bit obscure but you might want to flag the discussion page with {{Indian English}} so some American doesn't come along and try to change spelling of (for example) organise, which I assume is the Indian English spelling (but not American). You wrote it, you "own" it (well, the spelling anyway :) At the same time look at other baselios articles discussion pages for Wikiprojects, probably {{WikiProject Christianity}}

"reaffirm them in true faith" - this is WP:POV. We must omit proselytizing type affirmations from articles. "Train them in their faith" or some more prosaic wording. My main criticism is "too religious." Needs to be secularized for the encyclopedia.

All adjectives/adverbs need footnotes. "excessive" "slowly", "gladly" "saintly". Omit those and you're okay. Try to omit adjectives usually. They are usually WP:POV. Trying to make reader think one way without actual proof. We need to "prove" it here without adjectives.

"Dhukrono of the saint". This needs translation. I don't know what dhukrono" is. I think we would call it a "feast day" or "holy day" or just "celebrated" maybe?

"very common" (twice) drop. again adjectives. still needs footnote. " day of the heavenly abode of our Holy Father" drop. non-encyclopedic. When you use church documents to write bios hard to avoid WP:POV pious phrases. must edit out all that stuff. "left his mortal self for his heavenly home" - same. "died" is better.

Name external link - leave blank after address. e.g [http://www.somewhere.org Elsewhere] will yield "Elsewhere" with a pointer.

This is hard to explain, easier to edit.

Okay to erase this when you are through. Hope this helps. Student7 (talk) 20:34, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this elaborate guidelines.. This is inspiring and motivating...

Okay, I have made the changes that you have asked to..

1. "Morthsmooni and her 7 children suffered martyrdom". - This article do not exist. She is highly regarded in Kerala, and has several churches in her name. Will try to create it, once I get more online references.

2. "Does his consecrator have an article? " - Nopes.. Will need to trace the references. A bit tough as he is a Syrian.

3."honorifics " - removed them. "Episcopo" or "Episcopa" in Malayalam is Bishop.Will add Bishop in ()

4. Spell Checks - Corrected them.

5. "reaffirm them in true faith" - Changed as you suggested.

6."gladly" -removed

7."Dhukrono of the saint". - Syrian word, means "Memorial Feast" - Changed.

8." Died" - Is not considered a right word in India, when used in describing death of a famous personality. Some may consider that word too silly, or sometimes offending ... so left it as " left mortal self" ... i dont want to do that with my fingers ..:-)..

9.External pointer - Done.

Will have to add more details, since most of what i read was about his miracles and his tedious journey to india, avoiding the portuguese, which are not encyclopedic, hence have avoided all those.. so this article looks short.... anyway should find more details in books. Will add as I read further.

Once again thanks for your valuable advise. And thanks for spending so much time to help me out with this first article of mine..:-)

Thanks Fyodor7 (talk) 15:53, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

I have a problem with phrases other than "died," which is simple. See WP:MOS. Jawaharlal Nehru died. Article refers to Sheikh_Abdullah#Chief_Minister "death," maybe as a way to circumvent "died." Syed Amjad Ali died. B. R. Ambedkar died. This is not Indian, per se. If this is merely a religious affectation, "died" should be used here. The encyclopedia is secular. Student7 (talk) 23:42, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Matthoo Tharakan

The well studied source on Tharakan is by M. O. Joseph, which is in the references in Tharakan's article. I don't have it with me here, so I can't quote chapter and verse, but I do remember reading about this point very well. One of his ears was cut off. Karnan (talk) 01:09, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man... Had a doubt, as to who is right, Sankunni or Joseph...Fyodor7 (talk) 03:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome. I would take statements by Sankunni Menon on this particular topic with a pinch of salt. Karnan (talk) 17:52, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes

My pleasure :) --λⲁⲛτερⲛιξ ^[talk] 05:58, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fresh start

Hey Fyodor. It's quite obvious you're very knowledgeable about the history of the Saint Thomas Christians and are a great boon to Wikipedia's articles about them. Looking back at it, I feel terrible that we've gotten on the way we have recently, especially since our differences are so trifling and easy to resolve. Can we start again? I'd like to see some marked improvement in our Saint Thomas Christian articles, but that will take all our interested editors working together. I look forward to working with you again in the future.--Cúchullain ^t/c 01:24, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:AramI.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:AramI.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 15:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. dave pape (talk) 15:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ahatallah

I have seen that, you have made many contributions to Indian churches in wiki. Would you please go through the article Ahatallah and provide your comments... I have placed a POV. Most of the article is taken from one source, which noone in India talks about. Teutonick (talk) 05:41, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Fyodoe7,

Thanks for the letter. Later I shall go through the article and write comments on it. I am now busy with my two books and soon after finishing I am planning to go through all articles related to St. Thomas Christians. I do not consider the references in this article as reliable. Moreover there are a lot of discrepancy.Neduvelilmathew (talk) 17:01, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your unblock reason here.}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. jpgordon^{::==( o )} 14:25, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Fyodor7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Could anyone kindly show me , the mutiple account that were used. And also the abuses hurled by me.

Decline reason:

Well, here's one account. A checkuser confirmed that you have been abusing multiple accounts. TNXMan 17:10, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Fyodor7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Where have I hurled abuses at anyone. Can anyone point to a highly abusive word that I have used.

Decline reason:

No one is suggesting that you have "hurled abuses" at anyone. The meaning of the word "abuse" in this context is meant to suggest that you have used multiple accounts -- this one and User:Fanatic Handler -- in a way that is not in the best interests of Wikipedia but instead for your own benefit. That abuses Wikipedia. A request for unblock such as this needs to address the behaviour in question, not provide you with definitions of what you've done wrong. Accounting4Taste:talk 13:48, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.