For convenience: {{mdf|1=[[User talk:Joshua Jonathan]]|2=reason, ~~~~}}
"The avalanche was down, the hillside swept bare behind it; the last echoes died on the white slopes; the new mount glittered and lay still in the silent valley." Evelyn Waugh, Brideshead Revisited
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Maurya Empire. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
So basically, one of your sources for the hole map "Archaeology of South Asia", that book doesn't contain any maps with holes but rather a map without holes.
As respecting copyright rules of wiki, I did not directly upload the map here, but rather recreated it.
She mentions it for several empires, but does not mention any places where was autonomous, you have decided these regions either by yourself or by Kulke. Hence they shouldn't be even used as a source JingJongPascal (talk) 05:38, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like most other ancient Empires are based on their de jure territories, even the Persians (Achaemid) did not receive tributes from the Greater Baluchistan Regions.
Well, i meant, that the network model theory should and shall be applicable to all the ancient empires (this has been mentioned in the source aswell) but i have never seen any such development in Macedon and Persian empires. JingJongPascal (talk) 10:50, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that’s why I was also extremely confused about why you two are fighting. Edasaf was the one who disrupted the Nanda Empire's religious narrative using your reasoning and speculative additions on another page. Edasaf also randomly attacked Chandragupta Maurya's religion. (The jealousy of the Bhim gang and neo-Buddhists toward Hinduism, Brahmanism, or the Vedic tradition is not hidden.)
The problem is that you attacked the Maurya Empire, which is the only empire Indian Buddhists can somewhat properly relate to. Obviously, Edasaf was going to clash with you. Although the Maurya Empire, before the later years of Ashoka, had nothing to do with asceticism or non-violence. If Chandragupta had been a ascetic, there would have been no Ashoka or his edicts, and no spread of Buddhism. So, be glad that Chandragupta was not an extreme Jain ascetic and chose to take a wife.
And don’t be overly uplifted by Edasaf's views on Hinduism. He is in your category, just Indian as well, so he will be offended if you attack the Maurya Empire. No true follower of vedic tradition would describe any stage of Hinduism’s evolution using a Christian missionary term. Leftists and communists interested in India will, but they are becoming increasingly irrelevant as the trend of leaders around the world shows. Soon academia will be free of Marxist interpretations. It will take time. You wont be there to see it, i might be. 2409:40E3:407F:B092:7199:3821:B1F1:5146 (talk) 09:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I hope for you it will be a world worth living in... Regarding The problem is that you attacked the Maurya Empire, that's an enlightening comment; the perceptions of Chandragupta seem to be quite different. I found this book, Chandragupta Maurya: The creation of a national hero in India; it seems to delve into the differences of perception you're pointing at. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk!13:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmmm. I'll read it. In any case, I would not elevate anyone to hero status—no one is perfect. When even deities are flawed, humans stand no chance. Although there are many who are considered national heroes—Chandragupta, Ashoka, Samudragupta, Kanishka, Shivaji, Prithviraj, Rana Sanga, Veer Savarkar, Bhagat Singh, Mahatma Gandhi, Ambedkar etc.—even Rama, Hanuman, Buddha, Mahavira and Krishna are regarded as national heroes. There are probably countless others. If we want to counter India's national hero narratives, it will take generations. However, I understand why you detest any form of nationalistic tendencies. We can agree to disagree on many things, but I have come to the conclusion that continued hostility is not a solution.
:) I always poke around but Covid really just took a lot away and haven't managed to quite get my head back right. I keep telling myself I want to get back into the mix but just need to start carving out time to read and write. Its still calming to just make my usual tiny edits and watch patterns of users in my unique weird way haha. Always happy to get a chance to send my regards. Kbhatt22 (talk) 05:15, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Joshua Jonathan: I agree. It read in some aspects like a marketing brochure to begin with but splitting it into two articles seemed like a bizarre stretch the way its written. Couldn't find another Hindu temple that was given such treatment. Had to do a ton of searching around just to understand what the articles were trying to convey. Kbhatt22 (talk) 06:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Maurya Empire. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
.jpg)
.jpg)