User talk:Kautilya3/Archives/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

Please comment on Template talk:Nazism sidebar

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Nazism sidebar. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Striking..

Hi, Kautilya,

I have reverted your edit at Talk:2017 China–India border standoff which strike-throughed certain comments in certain t/p discussions. Per talk-page guidelines we seldom strike out comments of banned/blocked users without any other solid reason.This is only allowed at XFDs/RfCs/RMs et al to prevent blocked sock-puppets/ban-evaders from biasing a consensus.Regards:)Winged Blades of Godric^{On leave} 17:14, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi WBOG, Sure, I wouldn't do it for a normal block. But this user has been socking and evading his block. See WP:EVASION. I think it is useful to send a signal to the user that his participation is not welcome. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:32, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Your rationale is precisely understandable.And in that case, I would happily agree with you selectively striking the comments of the sockpuppeteers/ban-evaders (i.e TruthReigns) but not the comments of the sock-puppet(Adam4Math).Cheers:)Winged Blades of Godric^{On leave} 17:38, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at WP:ANI regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. 101.56.218.38 (talk) 04:47, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

re William Johnson (surveyor)

Nice work Brunswicknic (talk) 12:13, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bay Area Rapid Transit

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bay Area Rapid Transit. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Version of page to be protected

If you wish, please could you share your opinion here about the version of the page 'Sino-Indian War' that must be protected? Thanks, The Discoverer (talk) 11:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry that will never happen. Your best bet is to reach agreement with the other editor and then you can ask an admin to unprotect it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:02, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bosaso

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bosaso. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

TPG

Per WP:REDACT: "But if anyone has already replied to or quoted your original comment, changing your comment may deprive any replies of their original context, and this should be avoided. Once others have replied, or even if no one's replied but it's been more than a short while, if you wish to change or delete your comment, it is commonly best practice to indicate your changes." You can't edit your comment that has been already replied.[1] D4iNa4 (talk) 11:12, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I think you are being picky. Nobody has said anything about the sources, did they? I thought it was better to put all the sources in one place so that it is easier to see them. You could have moved it if necessary, instead of deleting it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:26, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If it's just a matter of adding to a comment made previously, removing the addition is really not necessary. If it really mattered, you could simply link the modification in a comment below the post. Vanamonde (talk) 11:59, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Reddy dynasty

Reddy dynasty is repeatedly vandalised by an editor named "Foodie 377" probably from Reddy community. He is making abuse comments on M. Somasekhara Sharma saying he is fake historian. Sharma said reddies of Kondaveedu are vassals to Musunuri Nayaks. That person is not accepting it though sources are provided by previous editor "Masioq". Kindly deal with the issue. Weckkrum (talk) 16:55, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know much about the subject. I suggest you reset it to Sitush's version and the edit-warring will get alleviated. Otherwise, everybody on that page is likely to get blocked. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Somebody did, and it was your OP here. Four reverts, two of them after a warning, nobody else breaching 3RR, reported to AN3. Clear cut as it gets. Weckkrum, if you are serious about your concerns on that page, please discuss them on the talk rather than edit-warring. Vanamonde (talk) 17:40, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2017

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2017. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2017 Berkeley protests

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2017 Berkeley protests. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Murdered journalist

When you've got a moment, could you take a look at Gauri Lankesh? It's still getting a lot of views, and it needs more substance. Vanamonde (talk) 15:36, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Van, I had the article on watch since she has been targeted. Unfortunately, I don't know much about her or her work. I will see if I can dig up some more info. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 09:15, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Theresa May

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

Saraswati river edits

The language of "exact" cognate irked me, it is not an exact cognate, as far as I have read, the nearest cognate is of "x" sound is "ksha" sound. It sounded a little pompous. The other edit, regarding Helmand clues is so vague, I know it is sourced from a book, but those statements like "earliest Saraswati" are unbased on any research, there is no such evidence whatsoever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kriteesh (talk • contribs) 18:03, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

I am afraid your repeated edit is WP:OR. Linguists say that it is a cognate. You and I don't have any standing to question that. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:09, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Shina

Hi, could you please clarify your stance at the Talk:Shina language page? There seems to be confusion as to what you might think.Willard84 (talk) 07:45, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

No, thank you. The discussion there is way out of proportion to the importance to the issue. It doesn't interest me to get involved. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:39, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Paisaci and Dharamsala

Hi Kautilya3, I was just wondering what progress has been made on the name-change of this excellent little article? And could you put a word in on my discussion about moving Dharamsala to Dharamshala (and current Dharamshala to Dharamshala (disambiguation)? (Or simply move the articles over if you can?) Gherkinmad (talk) 18:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Gerkinmad, I never knew that there was an issue with Dharamsala. It is a WP:COMMONNAME. I don't see how it can be changed.

Paisachi, on the other hand, is a Sanskrit term and should be changed to a proper transliteration. Thanks for remind me about it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:29, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi again, Kautilya3, the move wasn't my idea to begin with, it just seemed that the person who had proposed it had taken a lot of time to explain why they wanted the change. Gherkinmad (talk) 16:44, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

3RR violation

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

You have also violated your own advice at WP:STATUSQUO. I tried an alternative wording, based on your comments, but you reverted for a third time. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Well, you get the award for bringing me to 3RR, which happes only about once or twice a year! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:50, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Galkayo

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

Template:History of Pakistan

Since you made no comment on talk page, I would like to leave a note here. Talking about WP:CON, right now 3 people are on agreement while only 2 are opposing the version, and none of their opposes are noteworthy. Is there any reason why you reverted me [2]? The version that I am reverting, doesn't have consensus nor it is a stable version. The problems have been already highlighted in best manners on the talk page, see the comments of me, Satpal Dandiwal, Capitals00. Majority of the 5,200 removed bytes involve the spam of {{#if: {{{AD|}}}|AD|CE}} . D4iNa4 (talk) 15:56, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

You are still a long way off from consensus. You need to keep discussing, or use a dispute resolution procedure. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:03, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

When most people are not agreeing with the very new version that lacks consensus and engages in one sided pseudohistorical POV then we can easily go for WP:STATUSQUO. Onus is on those who don't want WP:STATUSQUO. We don't just start treating less popular version as authentic, especially when it has serious POV issues that can be solved only after removing the version. Again, 3 people are in agreement of it, there should be no reason to preserve such a POV version. Apart from removing the non-Muslim empires that held significant portion of Pakistan for a significant amount of time, the template lists princely states to show that in spite the rule of Bombay Presidency (not mentioned), British Raj, Pakistan was still divided as couple of independent/sovereign nations in the form of princely states.. What's with the inclusion of the Lower Paleolithic site "Riwat" at the top of the template as civilization or community of people by calling it "Riwatian Culture"? If you are saying that I need to use DR against such a pseudohistoric nonsensical version even when 3/5 editors supports reverting it, then that's simply a waste of time @RegentsPark: for now. D4iNa4 (talk) 16:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

It seems that you prefer WP:STATUSQUO yourself[3] when new edits lack consensus. Do you acknowledge that this misleading version has no consensus? D4iNa4 (talk) 17:15, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

The STATUSQUO is the PAKHIGHWAY's version, which has been there since August. It was reverted by Capitals00 on the grounds that it was an edit by a "blocked user". He wasn't blocked when he did the edit and he is not blocked now. So, off to the talk page. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Since August? That's too recent, I had said "Clearly a POV version by blocked editor", and also made a comment under a minute[4], that means even if he hadn't been blocked I would be still making the revert. Capitals00 (talk) 17:43, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, guys. You can't railroad this. Discuss it or take it to dispute resolution. You are wasting your time here. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:52, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Telugu pages

Reddy dynasty

Hello Kautilya. Can u explain me wats wrong in adding Subordinates of Musunuri Nayaks content. Mallampalli Somasekhara Sharma clearly mentioned reddies of Kondaveedu are subordinates to Musunuri Nayaks Weckkrum (talk) 22:25, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

You cited Cynthia Talbot, with some ten page range. What exactly does she say that supports your claim? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:36, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Telugu Brahmins

Please expand this page Weckkrum (talk) 22:25, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Kamma caste

In what way is it necessary to have legends section in of origin of Kammas regarding belthi reddy origin? It seems completely baseless......Talbot theories doesn't work always ......Talbot definition of formation of modern Andhra castes post Vijayanagara empire is utterly foolish. .. Leave his theories to himself.... Weckkrum (talk) 22:28, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Of all the caste pages that I watch this is about the most controversial one. People have an endless series of complaints. I wonder why that is. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:46, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

List of Malas

Please merge this article or redirect to main mala caste page Weckkrum (talk) 22:29, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

2017 Military history WikiProject Coordinator election

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:16, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sex characteristics

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sex characteristics. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

September 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Persecution of Hindus. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. - Mfarazbaig (talk) 18:38, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Timeline of the Trump presidency, 2017 Q3

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Timeline of the Trump presidency, 2017 Q3. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Spanggur Gap

Hello Kautilya3, I request your help and input for the content dispute at the page Spanggur Gap. The contention is whether a paragraph can be included or not. Please also take a look at the discussion on the talk page. Thanks, The Discoverer (talk) 19:19, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

They are not contesting content. They are contesting your sources. Why don't you use Google Books? There are tons of books that cover the Sino-Indian War.

