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)