User talk:Kautilya3/Archives/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 20

Requesting comments from you

Can you please comment on the ongoing discussion in this talk page section. You are an experienced editor who routinely edits that article. Regards, — Vaibhavafro ^💬 14:02, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Vaibhavafro, I haven't commented because I don't know much of Genocide Watch. It seems to be a one-man shop. If so, it would be necessary to find coverage in secondary sources. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:48, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: It is a one-man shop. Sounds like propaganda upon reading. And this new editor is not convinced about this, and is engaging in near-edit warring and personal attacks. Unsurprisingly, their editing history is also not clean. Could use your help in combating this. Thanks.— Vaibhavafro ^💬 14:53, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

I know my definition of propaganda may differ from others. But tell me, do you roam around calling Muslims as "terrorists and criminals" in India. Genocide Watch suggests so.— Vaibhavafro ^💬 15:03, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Explanation on reverts

Can you explain the reverts you made on the article I recently edited, have you gone through the changes. And can you please give details of reverts rather than just reverting them and asking the users to explain their changes. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkeshsharma (talk • contribs) 00:04, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Explanations are generally given in the edit summaries. Did you read them?

In any case, I believe you are making changes to the lead that are WP:UNDUE. You need to propose your changes on the article's talk page and obtain WP:CONSENSUS. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:07, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

I didn't saw any explaination on the reverts just some comments for you that I cannot change something on the page. Can you give me a reason why the changes were not better than the previous version? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkeshsharma (talk • contribs) 00:10, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Image and Reality of the Israel–Palestine Conflict

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Image and Reality of the Israel–Palestine Conflict. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Houthi movement

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Houthi movement. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Responses to the 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Responses to the 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Edit war

I saw you again reverted to an old version of the Ramesh Nagaraj Rao article. I think this is incorrect. Check the edit history.

• 11:06, 22 October 2019‎ Winged Blades of Godric reverted to an old version of Ramesh Nagaraj Rao, removing a fair amount of sourced content, during a deletion discussion on this article.
• 12:24, 22 October 2019‎ Aymatth2 reverted this
• 12:31, 22 October 2019‎ Winged Blades of Godric reverted a 2nd time
• 12:36, 22 October 2019‎ Aymatth2 reverted a second time
• 12:37, 22 October 2019‎ Winged Blades of Godric reverted a third time
• 12:37, 22 October 2019‎ Aymatth2 reverted a third time

I believe the correct thing is to restore the article to its state before this edit warring began. Aymatth2 (talk) 16:55, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Winged Blades of Godric is an experienced editor and he is certainly not making frivolous edits. Reverting his work is not the right thing to do in this situation. You need to make your case on the article's talk page and attempt to persuade him as well as other page watchers.

If any particular content affects the deletion discussion, you can ask for that version to be preserved until the closure. But, again, you need to explain this on the talk page. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:00, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I am an experienced editor and am certainly not making frivolous edits. I added well-sourced and relevant content, which Winged Blades of Godric removed without discussion three times. This was the wrong thing to do, particularly during an AfD, as I told him after reverting his first revert: User talk:Winged Blades of Godric#Reverted edit. I believe the version with the content I added is the one that should be discussed on the AfD, and ask that you restore it. Winged Blades of Godric can then make a case for removing the content on the talk page. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:13, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I had unwatched the AfD in disgust, but notice that Winged Blades of Godric seems to be edit warring with SD0001 there. I have no idea why he feels so strongly about this somewhat obscure (but notable) pundit. It is a mess. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:22, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Experienced editors engage on the talk page, identify areas of disagreement, and use dispute resolution mechanisms to resolve them. Since you are not yet doing that, I would not regard you as an experienced editor. So, please follow my advice and make your case on the talk page. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:27, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

The discussion is mostly hidden behind hatnotes on the AfD discussion, before and after the edit war, although there was some discussion on the talk page. There was certainly no consensus or attempt to gain consensus by Winged Blades of Godric on removing the content. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:40, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I do not feel passionately about this article, and do not want to waste more time on it. I am mildly irritated by getting a slap on the face. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:45, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject India Newsletter – October 2019

WikiProject India

Newly recognized content

The month of October 2019 started with Gateway of India re-attaining its Good Article status and the Sanjay Dutt filmography was recognized as Featured List.

Newly nominated content

• List of international goals scored by Sunil Chhetri
• List of chief ministers of Jharkhand
• Bengal famine of 1943
• India national football team at the Olympics
• Rakta Sambandham

News

• Article India appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page on October 2, 2019.
• Vijayadashami (pictured) has ended, which celebrates the victory of good over evil.
• There are a lot of high-quality images on Commons uploaded by Itsmalay which can be used on some India cultural monuments articles.
• Parinda is nominated to appear on the main page on November 3.

Miscellaneous

• You can join the discussions opened at Noticeboard for India-related topics.
• You can join the RfC on superlatives sentence at Talk:India.

---

Events

Events that occoured on October.

• Gandhi Jayanti (2 October)
• Digital Society Day (17 October)
• Martyrs' Day (21 October)
• Accession Day (Jammu and Kashmir) (26 October)
• Thevar Jayanthi (30 October)
• Rashtriya Ekta Diwas (31 October)

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Contribute
• Subscribe/Unsubscribe
• Archive

Sent by CAPTAIN MEDUSA on behalf of WikiProject India. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:20, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Maryul

Hello! Your submission of Maryul at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:16, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 22:13, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Muhammad Samiuddin Qazi (sami) is using my IP Address

dear Kautilya3, Muhammad Samiuddin Qazi (sami) is using my IP Address. - User:ACCOMPLISHED (talk) 18:16, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

How is that possible? In any case, please report it to cyphoidbomb. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:24, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Yet another sock CU blocked by Bbb23. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:54, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Fianna Fáil

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Fianna Fáil. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

You should read my novel

It's also about how one Akshant Kautilya Sharma fights against terrorists on board a Hamburg-bound Lufthansa flight. Atul Kaushal 05:18, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Ardagh–Johnson line talk page

Hello Kautilya3, you mentioned on Talk:Ardagh–Johnson line that A. H. Francke 'died long before there was any Sino-Indian dispute, has also put Ladakh's northern border along the Kun Lun mountains'. Could it be that you mixing the older August Hermann Francke with the descendant August Hermann Francke (Tibetologist), or did the older man also write about Tibet? The Discoverer (talk) 12:12, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Yup. I was. I didn't realize there were two of them. I meant the Tibetologist. The northern boundary given by Francke has been pasted all over Wikipedia by the Hindutash Ravi guy. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 12:23, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Maryul

On 31 October 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Maryul, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ladakh was originally called Maryul (capital pictured), the "lowland" of West Tibet? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Maryul. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Maryul), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

valereee (talk) 00:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

You are most welcome.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:33, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

It is always nice to get a pleasant cat from your Fylind. Thanks very much for all your hard work on troublesome pages! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:38, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Please add this one in your watchlist too.

Please add Akhand Bharat in your watchlist. Too high PoV pushing is happening and no one is watching changes. Yesterday, when I added it then also IP started removing content about countries and all. Start watching it. — Harshil ^{want to talk?} 01:58, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

I will watch it. But it is your baby really. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 06:50, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

I am not able to getting your last comment. -- Harshil ^{want to talk?} 10:12, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

I meant that I am not going to have much activity there except for occasional dispute resolution. "Your baby" meaning your thing. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:37, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

There was very high POV pushing across the border. (you know what I mean) However, yesterday, one IP made sense and objected some materials and replaced text after reaching on consensus. You can find about push in the history section. While improving article of Kanaiyalal Maneklal Munshi, these two pages came in my attention which were in pathetic state. -- Harshil ^{want to talk?} 10:42, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

EU visit: Once they're done and have made statements etc, maybe this can find a place here

I know wp:notnews comes into the picture, but in the larger encyclopediac sense, I guess this is a rather big thing, even if it is happening in a personal capacity. Whatever the outcome, maybe it could find someplace in the newer Kashmir related articles. Even just a line or two. Then again it could turnout to be nothing. (TOI: European Union delegation leaves for Kashmir) DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 06:15, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan, yes definitely. Once they finish their visit and come out with some observations, we should cover them. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:31, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

The sole article where this joke of an event shall be added to, ought be Revocation of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir. The quality of that article seem to be spiraling downward over the course of the last few weeks and I won't mind further degradation ..... ∯WBG^converse 12:59, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, we have this and this. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:11, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

And here is an inside scoop on how it all came to happen. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 02:20, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

WBG, I hope this line you wrote, "the quality of that article seem to be spiraling downward over the course of the last few weeks and I won't mind further degradation" isn't a metaphor for what you think is the reality of Kashmir over the course of these past few weeks?