And if you want to get me involved in something, you need to ping me from the article talk page. Inviting people on their user talks is considered WP:CANVASSING. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:01, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry about inviting you from your talk page. In any case, my request to you was a small post, neutral and open, and you are non-partisan, so I am confident that it would not be considered as an inappropriate notification.

Regarding their allegations about the unreliability of the sources, they haven't substantiated those claims. I have added a book as an additional reference and invited you on the talk page. The Discoverer (talk) 11:38, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tulle massacre

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tulle massacre. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Nivedita Menon

Since you've worked on related pages before, care to step in with this user? SPA, edit-warring, competence issues, and I simply don't have the time to deal with it appropriately. Vanamonde (talk) 16:12, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Hmm. Strange. I didn't notice this article getting created. I don't see why it shouldn't be AfD'ed. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm less concerned about it's existence: there's some notability for her publications, even before the protests, during which of course she received widespread coverage. I'd not suggest AfD. I'm more concerned about the SPA with serious English issues, who seems to want to ... still not sure what they're trying, but it's not an improvement. Vanamonde (talk) 04:07, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Ok, this is going to be a huge favour to you, because I think she is a waste of time. Her speech on Kashmir was worthy of a ten-year old. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:10, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't give two hoots for her speech (haven't even heard it, that I recall) but when folks come by editing a single article and accusing it of bias, it's something we've got to watch out for. Vanamonde (talk) 10:38, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bukhara

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bukhara. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Jamalpur

Hello Sir can you review my article. Atrisomkshraj (talk) 18:53, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Atri, I am not a new page reviewer. So you will have to wait. But looking at it, I would say you need a bit more content than the one-liner. Please try to expand it into at least a short paragraph. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 19:57, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for being a welcoming member to the Wikipedia community.

Neilc314 (talk) 04:02, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Sources..

Since you seem to frequent these topic areas, can you comment on my recent removal of several sources (which IMO are unreliable) from Operation Pawan?I have some thoughts that this may be a reliable one but am not very sure.Regards:)Winged Blades of Godric^{On leave} 07:09, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi WBOG, tamilnation.co is certainly a nationalist/separatist website, and its reliability is questionable. I think your removals were certainly right. But I don't know enough about the subject to find better sources. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:01, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Peter Hore

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Peter Hore. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

Hello Kautilya, You undid an edit I made to the Sikkim page, saying it was unsourced. I just changed the word "state" to "nation" for the sake of clarity. I don't think this needs a source. Thanks, HeroBobGamer (talk) 00:32, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that is the introduction of a WP:LABEL, which indeed needs a reliable source, multiple sources in fact. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:34, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Abdullah II of Jordan

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Abdullah II of Jordan. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Malta convoys

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Malta convoys. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

There has been a proposal to topic ban you due to tendentious editing. You can find the thread at ANI. Sardeeph (talk) 11:26, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Please adhere to NPOV

Hello, I'm TomBarker23. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. This is related to your tendentious editing. Please refer any comments to the discussion about you on ANI.TomBarker23 (talk) 13:01, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. I see that you were already notified above, but wanted to make it its own section to make sure you see it. The discussion can be found here: Wikipedia:Administrators noticeboard/Incidents#Topic ban for tendentious editor Kautilya3 --Darth Mike^(talk) 13:05, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh lord!

File:Autumn leaves (37344204731).jpg

The colors!

I just laughed out loud after reading the accusations against you at ANI. I hope you are enjoying some of the autumn. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:45, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Was it really that trivial? I myself thought it was quite damaging. Those cherry-picked quotes drawn out of context sounded quite alarming. Fortunately, we have some excellent admins who took the trouble to go and read the full discussions, and see through the attempted distortions. Apparently, this has been in the works for almost a year. Some serious work went into preparing it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:22, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Indeed, the distorted cherry-picked quotes show serious work over time. It is amazing how a parallel social network is being used. Something similar has been happening in cases unrelated to South Asia, e.g. against some of our best volunteers / admins active in Horn of Africa / West Africa articles. I just looked at the LxP SPI case. The behavioral evidence is strong... this is not a newbie, just some really upset long term NOTHERE case with background meat puppetry. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 00:07, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Operation Anubis

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Operation Anubis. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Akbar

Does the source in this edit, appear reliable to you? Stuart A.P. Murray is not a historian. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:34, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Kansas Bear, the book looks quite fishy to me, but that the content looks reasonable. You can replace the source with something here. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:47, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

The content did not concern me, as opposed to a source written by a journalist. There are plenty of editors that would use this situation(unreliable source) as an excuse to remove the information along with the source. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:51, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Nizam of Hyderabad

An old problem has cropped up again. I've added a cite for the contentious material (thank you for your suggestion of looking at Hyderabad State) but would appreciate some extra eyes on it for now... Pinkbeast (talk) 13:56, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I added some more references. Hopefully, it will quieten down. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:49, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh, that's much better. Thank you. They usually seem to give it a rest for a few months between appearances. We shall see. Pinkbeast (talk) 16:13, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Linda Sarsour

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Linda Sarsour. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump–Russia dossier

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump–Russia dossier. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Self watch

A newbie Wikipedian turned blogger says:

...but all my edits were brutally reverted. I was only trying to organize the existing article to conform to the Neutral Point of View, to make it easier to read, and to put in logical criticism to the Helmand Theory, in completely encyclopedic language, but one of the self-proclaimed guardians of Wikipedian neutrality reverted my edits, placed a sanction upon my head, and wasted hours of my work under some silly excuse of lack of citations. I have had great respect for Wikipedia but since it is a worldwide free encyclopedia, today it is sadly controlled by Leftist dictators, like User: Kautilya3. (emphasis added)

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:53, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Mar4d (talk) 14:02, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

1947 Jammu Massacres

Dear Kautilya. I have made significant edits on this page which you also edit. This is about Jammu massacres yet there is way too much text about unrelated events in Mirpur and Rajoi. There are seperate articles for these and they divert the topic by diluting it with so much unecessary information about a massacre elsewhere the other issue is that the Mirpir massacre page does not even mention the much larger Jammu genocide but the Jammu Massacre page is forced to accomidate Mirpur I may be wrong but it seems people are trying to diminish the genocide in Jammu by over emphasising Mirpur and Rajoi. Please can you discuss on talk page ? Thanks in advance. 2A02:C7D:151D:D100:7871:7BC2:3DB8:7A1C (talk) 09:16, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

What do you mean by "elsewhere"? Mirpur and Rajori were as much a part of the Jammu province as Udhampur and Kishtwar. All the violence of the Jammu province should be covered in that article.

