User talk:Kautilya3/Archives/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

Reddy

What is the proof reddy existed as a separate caste during kakatiya period????Reddy is originally a title used by peasant Telugu communities. Later post kakatiya period it branched off into separate community,here I'm citing cinthia Talbot. Create a separate page for reddy (tittle) and then put kakatiya kings under that page instead of reddy caste article. If I keep Nehru or Gandhi as a surname will I be the same caste as Gandhi or Nehru???? Plzzz answer me (talk • contribs) 19:09, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Calm down buddy. Reddy was not a caste at that time, as you say. Neither were Kamma, Kapu, Velama etc. castes. So the problem with your edit that it was saying there were such castes. I have now added content clarifying the title aspect.

As for making a separate article for "Reddy (title)", you can propose it on the article talk page. But I would oppose it. It is a title that has turned into a "caste", whatever that is supposed to mean. So it is the same subject, not a different one. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:45, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rajesh rao kumar —SpacemanSpiff 13:24, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Distinction

• I am a layman.
• I speak Y
• But I call it Z.
• Y is mutually intelligible with A , B , C and D.
• A is standard form.
• For centuries A is called language and B , C , D and Y are called its dialects.
• However since last 30 odd years few (NOT ALL) layman speakers of Y (Just like me) want a separate province.
• We start claiming Y as totally separate language from A.
• We start getting support of some Wikipedia users who want every dialect to be labelled as Language.

Question : Is not it fooling and trashing linguistics science on Wikipedia ? My friend K3 please be honest when you reply.

Question 2 : What if I start saying that I have not typed English. I have typed Mogo language. Will you create a new article on mogo language spoken by me bcoz If you will write it English I may get offended ?

Question 3 : Why only Indian languages targeted. Hindi trashed in to pieces, Bhojpuri, Rajahistani, Bihari, Haryanvi, Marwari, Maghadi, Maitli, Chatees garhi, Mewati etc and Punjabi too in to pieces. Why not English or Russian dialects considered as Languages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.51.168.40 (talk) 15:14, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Thomas Mair (murderer)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Thomas Mair (murderer). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

IVC DNA

Do you know if scientists were able to do DNA test on the remains found in the IVC? If so, do you have the article. And if not, do you know why? (2600:1001:B011:A257:C16C:C053:7DD9:38B3 (talk) 03:33, 13 January 2017 (UTC))

Keep following this site, and you'll know asap. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:12, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, but do you have an exact article? (70.192.64.113 (talk) 05:39, 13 January 2017 (UTC))

Nope. It's not published yet. Follow that site! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Unwarranted removal of categories from Indus Valley article

Dear user. I would like to imagine that you made a mistake when you removed the History of Pakistan category from the Indus Valley page, but please refrain from doing so again. This is not the first time I am writing this to Indian users and frankly its childish and petty. --Xinjao (talk) 16:08, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no memory of this. It does seem that both Category:History of India and Category:History of Pakistan should be removed because the more specific categories Category:Prehistoric India and Category:Prehistoric Pakistan cover them. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:59, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Abhiran

Hello, I need your advise. This User:Abhiran, does not know how to write; his grasp of the English language can barely suffice for even elementary level. Most of his edits have tons of grammar, spelling, spacing, punctuation, amoung many other major errors. His good faith edits are actually downgrading the quality of wiki articles. Is there any wiki policy that can stop him from editing or sanction him to improve his writing skills? Sorry, I am a grammar nazi; this is beyond annoying. (2600:1001:B026:E417:5DAC:5668:2496:5D65 (talk) 17:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC))

See WP:CIR. If the editor's English is poor but the edits are valuable, we generally put up with it and clean up after them. If they are really poor, the edits can be reverted, citing poor English. If things are intolerable, we can take the editor to WP:ANI. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! I will keep an eye on him. (2600:1001:B026:E417:5DAC:5668:2496:5D65 (talk) 18:03, 14 January 2017 (UTC))

Prithvi Narayan Shah

Quick question, I am editing Nepali history. Found conflicting references to the origin of Prithvi Narayan Shah of Nepal. Is he Gurkha or Rajput? (2600:1001:B026:E417:5DAC:5668:2496:5D65 (talk) 21:02, 14 January 2017 (UTC))