K3, that Scroll article you linked did quite a good job of throwing up information related to this! As a side note, sometimes I miss good ol' investigative journalism where people had to actually get out of the office to find information. (Then again I am too young to have experienced that era so can't miss it exactly). DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 12:04, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Good old fashioned reporting still comes, but not from the Times of India or the Indian Express. They seem to have fired all decent journalists a long time ago. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:04, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2019 Canadian federal election

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Canadian federal election. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Propaganda

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Propaganda. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Kartarpur Corridor

On 11 November 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Kartarpur Corridor, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 02:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Stephen, and thank you also DiplomatTesterMan and DBigXray for pushing through the ITN process! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 03:55, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tim Pool

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tim Pool. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Ayodhya dispute

On 12 November 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Ayodhya dispute, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 22:18, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Presidency of Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Presidency of Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mark Levin

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mark Levin. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kalapani territory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kumaon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:21, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Kautilya3/Archives. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 10:16, 18 November 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Harshil ^{want to talk?} 10:16, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for welcome

Thanks for leaving me a welcome message. I am not new and you know me already for last few years from here and here. I have always been an IP. I have shared and dynamic IP, which gets reallocated/changed every few months by the Internet service provider. Since you are always online on wikipedia, please add my articles to your watchlist, I sometimes Pakistanis vandalise/revert my edits. Thanks bhai. Regards. 58.182.172.95 (talk) 10:50, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Dispute

Hi Kautilya3,

I would like to resolve a current dispute with you, concerning your reversions of my edits to the Rig Veda article, as well as your comment to me on the article's talk page. Although it is in my nature to be blunt and direct, I'll try to soften my language and explain the issue from my perpective.

Although - as requested by Haukur - I cited Muller to support my claim, it was deleted by you anyway. In spite of my reasoning provided on the Talk Page, your response was hostile, ignored my points, falsely accused me of having an "axe to grind", and claimed I was going off-tangent without any explanation. In other words, there was no discernible substance to what you wrote, which seemed intended not for a reasonable discussion, but rather just to assert your authority (e.g. you don't have to explain your edits and that I should 'expect that your content may be reverted for multiple reasons at multiple times').

I do not believe it is tangential to point out there is an issue with the reliability of a translation of the Rig Veda on an article about the Rig Veda. I have also provided a secondary source on the Talk Page that raises serious concerns with Muller's translation. However, I would like to be open-minded and reasonable, so would like to discuss. Carlduff (talk) 18:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Joshua has explained to me that the edits I attempted to make could stir up trouble. I understand and accept that, so as far as I am concerned, there is no longer a dispute. Could have saved a lot of hassle if this was just stated in the first place. Carlduff (talk) 20:07, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

I don't know of any trouble. I reverted your edit simply because it didn't belong there. If you were to do a similar edit elsewhere, I would do the same.

You need to understand that writing an encyclopedia article is not like writing an essay, a magazine article or research paper. It is supposed to summarise the available knowledge about the subject as succinctly as possible. Period. No debates. No arguments. No ifs and buts.

If you think Max Muller's translations are unreliable, then you need to establish that on the talk page, achieve WP:CONSENSUS and then get rid of it. But as long as it is up on the page, you cannot undermine it by throwing up vague allegations of biases. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:27, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Salafi movement

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Muhammad. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

- SummerPhD^v2.0 23:06, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

@SummerPhDv2.0:, this alert for "Muhammad images", which is not what we are dealing with here. Let me check with RegentsPark if there are any discretionary sanctions that apply to Salafi movement. RP, please check out the little storm on this page. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:27, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

That seems to have been the original dispute leading to the DS. As passed, however, "Standard discretionary sanctions are authorised for all pages relating to Muhammad, broadly interpreted." Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Muhammad_images#Discretionary_sanctions

Incidentally, I gave the same DS note to the IP. Though they received a DS note on U.S. politics in September, I did not find one that connected with this one. I also gave them a 3RR and responded to the EW concerns on the article's talk page with a bit on WP:V. I'm staying out of the content question until the calms down or goes to AN/I. - SummerPhD^v2.0 00:21, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Looks like DS is still in effect on Muhammad based on the link above. Perhaps not really required because I don't see any action on Wikipedia:Arbitration_enforcement_log, but it appears to be still in place. And, though the case stemmed from images, it does say "Muhammad" and "broadly construed". We should have a negative sxponential sunset provision for arb rulings :) --regentspark (comment) 00:53, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

regentspark though I am curious, your last line bounced above my head. May I request you to have mercy and elaborate it. I dont normally edit this topic area but who knows about the future.--DBigXrayᗙ 07:38, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

What I understood is that the "Muhammad" ruling is now being applied to all of Islam-related topics. "Negative sunset", meaning that ARB rulings only expand in time and never see a "sunset". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:59, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Exactly. The "broadly construed" leads to scope creep and it doesn't look like we ever go back on a ruling. This Muhammad ruling appears to have come about because of a narrow set of events (images) which are long forgotten. But the ruling carries on regardless and now includes anything to do with Islam. Convenient for admins (and I can plead guilty to that) but a bit heavy handed. --regentspark (comment) 09:34, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

RegentsPark, And Kt Thanks a lot for explaining it. indeed it acts as a deterrent to new editors. I would possibly avoid the topic area simply due to this. DBigXrayᗙ 14:12, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

What?!? Discretionary sanctions are a deterrent? Practically everything you edit is under discretionary sanctions! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:32, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, indeed. and I have no apetite to add more minefields in my topic area. DBigXrayᗙ 17:38, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

2019 Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya dispute

You are invited to have a look at this.— Vaibhavafro ^💬 13:22, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Vaibhav. It looks reasonably NPOV. Whether we need such an article at all is questionable, but it ok for the time being. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:36, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

kalapani territory

Hello Kautilya3, I saw that you have asked evidence of "people of Kalapani" Where is the paying taxes to the Nepalese government?
So, According to the Neplese historical documents collections "Atikramanko chapetama Limpiyadhura-Lipulekh" (अतिक्रमणको चपेटामा लिम्पियाधुरा-लिपुलेक)- ISBN 978-9937-2-9665-6 written by Ratan Bhandari shows the photo proof of this information in Page no.224, 225, 226, 227.
Thank You! Rawal Bishal (talk) 03:52, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Rawal, thanks for posting here. Since the discussion is proceeding on the talk page of the article, I will let it continue there. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 03:57, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

References

November 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kartarpur, Pakistan; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

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 and 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. // sikander { talk } 🦖 14:15, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Sikander, you appear to be as much "edit-warring" as Kautilya. The general expectation is that when an editor makes a change and it gets reverted, it's incumbent upon them to start a discussion and get consensus. – Uanfala (talk) 14:24, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Uanfala Sure, I created a new section in Kartarpur, Pakistan, Kautilya added to it, I removed the edit with a summary that the main article about the corridor has info about ceremonies on the Indian side. This article is literally about Kartarpur in Pakistan and I don't see a NPOV conflict here. He reverted me, I reverted him with a longer explanation, and he reverted my edit again. Not interested in any further interaction here considering 3RR. // sikander { talk } 🦖 14:32, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

No, I didn't add any content. You must be mistaking me for somebody else. But, in any case, as long as you are talking about the corridor, you need to be cognizant of the fact that it runs between two countries. Other than that, that section is really poor to tell you the truth. I suggest that you summarise the Kartarpur Corridor article in a neutral way (as the Main article link implies that you should). -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:36, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

One would assume "cross-border" implies the existence of a border and a crossing between it. In any case, thank you for your truthful opinion. // sikander { talk } 🦖 14:41, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, that harasser is back!