I haven't been active recently due to real life commitments. I will check your edits eventually. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:06, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Dont ever leave baseless warnings on my page

Read the article Jammu massacres of 1947. Looking at your contributions its shocking Considering that your questioning my edit since you have been active on that page ofteb the massacre of Muslims of Hari Singh article is proof and I will link that article now and re add the the legitimate information. ShaniAli1lo (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

I am sorry, you have added an WP:OR commentary in the midst of a sourced paragraph. That is not the way to edit Wikipedia. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:11, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Vandalism on Rani Padmavati page

Recently, someone changed "Sinhala Kingdom" to "Kingdom of Polonnaruwa", which has no mention in original text. Please fix this mistake, Thank you. 117.192.206.249 (talk) 21:26, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Not sure which page you are talking about. Why can't you edit it back? Is the page semi-protected or something? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:41, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello, sir. It is this page Rani Padmini and it says its locked. There is "Kingdom of Polonnaruwa" in first paragraph, this should instead be "Sinhala Kingdom" based on original source, please check history of the page. 117.192.206.249 (talk) 22:00, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I have reverted the edit because it was unsourced. In general, if a page is semi-protected, you can always submit edit requrests as explained on the lock icon, or just write a note on the article talk page. Somebody will attend to it. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 22:11, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

The mysterious horses

Hi, Kautilya. The mysterious horses are in my edit notice. You can put an image into yours, here, if you like, and it will appear every time somebody edits your page. My edit notice has grown into greater elaboration, as a "switch" which changes images automatically every 24 hours, in a way RexxS kindly coded for me. (The horses have changed into a waterfall now.:-)) You could ask him, too! If you try it out yourself with a favorite image, or some text, you can see if you like the effect. Any image will work, including animations. I used to have an animated gif of Laurel and Hardy dancing, which made everybody laugh... people turned up on my page full of giggles, which was fun. Sadly, that gif has been deleted now. Bishonen | talk 16:01, 20 November 2017 (UTC).

Thanks

Thanks for the message on my page. Burundee (talk) 15:51, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

You are welcome. Hope you will enjoy editing Wikipedia. Please note however that new posts are expected to be added at the bottom of a talk page. You will find a "+" sign or "new section" sign among the tabs at the top. That opens a new section for you. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:55, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Oops, so sorry! Anyways, you could also delete these messages from me completely. It was just one of gratitude (and not important enough to be permanent. :-)) I have edited wikipedia pages previously, but not much. I usually do something on the fly if and when I notice something really wrong (esp if outrageous!). Cheers! Burundee (talk) 16:14, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Also, I am not sure how to push this post to the bottom any more. Sorry about that again! Burundee (talk) 16:16, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Political appointments by Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Political appointments by Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Mirpur Massacres

I just equalised the article so it gives due importance to the genocide of Muslims but it seems Indian users find it hard to swallow please review my Mirpur edits ShaniAli1lo (talk) 15:57, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

It doesn't matter much what you tried to do. But you are seriously edit warring and it won't end well. So, please stop this and initiate a discussion on the article talk page.

I am sympathetic to the first edit, but without a source that connects the "Jammu massacres" (that happened mostly in the Jammu and Kathua districts) with what happened in Mirpur, it is hard to argue that this content belongs there. But in any case, you need to discuss on the article talk page. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:06, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

See the Nangparbat sock page. Darkness Shines (talk) 16:42, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Caste system in India

Which "WP:PRIMARY" source do you object to? A.j.roberts (talk) 20:14, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

All of them. Anything published before 1950 is not permissible. And, the caste system issues are such a dynamic research topic that the only the most recent research might fit the bill, unless it is a highly regarded and authentic piece of work. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:43, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Copied this discussion to Talk:Caste system in India. Capitals00 (talk) 07:05, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Policy

1950 isn't mentioned anywhere in the Policy, and given both the Caste system, and British Raj were created centuries before 1950, you'll find no post 1950 PRIMARY sources, and discount numerous reliable secondary source, before you consider the article details the history of the caste system. To quote the WP:PRIMARY policy: Policy: Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them.[4] Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge. For example, an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source. Do not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so. Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them. Do not add unsourced material from your personal experience, because that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material. Use extra caution when handling primary sources about living people; see WP:Biographies of living persons § Avoid misuse of primary sources, which is policy.

anyway the NCBI published paper is a 2001 PRIMARY source, while the The Hindu is a 2016, the CDC a 2014 the Life Science a 2013, the Time another 2013 econdary sources, and they similarly cite the Manusmriti and Dharmasastra, validating their use in my:

First observed in Megasthenes's 4th century BCE work, Indica, where he noted the population was divided into 7 endogamous, and hereditary castes[7], and mandated in the 3rd century BCE :: Manusmriti code, described in detail by Al-Biruni, in the 10th century CE[8][9], and in a manner recent DNA studies appear to support[10], the system today is practised across South

Asia, with variations prevelant in Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan[11] and Pakistan.

A.j.roberts (talk) 07:20, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

What relevance does the historic Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan WARNING you have pasted into my talk page, have with this discussion? A.j.roberts (talk) 09:13, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Answered on your talk page. Please continue any further discussion there. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:46, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi protection request

Dear Kautilya3, I want to draw your attention to page Malegaon, if you can help or provide any suggestion. I created a request to semi-protect the article article. It seems IPs are vandalizing the page. CuriousPerson18375 (talk) 23:35, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Caste system in India, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:32, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Kautilya3. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Lohana

Please keep an eye on Lohana page, there has been recent vandalism of sourced content by user "Harsh54". He is claiming Lohanas are "Surayavashi from Iran/Afghanistan" and other absurd pseudo-history things without any source. I have restored as much as possible. 103.194.25.236 (talk) 17:53, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Bajrang Dal

The "reliably sourced" opinion calling the organization "militant" is a biased perspective and against wikipedia guidelines. I am editing it to a more 'neutral point of view'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mntzr (talk • contribs) 19:37, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

We cannot just take your word that it is a "biased perspective". You need to provide reliable sources that say so. You have already received an edit-warring notice in November. Resuming edit warring won't do you any good. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:47, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

The organization does not describe itself as either militant or extremist. To then introduce it as such is wrong. The references are allegations with no named sources. Yes, it is true that they have been criticized as militant and extremists and that description belongs in the criticism or controversy section, not the introduction.Mntzr (talk) 15:37, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

It doesn't matter how the organisation describes itself. What matters is what the reliable sources say. Please follow Wikipedia policies, and refrain from making up your own policies. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:00, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Robert Mueller

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Robert Mueller. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

remind

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Article. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you.--樂號 (talk) 04:23, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

what you have did will be see as an imperil or threat. Please do not game the system. And do not make modification that without reaching consensus.--樂號 (talk) 04:25, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Brexit

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

Calendar etc

Hi Kautilya3! Many months ago, we had some discussions on solar/lunar calendars. I have been reading through hundreds of historical stone/ copper/ etc inscriptions in the Buddhist, Hindu and Jaina traditions, for the last few weeks. Ran into something that I thought might interest you, if that topic ever needs a revisit. This by Jacobi is a decent introduction to calendars in an epigraphical context, what the solar and lunar were in different regional contexts. I have and will send you some additional stuff by your wiki-email link. Happy holidays, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 05:48, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Emily Thornberry

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Emily Thornberry. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jerusalem

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jerusalem. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

2017 Doklam standoff listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 2017 Doklam standoff. Since you had some involvement with the 2017 Doklam standoff redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ansh666 03:19, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Israel

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

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2018!

Hello Kautilya3, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2018. Happy editing, —MBL Talk 05:47, 25 December 2017 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Thank you MBlaze Lightning. Wish you a great bunch of holidays in turn. Happy editing! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:20, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Canada

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Canada. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United States recognition of Jerusalem

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States recognition of Jerusalem. Legobot (talk) 04:45, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump–Russia dossier

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump–Russia dossier. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Indian annexation of Hyderabad

You reverted my recent edit with the comment "we need to WP:STICKTOSOURCE; there is no evidence that Nehru ever thought of Hyderabad as an independent state". But this is utterly absurd! When the British withdrew from India in 1947, all their subsidiary alliances were abandoned. The princely states had never been part of British India, so they could not be handed over to the two new Dominions created from the British possessions. Pursuant to the Indian Independence Act 1947 they became completely independent, unless and until they acceded to one of the new Dominions, which most of them speedily did, although the process was slow in the case of the Princely States of Pakistan. A series of wars was fought between India and Pakistan precisely because Kashmir was left as an independent state. The Nizam of Hyderabad fought hard to retain his independence. Do you really not grasp any of this? Moonraker (talk) 05:31, 27 December 2017 (UTC) Moonraker (talk) 05:31, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

I am afraid this is a WP:FORUMy discussion. Please follow the Wikipedia policies on reliable sourcing. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:14, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

I am glad you do not dispute the historic facts I have mentioned above. If you have concerns about sourcing, it would be better for you to add a {{cn}} template, rather than removing information from am article because you have a POV objection to it. Moonraker (talk) 06:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC) Moonraker (talk) 06:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

The very fact that you call the above post "historical facts" is troublesome, because it is full of your personal interpretations. I do not care to "dispute them" because that is precisely what a WP:FORUMy discussion is. If you want to engage in such debates, please find Reddit or some such debating forum, not Wikipedia. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:53, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