Can't Gurkhas have Rajputs? Rajput basically means claiming descent from ancient Kshatriya kings. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I think this source will help you Kautilya3Gorkha(Princely State) Abhiran (talk)

Addition of wrong inaccurate data on article on district kathua

Hii sir, I want to say that I edited the article on district kathua by adding fresh verified data regarding population and others . But I have seen that you are reverting my edits without due reason even when I have provided correct citations so please cooperate state the reasons for these unnecessary reverting of my edits. Thanks AnadiDoD (talk) 15:38, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi AnadiDoD, yes, citations and edit summaries are important. Thanks for adding them. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:41, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kfar Ahim

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Kfar Ahim. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dublin Regulation

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dublin Regulation. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Skardu Fort

I gave references for the claims. Feel free to edit if something is wrong. RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 05:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Just a small FYI

This disruptive IP, is most likely operated by the same person (same proficiency, same target articles, same type of edit summaries, same geolocation,[1]) who used this one.[2] Thought you might be interested. - LouisAragon (talk) 20:48, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, the IP is ill-behaved but he probably has valid points. When a new nation gets created on old land, how do you define the identity? It is not an easy issue.

I think it is in India's interest in letting the Pakistanis claim all their heritage based on land. Nehru made a mistake by laying claim to the "India" label. There were plenty other names for India. Had he let go of the "India" label, it could have belonged equally to all the nations of the subcontinent. But instead we have now all these artificial problems... -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I was referring to this revert. I see that the IP user has now enlarged his claims. But I think the issues are still the same. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:30, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Kupwara massacre

What is the difference between words "accused of" and "found guilty" it is a historic fact that army killed people that day which is being covered by all newspapers so they were found guilty of killing the people. What is the prob with that.Owais Khursheed (Talk to me) 19:39, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Owais, "finding guilty" is legal terminology. It is to be employed only when a court of law determines guilt. Please check what the sources say and use the same terminology. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:48, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Atrocities in the Congo Free State

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Atrocities in the Congo Free State. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Hindustani language

Hey, I am replying to the message you left on my talk. I did leave an edit summary(And that too a large one) on Indo European languages page. Also are summaries necessary for talk pages ?King Prithviraj II (talk) 11:49, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. I didn't notice your first edit summary.

The problem with your edit was that it contradicted what the Hindustani language page says: It is a pluricentric language, with two official forms, Modern Standard Hindi and Modern Standard Urdu,. If you want to contest that, you need to do so on its talk page. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 13:29, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Some brainstorm: Iron Age India & Vedic Period

Hi Kautilya3. There's something weird about the terminology for the post-Harappan of north-Indian history: it's referred to as "Post-Harappan," "Vedic Period" + "Second Urbanisation (India)," and "Iron Age India." The terminology being used seems to depend on the context: IVC, Vedic religion, or archaeology.
Kenoyer (1997) and Coningham & Young (2015) treat the Indus Valley Tradition/Indus Age and the succeeding Post-Harappan/Vedic period/Iron Age as one sequence of developments, which is very interesting; it takes the IVC and the Vedic period out of their isolated positions as 'discrete' events, and shifts the focus to a much longer duree, and to the continuities and changes between those two periods. It's interesting; it also tells something about shifting insights and approaches. It might be good if we could somehow also introduce this broader view here at Wikipedia; see also History of India, which does not cover all terminology.
As a related point: an article on the "Indus Valley Tradition" seems to be too much of a fork; but it might also be called "Indus Age" (Possehl); but then, maybe it would be easier to start with synchronising the various 'big' articles on Indian history. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:54, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi JJ, my idea is that the article on the "Indus Valley Tradition" would mainly present the evidence and argument for the framework. It can take for granted the material that is already on the IVC page. It can be mainly about the term and what it represents, i.e., the processes, rather than rehashing all the archaeological civilisational material. Until I started reading some of these papers (haven't read any books yet), I was under the impression that the IVC died and disppeared for a long time before the Vedic civilisation began. But the evidence indicates that pretty much nothing disappeared, except for Harappa and Mohenjodaro. This stuff needs to be documented somewhere!