Kautilya3, that harasser which was doing edit warring on the page of Jammu and Kashmir reorganisation Bill is back and filing void reports against me in AE and SPI. I reported him at AN. Please comment there.-- Harshil ^{want to talk?} 08:39, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

User:Harshil169 this is an inappropriate WP:CANVASing. Kindly refrain from doing this again.--DBigXrayᗙ 10:27, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

No, I don't think so. When a complaint is made against an editor, he/she is entitled to ask for help from other people who know the situation. I personally don't monitor the drama boards to find out who is complaining against whom, and I appreciate being told about something where I had been involved. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:41, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, it might be possible that  WP:CANVAS has been updated since you last read it. So its time to check it out again to see when it is allowed and when not.  WP:CANVAS also clarifies how exactly you are supposed to inform an editor, and the manner above employed by User:Harshil169 is entirely unacceptable and falls under Wikipedia:Canvassing#Campaigning. --DBigXrayᗙ 16:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I don't think there are any changes since I last saw them. Canvassing is considered inappropriate because it compromises the normal consensus decision-making process. Decisions at WP:AN or other admin-boards are not made on the basis of consensus, at least not the consensus of non-admin editors. So I don't see how you can call it CANVASSING. I get your point about the manner of informing me though. Harshil169, please note. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:29, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Removing my post at the Talk:Kalapani territory page

Hi Kautilya I removed the post at the Talk: Kalapani territory page. But the reason for removal is misunderstood by you.

Kumaun & Garhwal region is a princely state of India of approx 10,400 Km only with nearly 7-8,000 Population in 1947. Kalapani is a part of this Kingdom. If I don't discuss the history of the kingdom, how it was attacked by a country called Gurkha/Nepal, how it became an area of dispute between Nepal & India... the whole concept of the dispute is gone. It is a historical conflict & the history must be understood before any conclusion is drawn.

Nepal considers it to be its integral part because of confusing historical record. To be an integral part, every country has to give historical insight. Nepal occupied this land only for 12 years. Before their attack & after their attack, this area again became part of its original Garhwal Kingdom (Present-day India). I have also written how Garwal chooses to become part of India. How Nepalese troops enslaved people of Garhwal. This talk will help people of Nepal & India understand the root of conflict & come to a solution. Short-sighted people don't know the root cause, they can't understand the solution.

Kalapani is a part of Garhwal & one cannot ignore its historical roots. I am not discussing the whole country India. I am very specific about the history of that particular area only. Kalapani was occupied only for 12 years by Nepal & it was a dark history for the people living there.

Prashanna01 (talk) 12:15, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rojava

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rojava. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Kondaveedu Fort

Hi sir This is rastrika, I edited the history of kondaveedu fort. You are re - edited, iam saying go and revise the history. Sir read KHAASHIKANDAM written by srinathudu. He is the minister and poet in Reddy kingdom. Rastrika (talk) 14:34, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello Rastrika, welcome to Wikipedia. The welcome message on your talk page gives pointers to Wikipedia policies. You should note that the content on Wikipedia is based on reliable sources, which are cited for the content you are disputing. You need to check the sources first and see if they support the content or not. If they do not, then please raise an issue on the article's talk page. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:41, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Requesting your opinion

It would be gracious of you to offer your valuable opinion on Talk:2019 Indian anti-satellite missile test#Requested move 27 November 2019.— Vaibhavafro ^💬 19:10, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject India Newsletter – November 2019

WikiProject India

Newly recognized content

November 2019 recognized content includes: List of international goals scored by Sunil Chhetri List of chief ministers of Jharkhand Hindi Medium.

Newly nominated content

• Karaikudi S. Subramanian
• K.G.F: Chapter 1
• Mahavira

Created by Sahibdin and nominated for Featured Media by TheMandarin

News

• A significant number of the new articles received each day are about South Asian topics, mainly biographies and cultural themes, along with the usual spam for companies. There is a huge backlog at the NewPagesFeed and more editors with experience and knowledge of Indian subjects are urgently needed to patrol the pages. If you are already a New Page Reviewer, please help out as much as you can. If you are not, please check out WP:NPP, then take a look at the requirements at WP:NPR and if you feel up to it, apply for the New Page Reviewer right at WP:PERM.
• Kalapani territory has been a subject of edit warring by multiple editors. Kalapani is a disputed area between Nepal and India. The page was fully protected from 10 to 17 November. You're welcomed to patrol the page and keep your eyes on the new editors. Makes sure to assume good faith while editing the page.
• An editor is pushing too high Jain POV in Jainism related articles. Join the conversation about the user at the noticeboard
• India Search Result is a bot-generated page that tracks newly created articles related to India. It is a place to look out for new page pages. The page is updated daily and make sure to add it to your watchlist.

Miscellaneous

• There are 14 Did You Know nominations, 25 Good Article nominations, 2 Featured Articles candidates, and 1 Featured List candidate to be reviewed.
• The Swaminarayan Sampraday and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh are opened for requested comments.
• You can review these article: Mouna Ragam, Everest (Indian TV series), Arjun Sarja filmography and Mullum Malarum for a peer review.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Contribute
• Subscribe/Unsubscribe
• Archive

Sent by CAPTAIN MEDUSA on behalf of WikiProject India. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:34, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of countries and dependencies by area

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of countries and dependencies by area. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

If you like to expand...

then here is Special Protection Group (Amendment) Bill, 2019 created by me. Though, many details should be added but your expertise will help me in making this article appropriate. Thanks!-- Harshil ^{want to talk?} 17:38, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Kartarpur Corridor

Some editors from Pakistan are using the page as a propaganda piece, adding exhuberant praise for their leaders and removing the section about security concerns. Can you do something about it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.131.170.231 (talk) 21:30, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

I will take a look. But today is the day for the jingoists. We need to let things cool down a bit. It is just a road, and I am not sure how long it will last either. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:50, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher), I guess it will surely last this November. More so is possible since they are earning 20$ from each visitor.--DBigXrayᗙ 12:38, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Criticism of Sikhism

Many things written in criticism of sikhism are fake.These are not the things sikh gurus told.Can u rectify it for me as some of these were just heresay. Sikh.ekonkar (talk) 06:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Sikh.ekonkar, yes, religious matters are often disputed. We do the best we can going by reliable sources. Please raise the issues on the talk pages of the articles concerned, citing reliable sources. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:56, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

See my reply at Talk:Criticism of Sikhism. Ms Sarah Welch, perhaps you can help? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Acknowledging your ping from last week. I saw many non-RS, blogs and some broken urls (one website is for sale). I estimate it will be December before I can review it more carefully and do some cleanup. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 05:39, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

What a muddle some of the related articles are. Trekking through them one by one. Planning to add Ravidassia criticism and its split from Sikhism, and other sections. Hopefully this week, maybe next. If you have additional suggestions, please let me know. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:12, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Social justice warrior

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Social justice warrior. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

New message from DiplomatTesterMan

Hello, Kautilya3. You have new messages at Talk:The Country Without a Post Office.
Message added 13:08, 4 December 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

When you have time just a word or two will do. Thanks in advance. DTM (talk) 13:08, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Hiye!

dear, my name is Jim Drum, i know that i have not create any account yet but i want to complain, User:Gotitbro is changing old edits, he edits Template:Urdu topics, and Template:Hindi topics, he is promoting Hindi. i know that i am new but I hope you will listen to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.190.28.239 (talk) 04:33, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

I am Jim

please listern to me, he is promoting his changes with unknown edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.190.28.239 (talk) 04:38, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Help

please help me, he is again an again edit old changes, he is calling me Sami. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MAKSMPH (talk • contribs) 05:36, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

You know better Kautilya the non-sense this user has been adding was only inserted by socks and IPs belonging to cronic sockpuppeteer User:Muhammad Samiuddin Qazi (sami). Gotitbro (talk) 05:46, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

you just shut up i am not sock puppetry i am Jim not Sami,i joined wikipedia yesterday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.190.28.239 (talk) 06:17, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2019 Romanian presidential election

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2019 Romanian presidential election. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Eli Cohen

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Eli Cohen. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring

You seem to be edit warring The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2019. You are blindly reverting many edits made by me on multiple different issues (mention of Muslims, sourcing of Nasrin's comments etc). You have already made 4 reverts in 24 hours:[1],[2],[3],[4].