You seem unable to comprehend that you have modified a direct quote (of Noorani's analysis of Nehru's views) with your own WP:OR is quite astonishing, given your experience. If you persist with this practice, I am afraid you will end up at WP:ARE. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:07, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Russian presidential election, 2018

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Russian presidential election, 2018. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Warning

Hello, I'm Josephus. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit:[5] to Exodus of Kashmiri Hindus seemed less than neutral. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. JosephusOfJerusalem (talk) 09:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

A detailed warning

I see that you have removed content cited to RS with a tendentious edit summary. Very interestingly the sequence of events I see on the page is that Anmolbhat has added a wall of clobbered Hindu POV text (copyright too I suspect) [6] which you conveniently are not worried about. Then comes along NadirAli who has added properly cited information [7] which happens to be too neutral for Hindu POV. You first try to soften the wording from ″false propaganda″ to ″exaggerated″ [8]. When NadirAli then tells you to WP:STICKTOSOURCE [9] you then remove the entire text he added,[10] although you had no issue with that text's presence earlier. All this is a display of tendentious editing and if you do not cease this disruptive behaviour you will soon find yourself in an AE or ANI thread justifying why Wikipedia should still allow such editing. JosephusOfJerusalem (talk) 09:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are warning me about. I have deleted UNDUE content and explained why I did so on the talk page. All further discussion takes place there. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:23, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Oh you know perfectly well what you have done under the guise of WP:UNDUE. The content discussions can go on but the behavioural warning goes here. Any further display of tendentiousness will have severe consequences according to Wikipedia policies. JosephusOfJerusalem (talk) 10:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Ramgarhia#appalled

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Ramgarhia#appalled. You may be interested. Winged Blades^Godric 07:12, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Your final warning

You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Kashmiris. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. JosephusOfJerusalem (talk) 15:01, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear Sir

I have responded at my talk page. --G (talk) 13:46, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Potential deliberate vandalism by Pakistani COI repeat offending user Mar4d on India topics

Dear Kautilya3 and MBlaze Lightning,

Please help with this suspected case of habitual repeat offender whom you both have tried to warn in the past, but he keeps repeating the same cycle. Please take it to the logical conclusion, by taking it to those forums/admins who can see this person either fix himself quickly or else he finally gets stopped permanently. He seems to be deliberately and repeatedly doing this to multiple editors on the multiple articles while covering/archiving his tracks. Experienced and smart enough to evade the perm banning by gaming the system for far too long. He is suspect for the systematic canvassing too.

1. Immediately and permanently sanction him from all the articles with India in namespace or category.

2. Put him on watch list of experienced admins.

3. Get some responsible unbiased admin to investigate his past tracks if those sufficiently warrant a perm ban on all his accounts and related IPs, specially if he does not own up and fix within next 24 hours.

He knows what he is doing (wrong). He is very experienced and extremely good at it (disguise and game). And, he has gotten away with it (time to bring the curtains down). Hence, he might even be beyond "cure him with compassion" (sadly).

I do not have the tools and sufficient knowledge of wikipedia to affect that. Hence, requesting you both to take it forward to permanently fix his "long-term below-the-radar successful-gamer-and-evader repeat-offender" behavior.

Thanks. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 20:19, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear IP, I am sure you feel pretty hard done by Mar4d's reverts of your edits. But you need to wait for him to respond and explain his reasons. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:44, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the concern. Actually, no, not at all, I do not feel hard done, because I am not emotionally attached to my edits. If you re-read my detailed comment on his wall, I already made it clear that I am okay for anything of mine to be chopped by the "unbiased" editors. This is not so much about my edits. I am more concerned by "his behavioral pattern". Yes, as I already said in my OP, wait for 24 hours. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 22:33, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

More refs and counter-refs, re our discussion few months ago

Kautilya3: Popular you are, your talk page is very active these days! I wiki-emailed you some sources from different sides on some topics we touched upon a few months ago. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 00:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Armenian Genocide

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Armenian Genocide. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018 India)

Greetings,

It is being planned to organize Wikigraphists Bootcamp in India, please fill out the survey form to help the organizers. Your responses will help organizers understand what level of demand there is for the event (how many people in your community think it is important that the event happens). At the end of the day, the participants will turn out to have knowledge to create drawings, illustrations, diagrams, maps, graphs, bar charts etc. and get to know to how to tune the images to meet the QI and FP criteria. For more information and link to survey form, please visit Talk:Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018 India). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:46, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Southern Transitional Council

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Southern Transitional Council. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

Atleast you seem reasonable on the Jammu article just wantes to balance article nothing new was added anyway common sense prevails. 82.132.187.153 (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

You are welcome. Please feel free to alert me if it gets vandalised again. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:03, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi sorry to bother you but someone again deleted it without a proper reason no one seems to discuss why a relevant subsection is not needed but the Mirpur article needs one? 82.132.220.38 (talk) 13:16, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Nangparbat you tried to play this game on RegentsPark's talk page[11] and all your socks were blocked by @Yamla: last month. Stop evading your ban over a section. Anmolbhat (talk) 13:35, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry More problems

Hello sorry to bother you but someone removed the heading and the article link again for no reason citing only "heading not needed" let me argue why it is. Its a historical demographic which no longer exists and merging it to current populations is diluting its historical importance plus the link to the causes of the demographics allows user to switch ti the main article explaining the change just like on the Mirpur page. 82.132.229.123 (talk) 19:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Well, you should have engaged in this discussion before you went ahead and did so many reverts. Nobody is going to take you seroiusly any more.

In any case, I think it sort of makes sense that we don't need a subheading in the Jammu article because the comminity still exists, even though it is vastly dwindled. I can't say the same for Mirpur, Pakistan. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

I reverted the IP's last edit as it's a sock of Nangparbat Darkness Shines (talk) 20:24, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Revert

Hi, edit summary for this revert is irrelevant to the sentence where citation was added, please self-undo your revert. Regards --Omer123hussain (talk) 13:23, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, fixed it now. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Question

Hi there! I want to know if there is any shortcut to becoming an admin on Wikipedia? ZAthe hero (talk) 13:27, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

No, there isn't. You need to stick around for at least a couple of years, do lots of good work, and win the confidence of all the editors. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

okay thanks. ZAthe hero (talk) 19:06, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jesse Hamilton

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jesse Hamilton. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Foreign policy of the Donald Trump administration

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Foreign policy of the Donald Trump administration. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Template:Lang-hin

Dear Kautilya, I hope that you are doing well. Would you be able to kindly fix Template:Lang-hin? It should be used for Hindustani in the same way that Template:Lang-hi is used for Hindi. I appreciate your time and help! With regards, Anupam^Talk 21:35, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Anupam, thanks, I am doing fine except for being very pressed for time. I do not unfortunately know anything about creating or fixing templates, and even less about scripts. Perhaps uanfala can help? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:48, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

I've reverted the recent changes that caused the errors, so it now works as expected but I think there's a more fundamental problem with it (I've brought that up at the template's talk page). – Uanfala (talk) 14:40, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Revert

Hello Kautilya3,

you reverted my edit in C. Christine Fair giving the reason that the content is "pointless gossip". This is not the case. The investigation for slander does not constitute "pointless gossip". Her diatribe about the German police and the Frankfurt airport, which she calls "Frankfart Hellport" (HuffPo article) might be gossip but the german reporting and my edit aren't.

Regards Haage42 (talk) 14:16, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Well, somebody losing their head over airport security is a yawn. If she actually had explosives on her, well, that would be worthy of Wikipedia to report it! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:11, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I think I warrants a short paragraph since she's a security researcher and she even involved the American embassy in Germany according to her Twitter. If she was a history prof it would be different. Anyway USA Today just published an article from "Deutsche Welle" about it. I have to say that I don't have a lot of experience with editing Wiki entries about living persons.

She is known for plenty of such hot-headed reactions and her loose tongue. If I could find some source that summarises her conduct of this kind, I wouldn't mind adding it. But each individual incident is basically minor and doesn't warrant mentioning. If she gets convicted in a court of law, then of course, we would cover it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:09, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Sure. Adding a paragraph about her being hotheaded might look a bit onesided, though. I'll keep an eye on the proceedings in Germany. I'll put it in the disc if something conclusive happens. Haage42 (talk) 21:32, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Coachella Valley Church

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Coachella Valley Church. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Romila Thapar

I only reinstated the indefinite semi-protect after pending changes trail ended. At that time, the consensus was to revert the protection back to the original pre-pending changes status. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 16:06, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Indeed, sorry for bothering you.