As regards the terminology, we are talking about multiple movements overlapping in time span. Trying to see it as a single chronology is probably a mistake. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

That's a nice comment: "Until I started reading some of these papers (haven't read any books yet), I was under the impression that the IVC died and disppeared for a long time before the Vedic civilisation began." Some of this is also in the Indo-Aryan migration theory article; I've always thought that it was added by some pov-pushers, which raised questions with me about those archaeologists, but I've also always felt that it was important. It convinced me that the Aryan migrations were not a 'huge' thing. For me the same: I started reading more because of the discrepancy in dating between the start of the Early Harappan and the Regionalisation Era, and I am intrigued by this continuity. It makes sense. And it shows the relevance of those "new" approaches by Shaffer, Kenoyer and Coningham & Young. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 02:34, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

I am also exercised about the fact that the term Mleccha does not occur in the Vedas, even though its variants like Milakka were current in Pali etc. When it does occur in the post-Vedic literature (Srautasutras), it occurs as a verb Mlecchati (interpreted as "speaking incoherently") and not as an ethnic label. This raises the possibility that the Mlecchas (Meluhhans) were themselves part of the Vedic culture. The dasas, dasyus, panis etc. (the enemies of the Vedic Aryans) were likely not Indians (Parpols'a view). The puras were also in Afghanistan or further up in Central Asia. All the prior conclusions were based on the assumption that the Rigveda was composed inside India. If we assume, for the moment, that it was composed in the BMAC, the picture changes entirely. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:54, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Article check

Could you check the edits of Ayonpradhan? They seem to be adding arbitrary links to certain articles. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:44, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Saraiki dialect

Hi. You recently participated in the Requested move discussion for Saraiki dialect, which has now been closed. The close is under discussion at Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2017 January#Saraiki dialect, where you'll be welcome to comment. Thanks! – Uanfala (talk) 13:07, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Uanfala, yes, I have noticed. Unfortunately, I can't find anything to say about the close. I think it was proper. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:20, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Reference errors on 26 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Telugu language page, your edit caused a redundant parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Political appointments of Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Political appointments of Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Trilinga

Thanks Kautilya for putting back some of the subject matter that you have undid. Thanks for realizing the validity and truth of at least some of what I put together. My salute to people like you. Some guy thinks that what I sourced was skeptical or flimsy and not related to etymology etc and makes these kind of comments as a so-called editor though I never made comments at his level, that is fine, I hope he will realize that I never said what I sourced was related to etymology in 100% but it is related to the background to support the history of the etymology. And what he may be forgetting or hasn't done a proper research is that I did not put that subject matter to begin with. I just corrected it with an old source that he honored previously. I see you had your etymology on the talk page as "Kautilya was the author of Arthashastra, the earliest treatise on politics and economics in the world, and the mentor and Chief Minister of Chandragupta Maurya, the founder of the Maurya empire.Etymologically, "Kautilya" means "belonging to Kutila", where the latter means "round" or "curvy". Kutila was a popular female name in the first millenium B.C..." I just loved it. Before commenting on my edits, somebody needs to go back and see if I added it originally or if I just corrected it. And nothing in that is my opinion. Somebody needs to rethink as an editor before making such comments. Anyways my salute to you and let the "somebody" learn from you. Bye. — Preceding unsigned comment added by William772 (talk • contribs) 02:22, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't remove much, just the stuff related to Trilingadesham, which, as I said, is WP:UNDUE there. But the issue of Trilingadesham is interesting. The classical Sanskrit sources don't use the term, only the local traditions. I always thought it was a made-up term until I found references to the Greek sources. So I am going to look into it more.

My user page is a mix of fact and fiction. It would be never fit for a Wikipedia page. But, to tell you the truth, most writings of Andhra historians are similar. They seem to talk among themselves and never raise to the national/international standards of scholarship. Velcheru Narayana Rao is a remarkable exception. I would encourage you to read the Rao & Shulman book that I cited. (They also have an excellent book on Srinatha, with a lot of historical information, and another one on Tamil Nayaka rulers, who were all Telugu by the way). Their view is that Trilinga was derived from Tri-Kalinga, which makes sense because Kalinga was an ancient name and it was used synonymously with Andhra in the Sanskrit sources.