Slightly outside that 24 hour window, you made an additional revert[5], for a total of 5 reverts in slightly over 24 hours.

I urge to self-revert your last revert.Bless sins (talk) 19:10, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

To clarify, here are each of your reverts and the edit(s) they reverted: 1.[6]. Was a reversion of this edit[7]. 2.[8]. Was a reversion of this edit[9]. 3. [10]. Removed large amounts of content made in several edits, including this one[11]. 4.[12]. Removed most of the content added in this edit[13]. 5.[14]. Reverted these two edits[15][16].

Bless sins (talk) 19:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Comments that make little sense

Additionally you have reverted my edits under summaries that make little sense. Consider this[17]: "WP:Edit warring; WP:Lead fixation; please obtain WP:CONSENSUS first". The edits they revert did not even touch the lead. How could edits to the main body of an article be guilty of "lead fixation"?Bless sins (talk) 19:52, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I mistook your edit as changing the lead. I have reinstated it now.

That having said, you have noticed that addressing the Muslim exclusion in the Bill has been in discussion long before you have arrived. You are welcome to take part in that and contribute to reaching a WP:CONSENSUS. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:32, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Nepali TV

Anybody know enough Nepali to make out what this Nepali TV programme is saying? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:25, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

User:CAPTAIN MEDUSA can you help an editor in need. --DBigXrayᗙ 18:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

or User:Rawal Bishal--DBigXrayᗙ 18:33, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. If it is just describing the wiki page, that is no big deal. But the visuals showed the edit history too. That is what I am curious about. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

The tweet is talking about Kalapani territory. It criticizes Wikipedia editors for claiming their opinions on the article. It also talks about the article vastly changing between each revision and the current edit war between editors. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 18:49, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

If you have further queries let me know.~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 18:51, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, The tweet reads essentially :- Following a sustained edit war between Nepali and Indian POVpushers at Kalapani territory, the article has now been edit-protected.

The video says essentially :- Kalapani territory was created almost 10 years ago and usually says that Kalapani is a disputed territory between Nepal's Darchula and Uttarakhand's Pithauragarh. It was edited very sparingly during that time. However, later on, Indian users began to claim that it lies in Uttarakhand. Last week has seen a huge amount of activity from Nepali and Indian users in this article. After India [recently] released a [new] map showing Kalapani as part of India, Nepali and Indian users have been having a tussle on this article for their own preferred versions.

The reply by Suraj Paneru says essentially:- India uses a huge number of RSS cadres and bots to spread propaganda and fake news to suit its narrative, in the internet. Even for the December UK election, India is doing the same, to make sure its preferred party and leadership wins. Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 19:38, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you CAPTAIN MEDUSA and Usedtobecool. It is true that "Indian editors" changed it to "Kalapani, Uttarakhand" until I changed it back. My feeling is however that the Nepalese can give the RSS a run for their money, any day. I have seen only one sane Nepali voice during the whole affair. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:01, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, it takes courage to show sanity in the current climate. For example, I'm sane but I don't advertise it. I still mostly blame Indian foreign policy though. Every time Nepalis begin to wonder if they have judged India too harshly (Operation Maitri), India defaults back to the same old cluelessness (2015 Nepal blockade). I mean, Nepalis will be Nepalis, but with all its intellectual might, if India can't devise a brilliant scheme to win over even the Nepalis, what hope does South Asia have? Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 20:31, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, this video describes this situation very well. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 21:44, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

CAPTAIN MEDUSA, quite! LOL! Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 03:44, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Well, Indians are not particularly brilliant, and even if they were, it all gets expended on Kashmir and Pakistan. There will be little left for Nepal. It looks like Kalapani is going to be Nepal's Aksai Chin. Worthless, but the centre of its pride. So nothing is possible. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, I wouldn't worry about it. Nepalis haven't suddenly started feeling strongly about it. Things stir up, then they settled down again. No one is making a fuss because they believe they can get Kalapani back, they're doing it because they consider it their patriotic duty and they want it known that Nepal doesn't quietly let things go just because the outcome is hopeless. Nepalis have made feature films about Kalapani a few times already. Then there is Susta and then "Buddha was born in Nepal" to cycle through. As long as Nepalis believe that BSF's main job is harassing Nepalis during the day, and moving border posts in the night, this is gonna keep coming up whenever it's politically favourable to make an issue of, for one party or another. Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 03:36, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Kautilya3, This is the article which was board casted in Kantipur Television before a week to say that this article is bised and Indians are only writing it as their knowledge. This also describes why Nepalese wikipedia is not so strong. Rawal Bishal (talk) 23:34, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Rawal. I am afraid it is going to be even more "biased" now. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:48, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, when things began, I did think it was slightly biased, but nothing that's not explained by the fact that it's just a start class article. Now that you've started working on it, it will only get better. Cheers! Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 03:39, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, thank you for your confidence. I will do my best. I have good enough sources for the 19th century history, but extremely little for the 20th century. Both the Indian and Nepalese governments have been extremely tight-lipped about what they were doing, leading to basically speculative history-writing by the Nepalese commentators and not even that by the Indians. So that is where I am stuck at the moment. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:11, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, that sounds about right. Good luck! Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 11:52, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

• The Nepalese idea of a dialogue? I wonder what soneka chidiya is supposed to mean. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:08, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

  Kautilya3, obviously it's to do with "gold" and "bird". The Golden Bird or The Goose That Laid the Golden Eggs or something else, I can not tell; but pretty sure the advice is that Indians shouldn't steal it from the Nepalese. I'm impressed by the diplomacy though. Usually, the default presumption is- "Considering India is on the wrong when it comes to Nepal, it's gotta be on the wrong side of all other conflicts it's involved in also, be it Pakistan, China or Bangladesh." Beware the instinct to generalise, though. Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 15:37, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, I was impressed with the diplomacy too. Soneka chidiya perhaps has the sense of "my dear"? DBigXray?

However, in all the debates, I see an overwhelming sense of the land as real estate, with no awareness of the people that actually live there. Sudurpaschim, far-away borderland, we have no idea what is there. But it shows up on our maps, which really matter.

Incidentally, I have been looking into the 2015 crisis. These two articles: Hari Bansh Jha, and Kanak Mani Dixit seem to exemplify the divide. I was once again impressed with Dixit's dismissal of the "Madheswadi leaders" as having no connection to the Madhesi people themselves! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:20, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Sone ka chidiya literally means "Golden Sparrow". Used to refer the golden age of India. I am surprised folks are not aware of this reference to India. [18] [19] [20] [21]--DBigXrayᗙ 16:30, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

DBigXray, Indeed. Thanks! Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 17:01, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, On your first point, isn't that the case with all border disputes? Otherwise, it'd be as simple as holding a referendum on what they want. Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 17:02, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Holding a referendum may not be "simple" as the Kashmir conflict illustrates. But, still, settling the matters as per the wishes of the people that live there, is the ideal that all countries should aspire to. Paying absolutely no attention to the people at all is only worthy of a feudal estate rather then a "country".

I felt like putting up this POV map of a section of the Nepalese opinion, because it is apparently endorsed by Buddhi Narayan Shreshtha, the former Suveyor General of Nepal. A similar map also appears in his published work with the label "Greater Nepal". If the elites promote such irredentist views, what hope do common people have? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:26, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, I agree with you on principle, but it's of course just ideal. If there were chance that Madhesis could vote themselves out of Nepal, no madhesis would ever get Nepali citizenship, the border might even get closed for immigration. It's precisely because borders are real-estatey that Madhesis have been allowed to settle in Nepal and even get citizenship. I suppose it's the same with Pahari Nepalese in the north-east India. Everyone's getting their own states, but for the Nepalese in Gorkhaland, how do you explain it?