RegentsPark, would you consider lowering the protection level to pending changes? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:12, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Done.--regentspark (comment) 16:36, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Baltistan

Respected Sir/Mam, In a reply to my edit that was done on 25 January, 2018 you unanimously declared my edits as vandalism but with due respect I want to cite sources of my edit and prove that my edits were correct and Baltistan is a part of Republic Of India under the unlawful occupation of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. At the time of independence and demarcation of international boundary all the regions previously under the erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir were shown as part of India in accordance to Radcliffe line and the same became part of Instrument of Accession [[12]] signed by Maharaja Hari Singh and Provisional Government of India. Hence it is a generous request on my part to recognise my edits as authentic and act as a credibility booster for Wikipedia and its editors and readers community. At last as a responsible editor i am not presently making any changes, edits or modifications to the article relating to Baltistan. Waiting eagerly for an eatly reply. Yours Sincerely, — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Truth should prevail (talk • contribs)

As per the 1972 Simla Agreement, India and Pakistan defined a Line of Control between their respective areas of Jammu and Kashmir, and agreed to respect it until the Kashmir dispute resolved. As far as Wikipedia is concerned, the territories separated by the Line of Control will be regarded as belonging to the respective countries until the situation changes. If you want to do anything else, you need to find a substantial number of reliable sources that support your position, and run an WP:RfC. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:46, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Blue Lives Matter

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Blue Lives Matter. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Explanation given at Talk

Hello, I have given an explanation at the Talk page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.127.246.106 (talk) 00:25, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Good advice

Thanks, Kautilya3 for the heads up. Yaditiva (talk) 04:56, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

For your kind perusal (M. S. Golwalkar)

• 'the' missionary-run Hislop college, I considered that 'the' qualifies 'missionary-run'. Since it appears first time in the article and there are several such colleges I replaced 'the' with 'a'.
• On 18 October 1947 he is 'reported to have' met Maharaja Hari Singh at the request of India's Home Minister Vallabhbhai Patel to persuade the maharaja to accede to India. He was accompanied by the RSS Delhi pracharak Vasantrao Oak and the RSS United Provinces sanghchalak Narendrajit Singh. Although it is believed that the maharaja agreed to the proposal, the accession was not signed until 26 October after the Indo-Pakistani War of 1947.
  • the 'reported to have' is editorial tone, if that should be maintained then we should also update following sentences. If he had not met the following statements become only suspicious narrative. The meeting is mentioned in some books including this one: "A State In Turbulence Jammu & Kashmir"
• Hedgewar's grooming (including encouragement to obtain a Law degree and the authorship of We, or Our Nationhood Defined).
  • I had added the closing parenthesis here.
• Removing quote signs around very short phrases from running text because these are typically hints of wiki editors' bias. Good articles do not have them. No statement was removed or edited. I only removed quotes around 2-3 word phrasal adjectives to make the article more like a usual wiki article.

I am going to wait for a response. You can also ask question if the edit is not appearing good to you. My edits were really simple in my view. --G (talk) 06:23, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Gbohoadwwian, I think in general you believe that the Wikipedia should report the statements in the RSS literature as fact and you also seem to believe that mainstream writers like A. G. Noorani should be discounted as being WP:BIASED. That cannot be done. We treat the RSS literature with skepticism because they are insiders (see WP:THIRDPARTY). Noorani's assessments in legal/constitutional matters will be reported as fact.

As for Golwalkar's involvement in the Kashmir conflict, I have provided a THIRDPARTY source, viz., Tapan Bose. However, this is not a peer-reviewed journal article. So we cannot place great reliance on what it says. Note, especially, his statement that it was under Golwalkar's mentoring that the Maharaja arranged the killing of Muslims. That needs solid evidence which Tapan Bose doesn't provide. So the same WP:NPOV policies that we apply to everything are also saving Golwalkar here. It cuts both ways. (As far as I can tell, Tapan Bose is relaying what the RSS literature says, and his idea of mentoring is an inference. There is no independence evidence for either.) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:37, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

I think you might have mixed up some other edit, I made no edit in reference of Noorani. You can shed your prejudice against me, please. What about other simple improvements? Like parenthesis, integrating editorial phrases in the text, why do you want to undo all my edits? Apart from "reported to have" all were simple improvements with no changes to content! Even that was intuitive to me but I can give benefit of doubt if you have a different take on it. Either ways ask me what I believe whenever you like. --G (talk) 05:01, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

I admit that my memory can be faulty but not in this case. See this discussion.

If you want me to check the other edits, please provide the diffs. In general, you cannot remove quote marks because they are indicating that a description or a phrase has been used from a source verbatim. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:05, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

That is a different article Sir. And I left it as it is. What is your intent on commenting about it here? I do not think this is a good discussion leading to collaborative editing. You want me to provide your diffs to you? Some 30 characters? Yes, quotes around two word phrasal adjective indicate they are used verbatim, their overuse ruins readability and stems from wiki editor's bias more often that not, will depend on case to case. Articles improve and evolve over time with these small edits too, if you want ownership it will only get improvements from you rather than few other people too, and you can guess that every editor may not share your POV. Every one can keep their POV and edit as per wiki guidelines, reliable sources. Lets say, "stunned" in quote mark, that is a good example of writers bias to add emphasis according to her POV than simply summarizing the reliable source for the readers. I do not see merit in such bias. I had given a book reference to engage you for another point, that is not central though, you can see that I have been engaging without trying to mock your POV. --G (talk) 04:30, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

I have removed quote marks for "stunned" because the context makes it clear that it is indirect speech. Quote marks are not used for emphasis. They are used to indicate quotation.

From now on, please use the article talk pages to discuss content issues, not here. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:52, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

References

Please comment on Talk:Justice Party (South Korea)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Justice Party (South Korea). Legobot (talk) 04:29, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Supporting Indian Wikipedia Program resource distribution

In 2017 - 2018, the Wikimedia Foundation and Google working in close coordination with the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Wikimedia India chapter (WMIN) and user groups will pilot a program encouraging Wikipedia communities to create locally relevant and high-quality content in Indian languages. This program (Code name: Project Tiger) will:

(a) Support active and experienced Wikipedia editors through the donation of laptops and stipends for internet access and

(b) Sponsor a language-based contest that aims to address existing Wikipedia content gaps.

The objective of the program is to provide laptops and internet stipends for existing editors who need support to contribute more actively. 50 basic model Acer Chromebooks and Internet stipends for 100 contributors are available for distribution. Provided resources are the sole property of the beneficiaries and should be used for the betterment of the movement.

If you're an active Wikimedian, and interested to receive support from this project, please apply. It will take around 10 minutes of your time, and will ask descriptive questions about your contribution to Indic Wikimedia projects.

• Apply at: Supporting Indian Language Wikipedias Program#Apply for support
• Last date for submitting applications is 11th February 2018, 11:59 IST.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Nizam of Hyderabad. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.--Omer123hussain (talk) 12:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Omer123hussain, in the first place you have not addressed the problems I pointed out in the edit summary: This is not a WP:HISTRS; do not use it; also do not modify sourced content with WP:OR. Have you looked at the policy pages cited there and understood what the issues are?

In the second place, when an edit is reverted, you are expected to discuss it on the talk page, as per WP:BRD. Repeatedly reinstating the problematic content will get you blocked. It is well and good that you know how to give template warnings, but you need to practise what they say! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:46, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Brother Kautilya3 please discuss do not revert our hardwork simply. It is hardly 1 sentence and its important because it gives information why the rulers suffix the title "Siddique". And my aim is to expand the section and later as per FA standards and guild advises that all will go to Main article it will not exist in this article. Please cooperate and advise with online available citation. Ur advise and support is important. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 12:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

If you are shooting for FA status, this kind of edit is exactly the wrong thing to do.

• First you add highly dubious opening sentence sourced to a British civil servant from another century.

• I know this and searching looking for latest version, but give some time to fix it.

• You delete and replace sourced phrases like "Having burnt the bridges with the princes", with WP:OR.

• To be honest, for me looks Dramatic tone, I thought you will understand this edit of my.

• And, why did you remove the reign dates?

• I did not removed brother i had brought it in uniform and encyclopedia manner. Insted of (1991 - 1993) it is replaced as (1991-93).