If you are going to be editing in this area, I would recommend reading WP:HISTRS closely and digesting everything it says. The identity of the authors, publishers, and the dates of publication are all extremely important. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 09:33, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Bud Kautilya, you did a good research and I am aware of it all, and I know Velcheru Narayana Rao and his writings very well, if you want me to show, I will show you some easy attribution mistakes that he makes for his stature. I am not "boasting" but I know the greatest of the lexicographers through my family or through research. I will learn to signature but for now I will let the bot do it for me. Thanks to the bot and to you for your enthusiasm to learn. Peace and Best to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by William772 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

New user issues

Hi Kautilya3. How are you. Just though I should give you a heads up on a new user (goes by various user names starting with "Worldciv"...) who appears to have the right intentions of adding useful info but does not know haw to go about it. He has been hitting FA's such as Chalukya Dynasty and Vijayanagara Empire. I have tried to improve his content presentation and citations where necessary and added some info with my own sources to augment his info. But he needs to understand that major additions to FA's happens through discussions and also that FA's are usually summary style articles. Couple of other users have left messages for him and Pied Hornbill has removed repetitive info and templates too. I believe you removed some WP:copyvio info too recently. I am hoping that multiple users can direct him in the right direction.Mayasandra (talk) 23:06, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

They are a bunch of students in a class. (Thankfully their user names tell us that.) SpacemanSpiff is monitoring them. But he would need help. We need to carefully review all the content they add and revert stuff that isn't kosher. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:12, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thought as much. Will research one piece he added that I reverted (Koppesvara temple at Khedrapura in Maharashtra) which if I recall was a Seuna Yadava (vasslas of the later Chalukya) construction in Later Chalukya style. Will put that back if my memory served me wrong.Pied Hornbill (talk) 23:31, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:James O'Keefe

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:James O'Keefe. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Cause for Reversion

Respected contributor,

        Please tell me the reason for the reversion of the edit I performed on the Article, Delhi Sultanate...
        I added a Hyperlink to the name of Firoz Shah Tughlaq which shockingly enough was not present in a paragraph describing his rule.
        I also added a link to Tyrant in Ala-ud-din Khilji's rule given the fact that some people might not know what it means and might wanna read about it...
        Strangely enough, you also reverted my edit where I removed the link for Ghazi Malik.
        Ghazi Malik and Ghiyas-ud-din Tughlaq AKA Tughlak Shah are the same individuals. However, 2 links existed in the same line... So I removed 1 link for Ghazi Malik which does not point to any article at all..
        I also edited a line which said South India and changed it to Southern India...

        Respected Sir, if you find any of these edits as problematic or bad, please tell me the reason for reversion...

Thanking you, NUMWARZ 13:28, 29 January 2017 (UTC)NUMWARZ — Preceding unsigned comment added by NUMWARZ (talk • contribs)

Hi Numwarz, welcome to Wikipedia. The reasons for the revert, as I said in the edit summary were, (i) that it was unexplained (didn't have an edit summary), and (ii) that it seemed pointless (you were changing links that were already working). More seriously, you added links to words like tyrant and Quran, which should not be linked according to WP:OVERLINK. Also, WP:REDLINK tells you to retain red links in order to encourage new pages to be created. You should remove them only if you think it would be inappropriate to create pages for those topics, and you need to explain that in your edit summaries. Hope that is clear. Sorry that my edit summary was too cryptic. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 13:42, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Kautilya3, the link I removed was for Ghazi Malik who later changed his name to Ghiyas-ud-din Tughlaq.

I don't think its proper for 2 links pointing to the same page to be present in the same line Respected Sir!

None of the links I changed were already working. Respected Sir, I would like it if you would go through what you revert before reverting as, with great power, sir comes great responsibility.