We have a saying - "In the country of the speech impaired, the goitred become the strong men", which takes me back to my first comment, Nepalis will be Nepalis, so south Asia doesn't have hope if India's intellectual might can't find a path for us all. That said, Greater Nepal has nothing to do with Kalapani. Kalapani begins with accepting the Sugauli treaty with the British India which says Nepal and India will be separated in the west by the Kali river, the dispute is all about which of the small rivulets that make up the Kali river is the actual Kali. Greater Nepal argument says that Nepal ceded the territories to the British, so when the Brits left India the treaty was voided and the territory automatically came back to Nepal, legally speaking. Usedtobecool ^TALK ✨ 18:06, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

I didn't mean that people should have a choice to vote themselves out of anything. Even though that kind of thing is now considered a reasonable expectation in the West, I don't think South Asia is anywhere close to that level of maturity. But my comment had more to do with the Limpiyadhura claim that even intelligent people like Buddhi Narayan Shreshtha make, with no cognizance of the fact that people live there. Asking for a real estate deal on Kalapani is one thing, but Limpiyadhura is an entirely different ball game. I don't believe that independent India will ever engage in such real estate deals. (The British did such things, but they are gone.)

The Greater Nepal claim is also a similar real estate view of the matter. It is even more laughable because nobody imagines that a 12-year feudal occupation implies that those lands have become perpetually "Nepalese". All those people regard it as a bad dream that quickly came to an end.

As for Madhesis, I won't say too much because I don't know enough about what is going on. But what I mean by "Madhesi" are the people native to the Tarai lands that Nepal either conquered or obtained from the British in real estate deals. I would hope that those people get treated as full-fledged citizens of Nepal.

As for Gorkhaland, there has been an expectation in India that a province/state has to be of a certain size to be viable. That is slowly changing, because India has found that small states can perform well too (examples being Puducheri and Goa). But the places will have to demonstrate that they can manage themselves. An autonomous council is a good first step. Usually, a union territory is the second step (like Ladakh right now), and statehood the third step. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:39, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Greater Nepal including the Tibetan expansions

It is a pity that the beautiful map of Greater Nepal has disappeared. I replaced it by a poor substitute. But here are some choice words from Buddhi Narayan Shrestha to make for its loss:

2. As the Treaty of Peace and Friendship between Nepal and India signed on July 31, 1950 and the Treaty between Nepal and the United Kingdom on October 30, 1950 had annulled and invalidated all previous treaties and agreements, thus Nepal should have territorial rights over the areas of Greater Nepal, lost in the Sugauli Treaty.

3. After India gained independence from the British rule, there is no treaty, agreement and understanding regarding domination of the territory of Greater Nepal by the Republic of India. Thus the land captured by British from Nepal should no longer remain under present India’s dominion.

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:45, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

References

Nationalist sentiments

@Kautilya3 Please remove your national sentiments while editing Wikipedia. You are thoroughly biased in Kalapani territory. You are not being neutral. You are showing that Nepal is the one that has illegally laid claim over Kalapani when even old Indian gazettes show it that the Indian govt is the encroacher. I do not like to hurt general Indians but the govt of India are sons of bitches who have faked up and fooled their citizens in the name of nationaity. Everything is blocked and controlled by Indian Wikipedians. Wikipedia is looking like the BCCI that controls ICC with undue influence.

भारतीय राजपत्र भन्छ : लिम्पियाधुरा नेपालकै हो - 103.28.86.145 (talk) 02:49, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi IP editor (103.28.86.145), welcome to Wikipedia. You would be better off registering an account here, so that we can communicate better.

Please see my response at Talk:Kalapani territory. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:48, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia is looking like the BCCI that controls ICC with undue influence. LOL .... ∯WBG^converse 18:15, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

References

Yaldor Sub Sector wiki page

Hi Kautilya3 talk this is regarding the Yaldor wiki page you helped update, i had created the page more than 3 months ago, it should have been reviewed by now, any idea why that has not happened. Joydeep ghosh (talk) 17:32, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Joydeep ghosh, you mean why hasn't it been assessed? I can do it now if you wish, but I would put it as "start" class. You can do better by adding an infobox and map, and describing the location and geography better. There need be no mention of the Kargil War in the section called "Terrain and weather". There is a citation needed tag in the lead, which is a bad sign. Also, it is my understanding that the Kargil infiltration was discovered for the first time by the shephereds of Yaldor. If true, that should be mentioned. That goes to its notability. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 17:43, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Kautilya3 talk i made some additions see if now the page is worth review btw if i remember correctly it was probably you who added the citation needed tag. hope this helps. I would be glad if you can review the page. :-) Joydeep ghosh (talk) 18:30, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi Kautilya3 talk can you review the Yaldor wiki page, i have added a lot more info that make it worthy. Joydeep ghosh (talk) 21:26, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Joydeep ghosh, it is not the amount of information, but the quality of information that is assessed. It is still start-class. In fact, I believe the article is headed in a wrong direction because it is not about the village of Yaldor at all. Rather it is about the Kargil War in that sector. It may be better to change this page to something like Batalik–Yaldor sector, and describe the entire infiltration and campaigns in that sector. That is a much larger task. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:25, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Kautilya3 talk thanks for input but problem is anything/anyplace related to kargil war will have a mention about the war either in detail or in snippets and with this village being focal point of the war besides kargil and batalik, where everything started there will be such mentions.Joydeep ghosh (talk) 17:05, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Joydeep ghosh, "Yaldor" means many things. There is the village of course, but the village is named after the nala. The valley is also probably named after the nala. Then there is the area that the army calls the Yaldor sector, or Batalik-Yaldor sector or even Batalik-Yaldor-Chorbatla sector. It needs to be clear what concepts are covered on this page. See Tinkar for a recent page that I worked on with similar issues. (No war there though.)

If you don't agree with my rating, you can add "|reassess=y" option to the assessment template, asking for another reviewer. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:44, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Kautilya3 talk its not that i dont like your feedback everything has a scope improvement, liked your work unfortunately as you said war here but no war there, i believe the battkes need mention since the village was used as base to carry out military ops even after kargil war ended, this is why i am giving reasons for the village's significance and the military activities occuring in and around the village that had significant impact during and after kargil war. i hope i have tried to give my reason, anyways will try to improve it further. thanks. Joydeep ghosh (talk) 15:43, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Kautilya3 talk could you please help review this page and help make it live.Joydeep ghosh (talk) 08:01, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Sarah Palin

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Sarah Palin. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Sir, please visit "Indo-Pak war of 1971" page and re-edit things

Someone has changed pakistani casualties to "2,200+ killed" which is very wrong as they suffered 2,200+ killed in the eastern front alone. Overall Pakistani casualties are some 8,000 killed according to most of the sources. Sir, I am unable to re-edit that page because it's protected. I request you to re-edit the casualties section. Thanks. Hard654 (talk) 07:57, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Hard654, I took care of it. In future, please raise such issues on the talk pages of the articles, and somebody will address them. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:30, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, sir. I definitely will. I took this matter to you because I've seen you making corrections which are genuine and accurate. You're among the best people I could contact to raise this issue. Thanks again and god bless you. Hard654 (talk) 06:14, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019

On 16 December 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:50, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Good work. I just pinged you from an edit summary. The NE protests need to be clarified on the protests page. please take a look and improve when you can. --DBigXrayᗙ 15:49, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Reverted edit dispute

Correct me if I'm wrong but why the revert on the CAA page? I agree that my summary was not fully representative of the edit I made. How is the meaning changed inaccurately when the earlier revision had it wrong? StreetSoda_{talk 00:38, 18 December 2019 (UTC)}

If you believed the phrasing was distorted, better thing to have done is to review my edits and keep the ones that made sense while deleting the nonsensical bits. The older edit certainly made the text confusing.

The first change and the last change are wrong, the last one especially. The other edits are mundane and not worth bothering about.

When multiple changes are made in an edit, it is normal practice to revert the whole thing and let the editor figure out what to retain and what to throw out.