The list goes on. If one edit has so many problems, I have no idea how you hope to get to FA! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Also the inclusion of hagiographic, rather than encyclopedic phrases like "thus descending from two illustrious families of the Mughal court". Hard to see an FA with this sort of writing.--regentspark (comment) 13:06, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Good point. That was my fault actually, but it was taken from a good quality source. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:09, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

• My apologies if i could not explain more specifically in edit summary, you can guide us this way once i am done with expanding work, like User:Dwaipayan , Abhishek and others. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 13:28, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Warning

I m warning you last time.Who are you to decide whether the sources are fake or not?And you cannot call a reputed press website fake.Consider this as a last threat from my side. Jainallotrope (talk) 13:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

When you see a blue link to a policy, such as WP:FAKE, please click on it and read it. Then you will know how we decide. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 14:08, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Nizam of Hyderabad. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.--Omer123hussain (talk) 12:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Omer123hussain, in the first place you have not addressed the problems I pointed out in the edit summary: This is not a WP:HISTRS; do not use it; also do not modify sourced content with WP:OR. Have you looked at the policy pages cited there and understood what the issues are?

In the second place, when an edit is reverted, you are expected to discuss it on the talk page, as per WP:BRD. Repeatedly reinstating the problematic content will get you blocked. It is well and good that you know how to give template warnings, but you need to practise what they say! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:46, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Brother Kautilya3 please discuss do not revert our hardwork simply. It is hardly 1 sentence and its important because it gives information why the rulers suffix the title "Siddique". And my aim is to expand the section and later as per FA standards and guild advises that all will go to Main article it will not exist in this article. Please cooperate and advise with online available citation. Ur advise and support is important. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 12:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

If you are shooting for FA status, this kind of edit is exactly the wrong thing to do.

• First you add highly dubious opening sentence sourced to a British civil servant from another century.

• I know this and searching looking for latest version, but give some time to fix it.

• You delete and replace sourced phrases like "Having burnt the bridges with the princes", with WP:OR.

• To be honest, for me looks Dramatic tone, I thought you will understand this edit of my.

• And, why did you remove the reign dates?

• I did not removed brother i had brought it in uniform and encyclopedia manner. Insted of (1991 - 1993) it is replaced as (1991-93).

The list goes on. If one edit has so many problems, I have no idea how you hope to get to FA! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Also the inclusion of hagiographic, rather than encyclopedic phrases like "thus descending from two illustrious families of the Mughal court". Hard to see an FA with this sort of writing.--regentspark (comment) 13:06, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Good point. That was my fault actually, but it was taken from a good quality source. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:09, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

• My apologies if i could not explain more specifically in edit summary, you can guide us this way once i am done with expanding work, like User:Dwaipayan , Abhishek and others. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 13:28, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Warning

I m warning you last time.Who are you to decide whether the sources are fake or not?And you cannot call a reputed press website fake.Consider this as a last threat from my side. Jainallotrope (talk) 13:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

When you see a blue link to a policy, such as WP:FAKE, please click on it and read it. Then you will know how we decide. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 14:08, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The National Memo

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:The National Memo. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Re:Bhat

Thank you for your reply. You are welcome to restore/replace the material you find helpful. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam^Talk 06:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of Trump–Russia dossier allegations

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Trump–Russia dossier allegations. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dras, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tiger Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Siachen

I see you're avoiding that discussion :) But, could you weigh in and help figure out what is appropriate? Thanks!--regentspark (comment) 16:29, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

I am not exactly avoiding. But I don't see what more I can say than what I did yesterday. I don't see any easy solution. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 01:09, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Real News Update

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Real News Update. Legobot (talk) 04:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Attention Required for Zero Page

There is no source that is required here; there is a factual error. If for India, there is a mention of "Devanagri" than for China it should be "Mandarine Chinese" and not "Chinese Numerals". This summary page should rightly mention, "Indian Numerals" or "Hindu Numerals". Also, why is India is conjoined with South East Asia in this page. India section should be separate just like the China section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karan Sharma82 (talk • contribs) 06:32, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

You need to check what the reliable sources say about the issues rather than make arguments based on your own opinions. I said this in the response to your edit request.

"Devanagari" is mentioned by name because it was one of the scripts that was in use in India. I will check to see if it is unclear what it means.

As for India and Southeast Asia being clubbed together, it is done because they were culturally joined in the first millennium AD. Hinduism and Buddhism were extensively practised in the Southeast, and Sanskrit was used too. In fact, Al-Hind, as envisaged by the Arabs, went all the way till Indonesia. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:05, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Kashmir conflict. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 03:21, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:B'Tselem

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:B'Tselem. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Holocaust denial

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Holocaust denial. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Racial views of Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Racial views of Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Your ping

Hi Kautilya. Re your ping on the Kashmir conflict page. I'm not really sure what to do. The discussion is way too complicated to follow for anyone outside the conflict and, as long as editors stick to the letter of the sanctions, it is hard to sanction anyone. Personally, I think if we remove two editors (and perhaps a third, all who shall go unnamed) from the discussion, things will improve. But, as we've seen on AE, it is impossible to get admin action in this area. One option is to do something along the lines of what was done for the lead on Jerusalem (a three "uninvolved editor" panel) but even that seems difficult unless we can get two, clear, competing versions of the text in place. All that said, something needs to be done, I just don't know what that something is. --regentspark (comment) 15:44, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

HI RP, thanks for writing. I saw the illhealth notice on your talk page. So, please do take rest and recuperate. We will figure something out. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:52, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:National Rifle Association

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:National Rifle Association. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Nice

What a beautiful user page! Thank you for sharing such nice thoughts and historical information with those who come upon it. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:13, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Randy. Fact and fiction are mixed together there. But it is all stuff I believe in any case. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:28, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Political appointments by Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Political appointments by Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Project Tiger Writing Contest

In 2017 – 2018, the Wikimedia Foundation and Google working in close coordination with the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Wikimedia India Chapter (WMIN) and user groups from India, are piloting a program encouraging Wikipedia communities to create locally relevant and high-quality content in Indian languages. This program will (a) support active and experienced Wikipedia editors through the donation of laptops and stipends for internet access and (b) sponsor a language-based contest that aims to address existing Wikipedia content gaps.

Phase (a) has been completed, during which active contributors were awarded laptops and internet stipends. Phase (b) will be a contest in which editors will come together and develop a writing contest focused on content gaps. Each month three individual prizes will be awarded to each community based on their contribution for the month. The prizes worth 3,000 INR, 2000 INR, and 1,000 INR, will be awarded to the top contributors for each month. The contest started at March 1, 2018, 0:00, and will end at May 31, 2018, 23:59 (IST). Useful links are as follows:

• Sign up at: Wikipedia:Project Tiger Writing Contest/Participants
• List of the articles can be referred at: Wikipedia:Project Tiger Writing Contest/Topics
• Submit/report your articles/contributions at: https://tools.wmflabs.org/fountain/editathons/project-tiger-2018-en
• For more details, rules, FAQ etc. kindly refer: Wikipedia:Project Tiger Writing Contest

Looking forward your participation, all the best. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) at 22:21, 21 March 2018 (UTC).

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Filed a request for response

I filed a request for response at Wikipeida dispute resolution notice board. I included you also as you were involved in discussioin on Raju/Talk page. I appreciate that you at least thought it was right to change the Raju article by including the information contained in my sources.Sharkslayer87 (talk) 22:47, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Worli riots

I've recreated this after dredging through all the available sources. I've a feeling that the usual suspects will try to pull a fast one here (again; it was deleted via AfD the first time because the creator didn't know what they were doing) so I'd appreciate it if you watchlisted this. Vanamonde (talk) 13:45, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Doug Ford Jr.

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Doug Ford Jr.. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Anantnag Page

Hi Buddy - It is a good edit you made on Anantnag page - neutral and backed by valid article (better than mine). I am new on Wikipedia (for editing). Hoping more interactions.

Lptx (talk) 19:53, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Hope to interact and discuss more. :) Lptx (talk) 19:55, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Lptx. I had actually made the same kind of edit to Anantnag some time ago, but somebody removed it saying Islamabad seems to be the name of the district rather than the town. Your edit spurred me to look deeper and I now find that there is loads of information about it. It is all for the better.

