User talk:Kautilya3/Archives/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

→

Archive 10

Annexation of Hyderabad state

I am surprised you did not add the fact that India annexed the state? every single source on planet earth states this and this needs to be added please stop your nationalist vomit on wikipedia. 2A02:C7D:14FC:C600:7550:5709:B28C:2EA7 (talk) 09:18, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@RegentsPark and NeilN: can we do something about this sock? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:13, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Who's the master? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:30, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@NeilN: I have no idea. It must have been before my time, but it seems that he/she is now obsessed with me. Seems to feed on talk page discussions and then go on rampage. Going by reputation, it could be User:Nangparbat, but I don't that user all that well. Some older IPs

• 2A02:C7D:14FC:C600:D5AA:E7F2:540C:E498 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 2A02:C7D:14FC:C600:A4E6:A3F:C283:FD91 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 2A02:C7D:14FC:C600:5D14:164B:83AE:526F (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 2A02:C7D:14FC:C600:AC06:C66E:8988:269 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

and possibly related to this old-style IP 5.71.195.155 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Since it is an IP hopper now, there is little point in blocking them. The best thing to do would be to semi-protect all the pages where they are active. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:31, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

So, now, he is edit-warring. -- Kautilya3 (talk)

Current IP blocked two weeks. If more show up, let me know. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:37, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@NeilN:, New IP showed up: 2A02:C7D:14FC:C600:C065:BE6D:A813:7ED5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:01, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

2a02:c7d:14fc:c600::/64 blocked a month. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:47, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

@NeilN: And now LanguageXpert wants to join the party [1]. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:01, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Singapore

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Singapore. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Saraswati Shishu Mandir

You own a copy of Jaffrelot's book on the Hindu Nationalist movements (1920-1990), right? Is there anything you can do with this? It's in really bad shape. Vanamonde93 (talk) 12:03, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Van, Saraswati Shishu Mandir is just the `brand name' for Vidya Bharati primary schools. It should be merged into the parent article. There is not much independent information available for it. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 12:49, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Ah okay I suspected as much. I'll perform the merger soon, after doing one last sweep for sources. Vanamonde93 (talk) 13:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Battle of Ia Drang

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Battle of Ia Drang. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Opinion polling for the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Opinion polling for the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Balochistan conflict

TripWire wrote "This is not an RfC" What is an RFC? 2A00:11C0:9:794:0:0:0:5 (talk) 14:55, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) An RFC is a Request for Comment. --regentspark (comment) 15:40, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

(ec) WP:RfC is a mechanism to obtain input from a wider Wikipedia community. We might need to go for it eventually but, for the other people to know what is happening, we need to make sure that all the relevant pages are polished up so that there is information when people go looking. That is not the case at present. Most Baloch pages are just stubs.

I really think we would be far better off citing high-quality secondary sources rather than the opinions of Baoch activists, at least for this section. BSO and all other Baloch organisations should of course be covered under their own sections. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Shehla Rashid Shora

Dear Mr/Ms Ghosh (or Kautilya Ghosh), why was the section on Shehla Rashid Shora's Anti BJP/Hindu views deleted? Firstly, all the material was cited appropriately according to guidelines set by Wiki. As an academic and someone formally trained in journalism I am well aware of academic citations for various disciplines, and to report objectively. The first article I cited quotes Shehla says she is not anti-bjp ministers at the outset, and at the end says she is anti-modi. How can this not be factual information, when you yourself have cited those new items in support of the wikipage? Secondly the other article clearly quotes Shehla saying that JNU student activism which will spread all over the country will cause the demise of the RSS. Thirdly, please look at her https://twitter.com/shehla_rashid where she has that meme. As an "intelligent" person you tell us what that meme implies. I can see from the wiki edit pages that you have been the sole person who has prevented clarifications on the 2002 riots. As I wrote to Widr earlier, almost all the Dehli-centric pages have been colored with your point of view. Somehow you because a wiki editor. I don't care to be one, however I will not let someone like you abrogate my rights. So please clarify, without using some broad Wiki guideline to justify you position, on why that is contentious material. Let it be review by more than one other wiki editor, after which I shall decide my next course of action. Human beings have biases, and likes and dislikes. A public forum is one where they are mutually set aside. You seem to think, and support Shehla Rashid Shora, and others like her who think that their views are bias free, and also use your wiki editorship or whatever it is that you have to do the same. If you want to disagree please do that, but be fair about it. What you do reflects a lot on who you are as person. From what I have seen in life such individuals have a deep-seated lack of self-worth which is projected in such behaviors. This is what totalitarian states and despots do. This is what Shehla Rashid Shora accuses the present Indian Govt off--without any tangible evidence. So please fight fair. Thank you.19:17, 4 July 2016 (UTC)2602:30A:C7D7:E590:D1B3:F74D:17DE:1462 (talk)