But frankly, if you add a not in front of a clause and call it a grammatical change, I am sorry, I don't have any polite words to describe it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 01:35, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

The earlier revision without the not is wrong as per the referenced article. Also, the other edits are not mundane since the inherent meaning was not conveyed properly. Clarity is important especially in the lead section. StreetSodatalk 21:04, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Then you should state what the source says that leads you to the conclusion that the sentence was "wrong". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:28, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

One would think a veteran user such as yourself would take the courtesy to do a rather quick fact check before reverting edits. I suppose such a day is yet to arrive. Adios. StreetSoda_{talk 08:30, 19 December 2019 (UTC)}

Citizenship Amendment Bill or Act

Hello Kautilya3 Sir, I am a ~~ps.prashantsingh16~~ a new user of Wikipedia so i don't know everything about it. You left me a message on talk page, i read it. Thank you for your Guidance, Teaching, Parenting, Helping and Love for me. If I have any questions or problems i surely asked you. Present Time when I go to my Talk Page, Wikipedia shows me I am a Block . So i want to know why I am a Block and can you unblock me. If you have Powers please unblock me. This help i need to you. & again thanks for your help and love. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ps.prashantsingh16 (talk • contribs) 05:34, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

ps.prashantsingh16, you are not blocked. But the page on Citizenship Amendment has been protected to new editors due to persistent disruptive editing. You need to edit other topics until you gain some experience and get get "autoconfirmed" as an established editor. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:41, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

• A consequence of getting Modi and the BJP pages to the GA level has been that no-one has updated them with information about the recent activities of the government. It's been on my to-do list, but any assistance would be appreciated. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:16, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Vanamonde93, It looks like Narendra Modi is finished. It is Amit Shah's government now. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:32, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

A request for more care in your comments

Kautilya3: When first I read your comment here, I thought it an insulting insinuation of ulterior motive. Then, after considering further, I decided that perhaps, though my edit appeared to me to be a clear improvement of the text, you might genuinely have felt that it distorted some aspect of the content. I bring this to your attention now so you will be aware of my initial perception of your comment. Please, in future, do not address me (or hopefully any other editor) in a manner that suggests lack of good faith, makes an unfounded accusation, or impugns my motives in editing Wikipedia. Thank you for your attention. Dayirmiter (talk) 13:20, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Help with a nationalist editor

Hi Kautilya I have recently come across a editor who is blatantly pushing an agenda he keeps removing categories regarding Jammu and Kashmir being a territory disputed by Pakistan but Gilgit Baltistan categorie section mentions Territorial disputes of India why is there bias? He is also blindly removing History of distillation section because it mentions Pakistan please assist. 31.205.18.37 (talk) 18:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Not sure what Kautilya can help you with when you are the one hounding me, making personal attacks and baseless accusations. Point me to a edit in which I have removed cats from a JK article incorrectly, I don't even remember doing that. With Distillation I was just removing edits by a blocked account, your personal attacks in that particular article's edit summary don't make your claims any better. Gotitbro (talk) 18:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I have clearly shown your pov cats edits on your page playing dumb here wont help you cannot bare any mention of Pakistan in historical terms thats why you push the Indian subcontinent term onto every page with that generic edit summary of "rvt pov edits" Kautilya please do check the users contributions clearly a nationalistic tily. 31.205.18.37 (talk) 18:29, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

@Kautliya Gilgit-Baltistan articles category section at the bottom contains Indias territorial disputes section so why has the user removed it from Jammu and Kashmir section? It was there for a while he also removed Pakistans addition to distillation for the same excuse when clearlt he has issues with Pakistan being mentioned in any positive way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.205.18.37 (talk) 18:53, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

		Season's Greetings
		May your Holidays and the Year that follows shine as much as this coin still does beneath the tarnish of bygone weather and long use. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:23, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the threats

You couldn't refute my edits so threatened me. I didn't even have to edit the article again, others have already mentioned the persecution of Hindus etc. in the three concerned countries. I stand vindicated.

BTW. Your "takiya cap solidarity with Indian Muslims" initiative speaks a lot about your lack of impartiality on the subject.

Did your parents wear a bengali hindu tikka during the genocide of 1971? I don't mind being judged, as long as it's not by hypocrites like you.

Cry as much as you want but remember Satyamev Jayate. Manish2542 (talk) 08:19, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy holidays Manish2542. That was not a threat, but an alert. And please do light a candle for Indian Muslims this Christmas. They are fearful that they might get put in detention camps. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:31, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Wadhwa report?

K3, Check your email please. Sent some links yesterday with a request for another source – if you have it, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 09:00, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Sarah, no, I never heard of it before. From the media mentions it appears to be a report on the West Pakistan refugees in Jammu. I doubt if it will be of any help for the CAB-NRC discussions. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:14, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. If you found mentions other than the one I linked (or one the generic google search finds), please email it to me. There are (at least) two Wadhwa reports, one dealing with refugees/Kashmir/Article 370, the other completely unrelated. The Wadhwa report of 2007 apparently says there are 47,215 refugees from 1947 who remain non-citizens. A so-called WPRA report says the number is closer to 0.15 million in J&K alone who were stateless and have never been able to vote since 1947/1965/1971 etc when waves of them crossed the border. There is another headed by M. Venkaiah Naidu in 2012, which I have not read yet. The UNHCR does not include any of these in its counts. I found the Wadhwa report referenced and discussed in a paper, for the first time last weekend. I have reached out to the author. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 19:15, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

47,215 is the number of West Pakistan refugees that settled in Jammu. They are citizens of India (recall that 1950 was the cut-off date), but they do not have permanent residence in J&K (at least they didn't have it until the whole thing was abolished recently). Here is a reference.

It is not possible for any more refugees to have come in 1965/1971 etc. because there were no minorities left in the Pakistani districts that border J&K (Rawalpindi, Hazara etc.) after 1947. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:49, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

My computer blocked that site, claiming some virus/etc issue. Who is the author, author's affiliation, publication year and what is the article title? On "not possible for any more refugees", I thought Pakistan had a minority of Hindus and Sikhs in the 1950s, mostly in the Sindh and Punjab region (if my memory serves me right), but elsewhere too – the source makes no mention of where they came from, so could these be from other more interior districts? There is a University of Victoria published paper (2016) that mentions refugees of the Indo-Pakistan war of 1965 and 1971. The WPRA report refugee numbers are larger, predominantly Hindus and Sikhs, it seems. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:08, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

It is a news article from August 2019, published by South Asia Monitor. Not sure why it got blocked for you. I emailed you a copy. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 21:27, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Hello Kautilya3: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Fylindfotberserk (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Thank you Fylind. Have great holidays! And thanks for all the defending Wikipedia in all directions. You have been a rock! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:36, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks man. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 06:42, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Hello Kautilya3: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 15:17, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Nice Edit notice :D --DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 15:17, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks you DBig. Unfortunately, these are neither holidays nor happy. But let us make the best of it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:23, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Check this out, The journo is known for her scoops. Also the author of "I am a Troll"--DBigXrayᗙ Happy Holidays! 20:18, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

All is not lost, yet [22]--Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 18:00, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject India Newsletter – December 2019

WikiProject India

Newly recognized content

December 2019 recognized content includes:

• List of India national football team hat-tricks
• Blue Pilgrims

Newly nominated content

• Chandrayaan-2
• Surat
• Golaghat

Created by Bellus Delphina

News

• The holiday season has begun. WikiProject India Wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade. We look forward to working with you in 2020!
• Editor Uanfala started a conversation about Lists of notable people in articles about places back in November and it still needs more editor's opinion on the subject.
• Join a disscusion about formatting writing credits and music credits. The discussion is about Indian films having some differences from Western films in terms of writing and music credits.
• India Search Result is a bot-generated page that tracks newly created articles related to India. It is a place to look out for new page pages. The page is updated daily and make sure to add it to your watchlist.

Miscellaneous

• There are 17 Did You Know nominations, 20 Good Article nominations, and 1 Featured Articles candidates to be reviewed.
• You can join the discussion at Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#Citizenship_Amendment_Act_protests.
• There are 3 articles waiting to be peer-reviewed.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Contribute
• Subscribe/Unsubscribe
• Archive

Sent by CAPTAIN MEDUSA on behalf of WikiProject India. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 08:40, 26 December 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)

sub threads

shouldn't the meta discussion on NPOV tag also be a seperate thread. It seems as if everyone is still discussing that "request for partial revert". --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 20:50, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, good idea. But that is not a "meta"-discussion though. "Meta" happens when people start discussing how we should be discussing. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:55, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

true. --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 22:07, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Wishes!