Welcome to Wikipedia, by the way. If you need any help with anything, please ask. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 20:00, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Kautilya3, do you think this is a genuine new account, or a returning user (the account was created yesterday and already actively involving in making baseless accusations; see contribution history). Cheers, Alex Shih (talk) 02:15, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Alex, his first edit at Anantnag was good and then it degenerated pretty quickly. It is clearly a returning user, probably somebody that interacted with me in his past incarnations. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Request

Hello. Help expand the article Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks you very much.171.248.63.149 (talk) 10:21, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Abiy Ahmed Ali

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Abiy Ahmed Ali. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Indo-Pakistani War of 1947

Can you explain this?-- Godric ki Kothri^{talk to me} 14:18, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Category:Indo-Pakistani wars is the right category for it, not Category:Indo-Pakistani War of 1947. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:21, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Narasimhan et al. 2018 preprint: "The Genomic Formation of South and Central Asia"

Regarding Narasimhan et al. (2018 preprint), The Genomic Formation of South and Central Asia, read Tony Joseph, How We, The Indians, Came To Be. The Narasimhan-article will prove be a watershed (big words, I know). Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:35, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, obviously, with 92 authors some of whom are big names in their own right, the paper was designed to create a splash! I am glad it is doing so. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:52, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Joshua Jonathan, so, can we now declare the Anatolian hypothesis a fringe theory? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:39, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Don't know; depends if there are people who stick to it, I guess. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 17:57, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

However, the hypothesis that an early form of Indo-Aryan was spoken already by the people of the Indus Civilization (or Mature Harappan culture, c. 2600-2000 B.C.) has its supporters, especially in India;[5] they claim that the Aryan languages did not come to the subcontinent from outside but have always been there.[6] In his bold new book, Archaeology and language,[7] Colin Renfrew has given some weight to this view by suggesting that Indo-European speakers may have brought agriculture from Anatolia to Baluchistan already by 6000 B.C.[8]

(For some reason, I never realized that this paper was available online.) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:33, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

References

Please comment on Talk:Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

March 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Point 5353. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. —MBL ^talk 01:04, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

MBlaze Lightning, can you provide diffs of where I am supposed to have "edit warred"? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:05, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

[13][14] —MBL ^talk 13:06, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

The second edit was as per what we agreed on the talk page. You can't brand that "edit warring". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:52, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

No Kautilya3, you are misrepresenting my comment. I asked you to prove that Ludra meets the exception criteria of WP:SPS and provide sources to support his rather isolated claims, you did neither. —MBL ^talk 13:30, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, you did mention WP:EXCEPTIONAL. I don't see how it applies. The Government makes a claim, and almost all reliable sources that know anything about the matter disagree. If anything, WP:EXCEPTIONAL should apply to the government claim. There is no WP:THIRDPARTY reliable source that backs the government claim, as far as I can see. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:00, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

It seems to me that you are seriously misunderstanding how Wikipedia policies apply here. Praveen Swami is a reliable source. Everything he writes can be reported as a fact in Wikipedia voice. The Governments of India and Pakistan are not reliable sources. At best they merit little footnotes. Giving the Government of India an equal space here, and worse making its claims appear as verified facts, is a serious inversion of the policy. Vanamonde93, can you look at the page and advise us? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:11, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

I am not going to beat around the bush with you. Praveen Swami is not being discussed here. You failed to prove that Ludra meets the exception criteria of WP:SPS, that's that. And, if you really need "advise", then you should go to a relevant noticeboard instead of resorting to canvassing. —MBL ^talk 14:31, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

• MBlaze, that isn't edit-warring by any stretch of the imagination, and you should know that. In particular, adding sources and removing a tag is exactly the response that a tag is supposed to receive; a tag is a note that something needs to be fixed, not a badge of shame. If you are responding in this manner to someone addressing a tag you had placed, that is a matter for serious concern. Vanamonde (talk) 16:07, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

[15] was a revert of [16], [17] was a revert of [18]. Multiple reverts are considered edit-warring. Period. And no, Kautilya3 removed the tag without addressing the concerns regarding the source's unreliability raised on the talk page.

Given that Kautilya3 has since made yet another revert,[19] this warning is even more justified now. —MBL ^talk 13:43, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

• This dispute is so arcane that I have not the time or inclination to dive into it. Given that the source in question has received scholarly attention, it may be okay, but I'd recommend in-text attribution. Mblaze, you are barking up the wrong tree altogether; the diffs you provide are days apart, and while that may still be edit-warring, everyone editing the page at the moment (including yourself) has done the same or worse. Templating a regular gets you exactly nowhere. Try opening an RFC instead. Vanamonde (talk) 10:53, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, arcane all right. But the fact is that these obscure mountain peaks and passes are of such critical strategic importance that they could instigate nuclear wars. (Cf. Doklam.)

In any case, the issue is on ice right now because MBlaze Lightning said that Ludra's article was rejected for publication by Frontline. Even though I can't verify the claim on Google Books, I decided to take him at his word. So, nothing is likely to happen until I find some corroboration from elsewhere. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:31, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

R.P. Kangle

Hello, R.P. Kangle's works have been used as a source to claim about other meanings of the word "dasa" on Slavery in India. However, I'm not really sure about it. Thing is that it's been poorly sourced.

For example i asked to verify source here. Part 3 of his book series on Arthasastra is not called "A critical edition"as claimed in the citation used, Only part 1 is. Part 3 is called "A Study". Even the ISBN no. is of Part I. See (https://www.abebooks.com/book-search/author/r-p-kangle/)

In another case, Vol 2 and 3 of his book series on Arthshahstra are used, however they both are separate books and as pointed out by me here, no page number has been detailed.

I cannot find these books to verify what is said. But the poor sourcing done on the article raises several doubts. If you can help, I will appreciate it. There seem to be other problems as well, including self-drawn inferences from primary sources, but I will focus on that later. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 05:10, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi MonsterHunter, verifying and cross-checking sources is an excellent thing to do. However, please don't put elaborate comments in edit summaries; put them on the talk page instead. Edit summaries are not considered reading material, and the editors that put all that stuff into the page are probably long gone.

Please feel free to change the title and publisher of the book to match the ISBN. There is not much we can do about page numbers except for adding a {{page needed}} tag and waiting to see if something happens. If nobody comes forward and we can agree on the talk page that the content seems dubious, we can remove it.

I myself had very little to do with that page by the way. I researched for the Slavery and Religion page earlier and know something about the subject. I have had the Slavery in India page on my watch list, but I never particularly liked what was put into it. It is not a subject that interests me a great deal. I just watch it to block any obvious bloopers that get added.

Of one thing I am pretty sure. Every occurrence of dasa in the Arthashastra means slave. If anybody claims otherwise, they are trying to pull wool over our eyes. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 07:55, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

While I could simply change the title, as I said the article had made-up self-interpretations added to it. I cannot change Part 3 to Part 1 without verifying Part 1 talks about interpertaion of dasa or not.

For example, the translation of Arthshahstra by R Shamasastry was used as a source for claiming it confirmed RP Kangle's meaning. However, what is surprising is that the translation was written in 1915, long before Kangle's work. There is no such "confirmation". So I removed it. It seemed a really deceptive sourcing attempt [20].

It seems the article may have been poorly edited. The assertions that Kangle claimed dasa was different from slave need to be verified. As there may have been an attempt at adding OR, chances cannot be taken. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 21:37, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

MonsterHunter32, I did a pass of source-verification on the section. In my opinion, the whole section needs a complete rewrite. So there is no point in wasting time to fix it. Perhaps later in the summer, I can find time to work on it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:35, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Seem to have a user similar to your name

Hey, I came across Kautilya5010 (talk · contribs). In the past, usernames similar to those of long term editors have been used for disruption. This might be just coincidence as well. You might want to keep an eye out. Adamgerber80 (talk) 15:27, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

I've added them to my watchlist. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 17:30, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:CSA Steaua Bucure?ti (football)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:CSA Steaua Bucure?ti (football). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Slavery in India

I have known about Dasas for years. I actually wasn't even looking for Aryan-Dasa conflict, I was only wanted to add various opinions of whether they think dasa denotes a slave or not and how it came to be so.

This is how I stumbled upon Aryan-Dasa conflict in Rig Veda. Now I am not saying they were different races, they may be even the same. This is not about races. But there was a conflict and the Dasas are usually referred to as enemies of Aryas in Rig Veda. Regardless, what I added was how the term Dasa evolved into denoting a slave, it wasn't about racial differences.

You need to let it go and not remove it just because you disagree with it. You can add contrary opinions, but don't remove reliable scholars.

