User talk:CAPTAIN JTK: Difference between revisions
Tag: Reverted |
🪶 Tags: Manual revert Reverted |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
==[[Joint Entrance Examination – Advanced]]== |
==[[Joint Entrance Examination – Advanced]]== |
||
Thanks for your response to my message. I fully understand the reason for what you did, now that you have explained. Under the circumstances it's an easy mistake to make, and I've done similar things myself at times. [[User:JBW|JBW]] ([[User talk:JBW|talk]]) 18:19, 3 July 2023 (UTC) |
Thanks for your response to my message. I fully understand the reason for what you did, now that you have explained. Under the circumstances it's an easy mistake to make, and I've done similar things myself at times. [[User:JBW|JBW]] ([[User talk:JBW|talk]]) 18:19, 3 July 2023 (UTC) |
||
== Convention versus deduction == |
|||
Good morning, dear and lovely friend @[[User:CAPTAIN JTK|CAPTAIN JTK]]. <br> |
|||
Dear friend, this article [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parity_of_zero Parity_of_zero] trying to demonstrate convention that saying "zero is even", but convention could not be demonstrated. |
|||
Logical deductive reasoning resulting is such demonstration regarding number zero parity. <br> |
|||
0/2 = 0 remainder 0. <br> |
|||
Remainder 0 tell us that number is not odd. <br> |
|||
Quotient count no groups of 2 elements in a group to consider 0 even, <br> |
|||
therefore final conclusion resulting 0 is neither even! <br> |
|||
'''Therefore number zero is neutral: neither odd nor even.''' <br> |
|||
Please, article must mention that "0 is even" by convention, that is an agreement, <br> |
|||
that does not reflect reality of demonstration by logical deductive reasoning. <br> |
|||
Can You make something regarding or who can take such a decision, please? <br> [[Special:Contributions/188.208.126.211|188.208.126.211]] ([[User talk:188.208.126.211|talk]]) 05:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 05:36, 12 July 2023
|
||
Golden age.
But who are the editor of the Wikipedia to determine which era is golden age or not. It is a term specifically used by historians to describe an era of a place or subcontinent. In this case historians have designated only gupta and chola era as golden age . Where does this random declaration of any delhi sultanate or mughal era come from. And no there was no economic development. Infact the GDP of the subcontinent went dow during their time. And there were many empire at the time of their existence. They are not only responsible for the GDP 103.81.215.136 (talk) 17:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- Can you please provide reliable sources to support your claim that that the GDP actually declined?
- Also, do you disagree about the architectural development? — CAPTAIN JTK (talk) 17:34, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- Sure. Here the GDP graph based on Maddison data.
- https://www.visualcapitalist.com/2000-years-economic-history-one-chart/
- https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/06/the-economic-history-of-the-last-2-000-years-in-1-little-graph/258676/
- Ya I disagree about the architectural development. One could argue mughal architecture was a blend of rajput and Persian architecture but delhi sultanate literally was a copy paste of Persian architecture. 103.81.215.136 (talk) 19:38, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- My point is they might have some good components but none of them were even golden age for india . Infact delhi sultanate was the worst thing to ever happen to india with them destroying so many cities, heritage, culture. 103.81.215.136 (talk) 19:40, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- I've gone through your sources & they seem reliable, so I'll let your edits stay.
- Thanks for contributing. — CAPTAIN JTK (talk) 13:33, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- My point is they might have some good components but none of them were even golden age for india . Infact delhi sultanate was the worst thing to ever happen to india with them destroying so many cities, heritage, culture. 103.81.215.136 (talk) 19:40, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your response to my message. I fully understand the reason for what you did, now that you have explained. Under the circumstances it's an easy mistake to make, and I've done similar things myself at times. JBW (talk) 18:19, 3 July 2023 (UTC)