Thanking you, NUMWARZ 14:02, 29 January 2017 (UTC)NUMWARZ — Preceding unsigned comment added by NUMWARZ (talk • contribs)

You have indeed changed working links, e.g., Qutub Minar. I will check the Ghazi Malik issue. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:50, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

I would like to know which is the working link that I have changed! 08:30, 30 January 2017 (UTC)NUMWARZ — Preceding unsigned comment added by NUMWARZ (talk • contribs)

See this. It is the diff of your edit. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

kashmir valley

Brother i have added proper references to my Kashmir valley page. You had reverted some recent changes. You were in saying that kashmir is just a division and geographical feature so it doesn't have a official language. I have changed that. But i have added info which is correct and properly referenced. So i hope you don'trevert them again. Umaarshah (talk) 02:14, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Sorry i meant to write that you were right in saying that kashmir valley cannot have an official language since it is not a separate entity. Umaarshah (talk) 02:16, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Umaarshah, thanks for writing to me. I won't revert any content that has sources and explained in the edit summmaries. So please don't worry. I am glad you agree about the "official language" issue. "Government" should also not appear here. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 09:49, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Siachen conflict

Did these references [3] [4]open to you, If they did, it is ok, otherwise the whole books can't be references, we need to specify the page numbers for the purpose of referencing. Owais Khursheed (Talk to me) 17:41, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

The first one did, and it checked out ok. The second one didn't show on Google Books and I asked for a quotation.

But the broader point is that they are books. Whether they are available on Google Books or not makes no difference. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 19:28, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

So please, then provide the proper references, I am doubtful that these are proper sources, so that everyone can access the sources.Owais Khursheed (Talk to me) 04:21, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

I am not sure what you mean by "proper references". Full citations have been given. A quotation has also been provided for the citation that didn't have a page number. There is no requirement that a book should be available on Google Books for it to be cited. Books are generally available in libraries and book stores.

A couple of tips: If a user has given a country-specific Google Books url, please change it to "google.com" to get the generic url. (You can also correct it in the wikisource.) To get to a page, say 62, add "&pg=PA62" at the end of the Google Books url, or search for the quotation that has been given.

I would also say, after having interacted with you for a couple of days, try to relax and enjoy editing Wikipedia. There is no war going on here, and all Wikipedians are generally nice people :-) Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 09:46, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Kautilya3 (talk) I rather doubt that the quotation given in 48th reference is not from the book, that's why I was asking for page no. so that source can be confirmed. Thanks.... Owais Khursheed (Talk to me) 12:58, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Brahmi script

Friend being newer in wiki I have done imperfections. But I request you to search on my ideas. I have seen them in news papers. I think it is very important information and you maybe able to find the right persons to choose. VINAYAK PR — Preceding unsigned comment added by VINAYAK PR (talk • contribs) 13:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Vinayak, not everything that gets published newspapers is fit for Wikipedia. For historical matters, we exclusively rely on scholarly sources and downrate news items. If there are important discoveries/revisions to be made, then they will eventually appear in scholarly publications. That is when we include them in Wikipedia. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 15:50, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:British Empire

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:British Empire. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Indian Century

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/122.176.10.198 Is Motbag12 evading a blockk. Thanks for your support atSabarimala, but he'll probably now try to use George as she's well known although I'd argue WP:undue. Doug Weller talk 07:43, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Germany

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Germany. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

deletion of content

	deletion of content
	Why was the content deleted for (azad kashmir) when it had reliable sources? CorrectionLab 3000 (talk) 16:37, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi CorrectionLab, I deleted it for two reasons:

• There was nothing about government in the sources or the content you added, but it was being put in the "Government" section.
• There was some WP:SYNTHESIS in your text, which wasn't in the sources. I rather doubt if this content belongs here. It could go in Mirpur, Azad Kashmir perhaps, but this article is not about one city. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 17:05, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Milo Yiannopoulos

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Milo Yiannopoulos. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Disputed status of Gibraltar

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Disputed status of Gibraltar. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Chalukya dynasty

Hi. Noticed the edit to this article by dbkasar. Looking back at the history of this article, user dbkasar is an old hat from 2006-2007 time frame who along with some other users (such as mahawiki, later banned from wikipedia) tried to create edit wars in this article on similar issues. We have to be vigilant I guess.Mayasandra (talk) 18:15, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Good to know. Did he actually edit the article? If so, it needs to be documented at WP:SPI. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:49, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes. for example here [[5]] where he calls himself "kasar" . He maintained a low profile compared to his counterparts. but his account user:Dbkasar was eventually blocked permanently for creating numerous sock puppets.Mayasandra (talk) 23:06, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

And looks like he is back to make trouble.Pied Hornbill (talk) 23:55, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

And here is his edit from 2007 with the same content. [[6]]. He has edited a few other articles which I have reverted.Pied Hornbill (talk) 00:03, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Buffalo–Niagara Falls metropolitan area

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Buffalo–Niagara Falls metropolitan area. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Reference errors on 16 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the 1947 Jammu massacres page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Armenia

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Armenia. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

for creating the article Bindeshwari Prasad Sinha. You also seem to be involved in enhancing the academic rigor of India related articles here. Can you take a look at the message I wrote at User talk:Fowler&fowler. I stumbled upon B P Sinha's article while attempting to create the Wikiquote article on Bihar.