The truth is needed. And the truth is that your actions are not motivated by any real dispute, it is plain censorship. Please don't impede me in maming contributions to Wikipedia. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 22:22, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

I am afraid you are trying to right great wrongs. That is not a good strategy for editing Wikipedia.

And if you don't stop casting WP:ASPERSIONS, you will end up getting blocked. Please be warned. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:26, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

It is okay for you to cast aspersions on sources and my edits and warn me (even if you too edit-warred)?

I wasn't even looking for any Aryan-Dasa conflict. My only concern was and is with opinions of scholars on dasa meaning slave. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 23:47, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

"It is okay for you to cast aspersions on sources and my edits and warn me." If you don't think it is ok, you should report it WP:ANI, with evidence. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:50, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

I've got a compromise. Instead let's use only Trautmann which you added. We can leave aside the Aryan invasion comments of Tony. Instead simply add Trautmann's comments about enslavement of some Dasas made their name a word for slaves. I hope at least that is acceptable. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 00:05, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

I have already told you that I have no objection to using Trautmann. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:38, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

But how to use it? Let's not have blames of incorrect inferences again.

Here's my suggestion: Thomas Trautmann considers that like the Slavs whose name was turned into the word slave due to their enslavement by other Europeans, due the enslavement of the Dasas of the Rig Veda too it seems, their name became a word for slaves in Sanskrit. This seems short ans to the point. If you disagree then you can suggest your own. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 01:01, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

They were not the "Dasas of the Rig Veda" and Trautmann isn't saying that they were. Just because English uses the word "slave" for slaves, you can't say the Englishmen enslaved the Slavs. Language is much more complicated than your linear analysis.

Rather, the Rig Veda introduced the term "Dasa" for rival non-Aryan tribes. Some of these tribes were apparently enslaved giving rise to the meaning of "Dasa" as slave. (But this happened in later times, i.e., after 1200 BC). And it happened in Punjab and the Gangetic plains. By the time it happened, there were no "Rigvedic tribes" any more. The Aryans were forming states. The Rigvedic tribes didn't have any states. Try reading this paper to understand the whole context:

• Erdosy, G. (1989). "Ethnicity in the Rigveda and its Bearing on the Question of Indo-European Origins". South Asian Studies. 5 (1): 35–47. doi:10.1080/02666030.1989.9628382. ISSN 0266-6030.

Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 01:19, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

By the way, the Finnish word for slave is orja, a derivative of Arya. Apparently the Finns enslaved the Aryans.

And, the famous Dasas, also gave rise to the Iranian word for slave, daha, and the Greek word for slave, doulos. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 01:25, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

My statement was based on Trautmann's sayings: "Like the Slavs, whose enslavement by other Europeans in the long past turned their name into the English word slave, the Dasas of the Rg Veda show every sign of being an ethnic group whose enslavement gave Sanskrit its word for slave."

Since you still disagree, please give your own suggestion of the statement to be added. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 01:34, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Also just to be clear I never said Englishmen enslaved Slavs. I only said other Europeans did because Trautmann said it himself. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 01:50, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Apparently, Truatmann does think that the Rigvedic tribes had slaves. But there is no evidence for it. The right thing to say is something like this:

The Rigvedic term dasa for enemy tribes came to be employed to mean slave in the later Rigvedic period. Scholars envisage that this was due to the enslavement of some of the enemy tribes by the Aryan settlers.

References

The term "later Rigvedic period" is used by R.S. Sharma (even though I think of it as post-Rigvedic). -- Kautilya3 (talk) 02:10, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

I accept your suggestion. Is it okay if I added it? MonsterHunter32 (talk) 02:17, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Sure you can add it. But you have to wait until the protection on the article lifts.

By the way the original Dasas were by no means extinguished by the Aryans, just like the Finns never extinguished the Aryans. The Dasas were probably driven away. In historical times, they were found in the east of the Caspian Sea, and later turned into Sakas. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:11, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

I never claimed they were extinguished or completely defeated. What I was simply talking about was that there was some conflict. However, the source from Bridget Allchin and Raymond Allchin which I used on other articles talks about peaceful integration as well. My edits at other articles were only about the conflict part which may have caused confusion. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 19:08, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Regardless, the article Slavery in India is not about conflict between Aryas and Dasas. I agree with your suggestion as its minimal and to the point. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 19:10, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

This map shows that rather than defeating and enslaving the Dasas, it must have been the Dasas who must have defeated the Aryans. That is why they were driven south (into Arachosia), and from there east to Gandhara and Punjab. The Aryans invoked their gods to defeat the Dasas, but to no avail. The scholars say that the Rigveda was composed within five generations. That was very rapid, during which they moved from Arachosia to Punjab. So it wasn't a peaceful migration. It was an exodus, a flight. In contrast, the Dasas stayed where they were and developed into the far more powerful Sakas. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:43, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Taittereya Brahman mentions destruction of settlements inhabited by previous inhabitants and its people fleeing to another land. Now who exactly are these people, no one knows. Puranas mention Druyhu being expelled into Mleccha territory (Gandhara). Dasa may as well be fellow Aryans. But that's just interpertations. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 00:05, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Since the two of you are agreed, you can ask Dlohcierekim to lift the protection now, if you like. It's a little unorthodox that the discussion is here on Kautilya's page, but since in practice the back-and-forth on article talk has been between you two as well, I shouldn't think that would matter. Bishonen | talk 11:24, 14 April 2018 (UTC).

Which article? @Bishonen: Please unprotect as I may be asleep.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:16, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

@Dlohcierekim: it is Slavery in India. No hurry. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:28, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States Government

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States Government. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Rehmatullah Khan and Aslam_Khan_(Pakistani_brigadier)

There is a wikilink in article Aslam_Khan_(Pakistani_brigadier)#Return_to_Pakistan which is is linked to Rehmatullah Khan. According to the article, Rehmatullah Khan is father of Aslam Khan. But Rehmatullah Khan is redirected to Rehmat Khan which is squash player and has nothing to do with Aslam Khan. Since you are creator of Aslam Khan, and you added this link, what do you want to do with this incorrect link. On the other hand, redirect of Rehmatullah Khan to Rehmat Khan may be incorrect, because no one knows Rehmant Khan as Rehmatullah Khan. One option is to expand Rehmatullah Khan (father of Aslam Khan) article.--Spasage (talk) 16:21, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out. I have changed it to Rehmatullah Khan (Jammu and Kashmir), which is where the new page should go, when written.

Or, it could be Rahmat Ullah Khan, which is how his name seems to have been spelt in the State Forces [21]. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:27, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Rehmatullah Khan is correct spelling. Do you see merit in creating a new article for Rehmatullah Khan--Spasage (talk) 17:04, 18 April 2018 (UTC).

There is nothing "correct" or incorrect about names. It depends on how it is recorded in official records. And, yes, I intend to create an article on Rehmatullah Khan as well. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:46, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

You are Most Welcome

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:25, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Justice Party (South Korea)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Justice Party (South Korea). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Holocaust denial

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Holocaust denial. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Christophe Jaffrelot

I'm working at the CERI SCiences Po and I'm trying to ùodify C Jaffrelot's page at his request. I wrote the page on SPIRE so I am just trying to copy some of this page's elements on wikipedia and actualize the bibliography. Nothing much, so please be kind to make me able to do these modifications that C Jaffrelot who is my boss sked me to do. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by JuchieG (talk • contribs)

I am sorry. Wikipedia policies do not allow either Christophe Jaffrelot (or anybody else acting on his behalf) to modify his page. Please see WP:COI.

On the other hand, you are welcome to explain on Talk:Christophe Jaffrelot, what changes you (or he) want made, and let other editors handle the edits in accordance with Wikipedia policies. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Disruptive editor at Wikiquote

A disruptive editor keeps on adding non-notable quotes on Wikiquote just to promote hatred against non-Hindus like Muslims and Christians and their religions. Even if the quotes are non-notable it doesn't matter to him. Another editor with right-wing views keeps on supporting him. Can you comment on here [22] on Wikiquote's Administrators' noticeboard? Thanks. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 17:29, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry I haven't participated in Wikiquote. So I have no idea. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:33, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

If the quotes are supported by valid references, why it shouldn't go in? Just because someone has chosen to be ignorant of facts, doesn't mean facts shouldn't be presented. Kautilya2018 (talk) 17:36, 24 April 2018 (UTC)