Hello Kautilya3: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Harshil ^{want to talk?} 17:58, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

-- Harshil ^{want to talk?} 17:55, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Harshil169. Happy holidays to you too! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:57, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, Happy holidays! Seems like you are in depression... Harshil ^{want to talk?} 17:58, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

No, I am not in depression. But I am certainly not happy. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:00, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, Hmm.. Saw your talk page. If you can allow then I can let you explain how it is difficult for everyone, not for Muslims only. Should I? Harshil ^{want to talk?} 18:10, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) the way things are no human with a sane mind should be happy. These are signs of worse that is going to come. --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 18:10, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

DBigXray, Well, NRC and NPR are need of an hour, IMHO. But government is creating too much confusion by paradox as usual like demonetisation. CAA is different issue. It will not be helpful to any Jain like me either. I can't even claim that I belong from Pakistan because I need document of Pakistan to prove that. So, Indian Muslim or Jain or anyother will face same treatment of detention center if Assam type of NRC will be applied. I hope government and HM clears doubts amidst protests. FWIW, HM is from my constituency. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 18:19, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

You fail to realize that all this has nothing to do with immigrants. That is just an excuse and distraction. The plan is to harass and disenfranchise "some" of the Indians, (including Hindus and muslims, who don't vote for BJP). Immigration is just an excuse to that end. --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 18:25, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Well, I still don’t understand how it will harass particular citizens.— Harshil ^{want to talk?} 18:34, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

[23] and [24] should help you. --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 18:47, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

I am not happy because the glorious India that was supposed to be on its way to becoming a superpower a year ago is suddenly rolling in the dust looking like a tinpot dictatorship. A Muslim gold medalist of Puducherry was escorted out the auditorium because apparently the President of India was afraid of meeting her. WTF? India is now a joke! Seeing ghosts in the shadows and afraid of itself. What a fall! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:50, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

KT that detour from the road to super power happened in 2014. Although a lot of indians were hypnotized by APCO and took time to realize they had been taken for a ride. --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 19:05, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

For the moment, president belongs to country. He’s not representative of any party and if someone wants to protest against them then college authorities reserve rights to maintain decorandum. I don’t want to comment on that particular issue. — Harshil ^{want to talk?} 20:03, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Regarding first tweet, which you shared, it’s indeed an insensitive remark. Every party consists their quota of fringe elements which represents mind of small minority fringe. [25][26] This is representation of that. IDK it’s okay to do Hasty Generalisation. Second tweet is seriously eye-opening for me. — Harshil ^{want to talk?} 20:15, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Harshil, the time for all these discussions is past. There is no trust in the government right now. There were signs of a back down by the government earlier this week, but then they surreptitiously started NPR and started obfuscating all over again. It was the worst move they could have made. The only option left for Modi now is to remove Amit Shah and bring back Rajnath Singh or somebody with a cooler head and softer touch. If he doesn't, India's reputation is going down, down and down.

Read this very nice report from Outlook, which says it a lot better than I can.

DBig, the Ramachandra Guha interview that I told you about kinda explains why it is very very hard for Modi to do the sensible thing right now. It will probably end in a complete show down, which might even start to look a civil war once the RSS/ABVP gangs get into the game. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:54, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Outlook article's date is 30 December 2019. Pretty sure, that date is in future. --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 21:59, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I wondered about that. Why do they put these funny dates? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:16, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Probably the release date of the magazine. They are sent to print and often reaches market so that they dont get stale. Funny, indeed. Article overall is good. I think it was not so clumsy that is being shown. I think Shah had planned this well, singling out JMI and AMU , the plan was to portray this as Muslim vs Hindus, but that is where the calculations failed. The average Hindus cried foul everywhere leading to the govt scurrying for covers. I also agree with the author that this is a tactical retreat from the govt. Lets see how it goes. --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 22:28, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

This Share by Anurag Kashyap is also quite good. Read the short experience. --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 23:31, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Now that things have sunk in, some really intelligent commentaries are coming up:

The collateral damage to the Prime Minister's global image in a matter of two weeks has been catastrophic and beyond repair.

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:04, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, do check out this editorial by Venu. I came across that article via this twitter thread that highlighted the main points. --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 18:15, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, India is no push over. No politician can take it for granted. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:25, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

“After the prime minster, he is the final authority,” said Satya Pal Singh, a lawmaker from BJP and former minister in Modi’s government. “If something comes from Amit Shah, it should be carried out. We all know this.”

Does Modi have the power to fire him? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:31, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't think he will. AS got him the throne. Modi isn't that clever. The duo have strong camaraderie and know too much about each other. This friendship will be too costly to break over CAA, the country can goto the dogs. I do feel that AS believes that he will be the next BJP PM whenever that happens. Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 00:55, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Nah, you are overrating him. People didn't vote for the BJP. They voted for Modi.

Wait till he uses the next state election and then he should be finished. Maybe both of them are finished when the economy's tailspin hits home. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 01:08, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Read whole thread, @DBigXray, Harshil169, and Kautilya3:. I think the economic issue article of Draft:2019 Indian economic slowdown needs more attention instead of political issue articles of CAA/NRC protests. I started that draft but nobody turned up for help at WT:INDIA. Economics needs special skills. I am still studying the sources before I create it fully. Please check draft talkpage for some sources which I am studying. Please feel free to help/expand the draft. Hoping for better 2020. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 13:18, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

There will be no economy left if people are killed like this. So the comparison is inappropriate. Why is it still in draft ? May be thats why no one joined. --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 13:22, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Well, everyday I wake up and wonder, how long before Modi declares a national emergency. You all forgot that word, didn't you? But things are heading in that direction. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:28, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, It is time for you to google search "undeclared emergency in India". Why would you want to declare adn spoil something that already exists. I guess he took a leaf from Pakistan Army strategy. In Pak, the army follows an undeclared dictatorship, where the army is the real ruler but to keep the world happy a puppet is put as a PM. Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 13:39, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

That is rhetoric but a real emergency in an information age is scary. It will make the last one look like the garden of Eden. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:47, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

References

CAA at ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

Just to let you know that I have mentioned you in my response. regards. --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 16:48, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, well, I thought we were all grown-ups. But, frankly, everybody is POV-pushing. The only solution is to dump all newspaper sources and stick to scholarly sources. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:54, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

well I did express my shock at this puerile tantrum . --Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 01:02, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Funny, as it may sound, someone tried to WP:NOTHERE me today.--Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 14:08, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Re:

https://indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/1522/3/A1955-57.pdf see the footnotes--Mike Rohsopht (talk) 03:42, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Kautilya3!

Happy New Year!

Kautilya3,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:23, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thank you, Fylind. Happy New Year to you too! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:32, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Kautilya3!

Happy New Year!

Kautilya3,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Happy Holidays! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 21:04, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thank you DBig. Happy New Year to you too. The much-hyped 2020 is finally here! Let us see what it will bring. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:17, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Kautilya3, if they just stop fucking up what India already has, India can probably survive this as a calamity. Although the chances seem bleak now. Happy New Year! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 10:37, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Depends on who "they" are. As you know, I am blaming the newspapers for the whole fracas.

Something like a list of demands is slowly emerging, which are I think too high for the government to accept. But the Government can postpone the effective date of CAA until after the Supreme Court reviews it. Some compromises will have to be found. But I don't think the newspapers will let them happen. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:53, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Leh and Gilgit

Why does the Gilgit article contain Indias claim so prominently ? Gilgit is also a city. Thats why I think Leh along with Srinagar should also mention Pakistans claim since they are all cities in a disputed territory. 2A02:C7F:3614:CA00:428:F043:792:AB4A (talk) 13:37, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Please take a look at this [[27]] no mention of Pakistans claim this is the capital of a disputed territory so why should Gilgit accomidate Indian editor claims? 2A02:C7F:3614:CA00:428:F043:792:AB4A (talk) 13:41, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

I removed the mentions of dispute at both Gilgit and Leh. If you find other pages with such mentions, please do something similar. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:44, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Ok thank you sorry for reverting again. 2A02:C7F:3614:CA00:428:F043:792:AB4A (talk) 13:46, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Kmoksha (talk) 15:30, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Baji Rao I article

Please help me to improve article Baji Rao I, as it has the capacity to become a Good Article, if useful information and content from different reference books are added to it. Mahusha (talk) 06:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Mahusha, I will watch list it. But this is not a good time for working on historical articles because current affairs are taking up most of our energy. Note also that the Shivaji page went up for GA and failed it. The first step would be to work on that page and correct the problems that have been identified. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:16, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

At least visit the page and what are the problems with that article list it & submit it to me I will see to it as I am working on Baji Rao I. Mahusha (talk) 13:01, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

By the way are you working on Citizenship Amendment Act.... Mahusha (talk) 13:02, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

5 largest geopolitical risk

Surprised me. Things have changed. (ping, User:DiplomatTesterMan)--DBigXrayᗙ 19:52, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

You have seen Shiv Shankar Menon, haven't you?