BTW I wonder if you have any opinion on B P Sinha plagiarizing an earlier quote of Hemchandra Raychaudhuri: "Magadha played the same part in history of Ancient India, which Greece and Rome combined played for Europe" vs. "Magadha played the same part in ancient Indian history which Wessex played in the annals of pre-Norman England, and Prussia in the history of modern Germany". Solomon7968 17:59, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Solomon7968, thanks for your appreciation. To tell you the truth, I don't know all that much about B. P. Sinha. His name came up while I was researching for the Ayodhya dispute and thought he deserved an article on Wikipedia. I am afraid I don't have enough of an expertise in quotes to contribute to Wikiquote. But thanks for thinking of me nevertheless. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:18, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You thinking of rewriting that article any time soon? I've had intentions of doing so for a long time, but the size of the task has always put me off, and god knows there are enough less daunting and more enjoyable topics out there to distract me...Vanamonde (talk) 14:10, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Vanamonde, no, I don't have plans to revisit the Ayodhya dispute at this time. That might be more enjoyable than Kashmir conflict, but what can I say? Kashmir has erupted! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Indo-Aryan/Iranian languages

Hi, you need to stop updating numbers randomly. Open a discussion on some talk page, provide your sources and the revised numbers, and get consensus for your changes. You should update the main pages only after obtaining consensus. .................... hi, my edit isnt unsourced, i see source and correct numbers from source, you can see india pakistan and bangeladesh source , this source provide 2016 numbers and percent of indo aryan, pls reverted it. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talk • contribs) 22:43, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

@Callofworld: If you are correcting as per source, please say so in your edit summary. Otherwise, it will get reverted. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:46, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Indian Independence Act, 1947

You have reverted my edit calling it unexplained removal of sourced content. I checked the source and could not find what the article claims, that is why I modified it. You may want to check it yourself to see if the removed content was sourced. Srkris (talk) 15:57, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

If you were correcting it as per source, you needed to say so in the edit summary.

Secondly, I don't think you were correcting it as per the source. There is no distinction made between India and Pakistan in the Act, nor does it call Pakistan a "new nation" and India an old nation. So, there was definitely WP:OR in your text. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:24, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

The point I was making is not that the reference to Pakistan as a new nation was sourced (it was undisputably a new nation in 1947, regardless of India being new or old, and regardless of international law treating India alone as continuing the nationhood of undivided India) but that there was no independence for the princely states contemplated in the "Indian" Indepedence Act. So my edit was not OR, even if it was unsourced, you cannot call all unsourced edits as OR. Srkris (talk) 19:25, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

@Srkris: The right thing to do in this situation is to tag the unsourced statement with a {{citation needed}} tag. The standard on Wikipedia is not sourcing, but verifiability. Unless you are confident that no source exists for the content, you shouldn't remove it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:50, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Khurshid Anwar

Nice work; but you've got a few harv errors in there, so I thought I'd leave you a note about the script "User:Ucucha/HarvErrors", which I find immensely useful, not just to spot errors, but to keep track of which sources I am using/need to be used when rebuilding an article. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 10:29, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

That was really quick! I think the harverrors are due to unused bibliography entries. They will get used in the remainder of the Kashmir section, when I get to expand it. I put it up there right now because I was getting tired of looking at the red link in the First Kashmir War page. But, thanks for looking over it so quickly. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:35, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, they're caused by a mismatch between in line cites and the bibliography, which this script highlights in large red letters. You linked to a page I had created (1946 Bihar riots), which is why I saw it so quickly. As an aside, read that talk page, if you happen to feel nostalgic for the good old days...Vanamonde (talk) 10:57, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Ah, how I come full circle! I think that article needs to be beefed up. Reading Hajari and Ayesha Jalal, I get the feeling that the 1946 Bihar riots were the single most decisive event that led to the partition (arguably). Since Bihar was under a Congress ministry and the Centre as well, the Muslim League was able to say, "this is what happens to Muslims under the Hindu Raj". Punjab and NWFP went up in flames soon after that. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:30, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Indo-Aryan languages -

i dont know what i say! afd for a report with unregisted user! improve articles isnt ridiculous edits.he/she should be polite.Insult and ridicule!Remove unreasonable edited by me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Send a warning for what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talk • contribs) 07:12, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

For disruptive editing. Take care, or you'll be blocked for sure. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:39, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@Joshua Jonathan, oh my god!! funny. can u see my "disruptive editing"? 900 or 1347? can u add numbers ? i explain numbers in talk page. you can not see it. first you should see it. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talk • contribs)

@Callofworld: when an edit is reverted, you are supposed to open a discussion on the talk page of the article and generate consensus for your edit. If consensus is not possible, you cannot do the edit. Please stop posting on my talk page. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok , i dont know it , ok , thanks. pls say to me source of 900 ? if you add numbers is more than 900! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talk • contribs) 08:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

ok, but i not make a mistake, i am not keep on your aryanic articles but say again : number in this article is wrong

ok about your comment, my english is intermediate and i proud it, enghlish language isnt important for me because of i know three language another. i guess from your user name you are born in india , i am like india and have a indian friend in out of wiki, my edits about aryan article restricted only in : numbers . many numbers in indo - iranian article is wrong. i was see and i like corect them, but u and your friends prevent and delete it. it is no important and i not keep on . i am understand in wikipedia isnt important that many number is wrong! my read and translate in english is very well but my type to english no. in my homeland english isnt official language but in india yes. It is important that in wiki is personal taste admins! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_languages

• i was understand in wikipedia 900 = 1086! 329+ 200+100+ 70+ 50+40 +38 +30+ 30+ 26+21+ 20+ 20+ 18 + 16 + 15+ 15 + 13 + 9+ 8 + 6 + 4+ 3+3+ 2 million=1086 million, with a total number of native speakers of more than 900 million. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talk • contribs) 14:21, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

900 and 1086 are close enough. Doing calculations like this error-prone and, in the long run, hard to maintain, because the numbers keep changing as populations grow. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:35, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

of course, but should not attack to person who correct numbers. 900 and 1086 close enough? 186 mil more than 185 country population! every year numbers should up to date, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talk • contribs) 17:54, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Mahatma Gandhi and English language

http://agrao.50webs.com/gandhi/gandhi_pri_edukado.htm

• http://www.languageinindia.com/april2005/earlygandhi1.html
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_language_in_South_Asia
• aryanic language have a honor , speak to Occupying country isnt honor.From its earliest days, the language was brought into South Asia by various Turkic and Afghan dynasties. With the advent of the Turko-Afghan Delhi Sultanate and the Turco-Mongol Mughal dynasty, the language was grounded in the court and the administration. Beginning in 1843, however, English gradually replaced Persian in importance in South Asia as the British had full suzerainty over South Asia.[1] Evidence of Persian's historical influence there can be seen in the extent of its influence on the languages of the South Asia. Many of these areas have seen a certain influence by Persian not only in literature but also in the speech of the common man.[citation needed] Persian exerted a strong influence on Urdu, and a relatively strong influence on Punjabi, and Sindhi in India and Pakistan. Other languages like Hindi, Marathi, Gujarati, Rajasthani and Bengali also have a sizeable amount of loanwords from Persian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talk • contribs) 15:08, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Mahatma Gandhi was a nationalist and he was fighting the English. That fight is now over. There is nothing wrong with the Indians using the English language now if they feel like using it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:38, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

We are (aryan people - from anatoli to mynmar not forget 1857 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mangal_Pandey ) england change all of history of india, pakistan, afghanistan, iran, and other related country and languages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mangal_Pandey:_The_Rising - viva gandy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talk • contribs) 18:01, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sirius

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sirius. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Jammu and Kashmir

Thanks for reminding me to add summary while editing. I will try my best to add summary from next time onwards. As far as my recent edit to Jammu and Kashmir is concerned, I just wanted to make article neutral. "India and Jammu and Kashmir" gives a biased impression that "India doesn't include J&K". That's why I made that edit to make the article more neutral. Thanks Ind akash (talk) 01:49, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