I always thought that the worst thing that can happen to the BJP is to get a majority in the Parliament. So everything he accomplished in his first term goes down the tube now.

It is not like Modi to back down. It won't go with his "tough guy" image. But who is going to tell him that backing down is actually tougher, and will show the world that he is his own boss? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:04, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Re:Welcome back

Dear User:Kautilya, thank you so much for the kind wish on my talk page! I really appreciate it and am happy to be back! With regards, Anupam^Talk 22:07, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

You are welcome, Anupam. I wonder if you can find me a good translation of Hum Dekhenge? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:34, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Sure! This one might be helpful. With regards, Anupam^Talk 23:49, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, but the subversive part is missing in this version. Discussed here. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:28, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Here is the original recording of Iqbal Bano's Lahore concert [28]. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:53, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Onam

Just letting you know that your comment was moved to another location in this diff to change the context of the question instead of answering the very obvious question that you had asked. I have moved your comment back. --Happy New Year! ᗙ DBigXrayᗙ 20:18, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

and now NitinMlk's comment being refactored [29] DBigXrayᗙ 22:29, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hum Dekhenge

Jab arz-e-khuda ke Kabe se

Sab but uthwaye jayenge

The right wing says this is firing from the "shoulders of Hindus" [30]. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:11, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Kautilya3, why should we care ? these are just stipd distractions being put up to derail the protests. DBigXrayᗙ 22:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Because they may have a point. Genuine idolators may indeed feel offended by any talk of iconoclasm, even when used metaphorically. I can't dismiss it that easily. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:53, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Kautilya3, this reminds me of Vande Mataram fracas. Anyway I consider it a timesink. DBigXrayᗙ 22:58, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

More than meets the eye

• 'Only a Pawn?' 'Bigger Conspiracy' After Arrest of Decorated J&K Cop Caught Ferrying Terrorists
• A Senior Journo --DBigXrayᗙ 13:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

User:DiplomatTesterMan thoughts ? --DBigXrayᗙ 13:37, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) The concerns as to NIA are way over-blown. That being said, hardly the strangest thing that has happened as to Kashmir; insider tales of the tumultuous 90s will put our best of fiction writers to shame. From a more Wikipedian perspective; does this man pass WP:GNG? ∯WBG^converse 16:03, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

User:Winged Blades of Godric He was the DSP in Pulwama. A lot of questions were raised on how 40 Kg RDX could be arranged with all these cops and army there. Also the politicians raised questions that the NSA likely allowed this to happen, for reaping political rewards. I would believe that there may indeed be some truth in these allegations. Talking about the notability, a DSP is not the top post and hence not notable on its own, but he got a President Medal (I dont know how many get it) and now this case. May be GNG due to the case makes it notable. --DBigXrayᗙ 16:19, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

It would be hard to imagine anything stranger than the Pulwama attack. Godhra pales in comparison. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 02:03, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Especially since India already had intelligence of such an attack going to happen. That is why I said, NSA likely allowed it to happen. --DBigXrayᗙ 19:48, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Finally someone spoke it openly. DBigXrayᗙ 14:35, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

"Finally someone spoke it openly"....and the tweet is gone now. Hmm. DTM (talk) 07:50, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Here RAIOT republishes Arundhati Roy’s introduction to 13 December, A Reader: The Strange Case of the Attack on the Indian Parliament (Delhi, Penguin India, 2006). -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:19, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan, She said 'Bring the terrorists to Delhi. Blast on Republic Day. Hundreds of deaths. Blamed and targeted the Muslims. Was this the script? '. Obviously no surprises that Bhakt brigade got it deleted. DBigXrayᗙ 09:31, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

DBigXray and K3, oooops, I should never have asked :D opened a Pandora's box! (just kidding, thanks for the reading material) DTM (talk) 15:36, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

January 2020 - Kindly allow the other editors to reply to your queries on NPOV for this section and let the discussion finish before reverting edits

Hello, there. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 without proper discussion and without giving other editors time to reply to your questions. Talk page is discussing NPOV for this section - "Relationship with NRC".

You should wait for discussion on this issue to finish. You should give proper proposals for what changes you would like and wait for few days at least for other editors to give their responses. Since this article is highly debatable, it needs proper discussion by the Talk page editors.

Kmoksha (talk) 17:18, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Please click on the Help:Reverting page you have cited above, read its first section, and do what it says. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I will do as per that link. But why you did not let the discussion on the Talk page for NPOV for "Relationship with NRC" finish before removing and replacing your own content ? Why you did not give your full proposed changes to that section on the Talk page even when you ask everyone else to do that ? -- Kmoksha (talk) 18:36, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

The talk discussion in the "Relationship with NRC" section has nothing to do with the content that I wrote. You are raising another red herring.

Once content has been written, you can essentially object on only three grounds. Either (a) the sources are no good, or (b) the content misrepresents the sources, or (c) it gives isolated views UNDUE prominence. Unless you are able to do any of these, you should not revert the edit. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:23, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Even while we were discussing NPOV on this section on the Article Talk page, you removed a whole paragraph. That paragraph violated which of your said "3 objections", that you had to remove it ? That paragraph is completely different from your new content.

Your newly inserted content violates Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. I will give the details soon how. But my question is even after asking me to explain my revert on Talk page, without allowing me to answer, you re-reverted the edit. What is the hurry ? -- Kmoksha (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

You go on and on making posts, but you are not reading or absorbing what we are telling you. Your first point, I have already answered on the article talk page.

You reverted my edit at 14:57. It is now 19:58. What is stopping you from explaining the revert in all these hours? The HELP page asked you to do so before you reverted. I shouldn't have had to ask you for an explanation. Kautilya3 (talk) 19:59, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

As I told you, I will soon be telling in detail how your newly inserted content is violating Wikipedia:Neutral point of view . Other people may have other jobs to do as well. So, you should give some time to others to respond. If you do not wish to answer my question that why you asked me on the Talk page reason for my revert and did not wait for that discussion to finish before re-reverting my edit ? If you do not wish to answer that question, it is your wish. -- Kmoksha (talk) 20:19, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I have reverted it because you did an unexplained revert as I said in my edit summary. If you have trouble reading edit summaries, that is not my problem. Now please get off my talk page and go do some real work, like providing an explanation. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:28, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

While reverting the edit, I had specifically mentioned that discussion on this topic is ongoing. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. If discussion on a topic is ongoing and that too policy discussion, the discussion should be finished on it first. So, there was an explanation, but it seems you were not satisfied by that explanation. Besides that, your newly edited content violated Wikipedia policies. I have given a detailed explained - here -- Kmoksha (talk) 07:20, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I have already called the "ongoing discussion" that you refer to as a red herring. It was talking about content you want to see added, not the content I was adding. So you cannot cite that as a reason for reverting my content.

And I have noted that you have posted an explanation. Unfortunately, it is not any policy discussion. Rather it is your usual pushing of the government propaganda couched as an objection to legitimate content. Please be sure that I will be taking it to the admins since you are now being genuinely obstructive. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:26, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I would request you to talk more specifically about the article content rather than the editors. I had given a reason for reverting your edit. If you were not satisfied with that explanation and wanted a detailed explanation, you should have specified that. I have given a detailed explanation now, how your edit violated Wikipedia policies. I have only reverted the edit to previous content which was agreed upon previously by the editors. -- Kmoksha (talk) 10:07, 20 January 2020 (UTC)