That is written as per the source. In this context, J&K cannot be presumed to be part of India. It is disputed territory. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 02:05, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

But it can't be presumed that "It is not a part of India" either. Wikipedia should be neutral. One party claims it to be disputed and the other party says that it is not disputed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ind akash (talk • contribs) 02:32, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

How about the Kashmiris? Are they a "party" in your calculation? Has India not promised them that the accession of the state would be subject to the "wishes of the people"? Has India forgotten? This kind of thing is described in the Puranas as "maya descended on them", like for example, when Bharata's father Dushyanta "forgot" that he had married Shakuntala and fathered a child. It is that very Bharata that India is named after, is it not? Has maya not yet lifted from India? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:18, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

I just said Wikipedia should be neutral, who is right or who is wrong is not going to be decided on Wikipedia, right? Ind akash (talk) 12:04, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

"Neutral" on Wikipedia means reporting the scholarly consensus, not our own independent decision of whatever is supposed to be "neutral". See WP:NPOV. I have already said that the wording is taken from a reliable source. Your continued argumentation is not neutrality, it is WP:POV pushing. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:15, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

You are far more experienced wikipedian than me and I respect that. Could you please tell me, does WP:POV pushing generally apply to talk page discussions? And what did I present aggressively? Ind akash (talk) 13:12, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it does apply to talk pages as well. I wouldn't say that you are being particularly aggressive yet. However, you did say that merely writing "India and Jammu and Kashmir" gives a "biased impression". You seem to be arguing that the Indian government's position is "neutral" and everything else is "biased". The fact is, the rest of the world regards Kashmir at least as an unsettled matter. India has been given allowance to settle the issue bilaterally. Until it does so, it is disputed. Given that the most serious unrest in the history of Kashmir is currently going on, it is quite unseemly to argue these positions. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:08, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

"POV-pushing is a term used on Wikipedia to describe the aggressive presentation of a particular point of view in an article...", if in your own view, I am not being "particularly aggressive yet", could you please tell me why did you claim that I am "POV-pushing"? When you say that "The rest of the world regards Kashmir at least as an 'unsettled matter'..." why are you seemingly keen to use the word 'disputed' which is used by the Pakistani government? And what do you mean by "India has been given 'allowance' to settle the issue bilaterally..."? Doesn't the Shimla Agreement call for a bilateral resolution of all the issues? You claim that" the most serious unrest in the history of Kashmir is currently going on", is it bigger than the 1947 and the 1990's? Ind akash (talk) 02:40, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

You were certainly being aggressive, but I was giving you the benefit of the doubt because you took the trouble to initiate a discussion here. But I think you have now exhausted your good will.

The term "disputed territory" is used for any region that is not internationally recognized to be an integral part of any particular country. Kashmir is definitely such. How often people use that term depends upon how intense the dispute is and how polite they are trying to be. But the frequency or infrequency of usage doesn't change the fact of the matter one bit. See this source for example.

I have no interest in engaging in WP:FORUMy discussions with you. So, please don't post here unless you intend to discuss some article content. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 04:10, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Indo-Iranians

diff — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talk • contribs) 09:48, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

@Callofworld:, Indo-Iranians were a historical people. They don't exist any more. The current lead of Indo-Iranians is wrong, and Naseer Dashti, whatever he might be saying, is not a reliable source for history. Joshua Jonathan, perhaps you can find time to straighten this out? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:31, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

write in simple english : "perhaps you can find time to straighten this out? " what mean? indo-iranian now is here, from iran plateau to indian subcontineit -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calloftheworld (talk • contribs) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callofworld (talk • contribs)

I was requesting Joshua Jonathan to correct the lead. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:34, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

So, what's wrong with the lead? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:50, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

It makes it sound as if "Indio-Iranians" is a currently existing group, which leads Callofworld to add an infobox. But they were a historical group, who split up into Indic and Iranian groups millennia ago. This needs to be explained and sourced. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:00, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

(comment) Just struck the signature, as Callofworld states it is not the same account as Calloftheworld. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:39, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Taiwan

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Taiwan. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)