Dear anonymous, Wikpedia is not a newspaper. So your journalistic skills are unlikely to be of much use here. Please study the Wikipedia policies I posted on your talk page, especially those on reliable sources. Wikipedia content is based on reliable sources, not our personal views. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:22, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Kautilya3, you made a change to my edit, labeled it unconstructive, reverted my reversion, and now threatening to impose a three-revert rule, that only you know best. Please refer this comment and the edits I made to another editor. Since you are accussing me of warring edits, which you speak of in third-person, you are the one doing it. In newspaper or academia that is why they have multiple reviewers and editors and blind processes. What you are doing is OK, except that it is biased and you hide under wiki rules that you know best. Please refers my edits to another editor. Thank you2602:30A:C7D7:E590:D1B3:F74D:17DE:1462 (talk) 19:37, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

When an edit is reverted, you are advised to follow WP:BRD, i.e., discuss the issue on the article's talk page, and wait for consensus to develop. Repeatedly reinstating preferred content constitutes edit-warring, and it will result in blocks. You are still new here. I would advise you to take the time to learn the Wikipedia policies and understand how Wikipedia works. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:42, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

By saying "you are still new here" you make many mistakes. Firstly, it is neither grammatical by US English, and certainly not by the Queen's English. Secondly, you are making an unfounded assumption that I am a novice to wiki, and hence the inference I do not know your rules. You are making a substantive mistake by saying that. A "so-called" editor does not make unwarranted ad hominem attacks. Now if I did that I would be banned or something like that. What applies to me should apply to you as well. They say: "what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander" I hope that saying conveys meaning to you. I would like an apology for that unwarranted personal attack, and ask for this post to be escalated and viewed by other wiki editors. Thank you very much.2602:30A:C7D7:E590:D1B3:F74D:17DE:1462 (talk) 20:24, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

"From what I have seen in life such individuals have a deep-seated lack of self-worth which is projected in such behaviors. This is what totalitarian states and despots do" - talking about personal attacks. I guess your previous Wiki-incarnations have been blocked? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:12, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Accompong

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Accompong. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent

Dear Kautilya3,

You cancelled my entry about this topic with arguing it didn't rely on trustable sources. If you had researched conflict between Marathas and Afghans, you found them. I summarized this conflict:

Maratha Empire had the biggest power in Indian subcontinent. They also nominal overlords of Sindh and collected Chauth between 1752 and 1762. Their supremacy was challenged by newly founded Durrani Empire. Ahmad Shah Durrani. He invaded India once and advanced to Sirhind by January 1748. But, he was defeated at Manupur by Mu'in-ul-Mulk, was Mughal general in March 1748 and was forced to leave Punjab and Lahore to Mughals. After the victory, Mu'in-ul-Mulk became governor of Punjab for Mughals. Ahmad Shah renewed invasion of India in December 1749 and forced him to promise the revenues of the Chahar Mahal (Gujrat, Aurangabad, Sialkot and Pasrur) which had been granted by the Muhammad Shah, Mughal emperor to Nader Shah in 1739.

These revenues wasn't paid in 1751. Thus, Ahmad Shah used this situation for 3rd invasion of India. He marched from Kabul in 21 September 1751 and defeated Mu'in-ul-Mulk in March 1752. Thus Ahmad Shah forced Mughal emperor to cede provinces of Lahore and Multan. Also Mu'in-ul-Mulk became governor of Punjab behalf of Afghans. The city was plundered and the defenceless inhabitants was massacred. Mathura, Brindaban and Akbarabad faced with similar fate of Delhi. He was forced to return home after outbreak of cholera among his troops. He made Najib Khan,was a Rokhilla chef, as Mir Bakshi (regent) of the Mughal emperor and Timur Shah, his son, as governor of Punjab. He had no sooner left India than the Sikhs and Adina Beg, rose in revolt against Timur Shah. Also, Raghunathrao, Maratha commander-in-chief rejected the matrimonial alliance established between empires of Durrani and Mughal and captured Delhi after a 2 month siege in 3 September 1757. Najib Khan was forced to leave his position and Imad ul-Mulk was reinstated. Adina Beg, exgovernor of Punjab, requested help from Marathas for regaining his position. Marathas with troops of Adina Beg and Sikhs marched against Afghans. Sirhind fell in 21 March 1758, followed by Lahore (20 April 1758), Attock (28 April 1758) and Peshawar (8 May 1758). Kashmir was also conquered.

Ahmad Shah sent Jahan Khan to the Punjab. He initially regained Peshawar in March 1759 and Attock in April 1759 but he was defeated by Sabaji Patel at Rohtas. Thus, Marathas regained lost cities in May 1759. Jahan Khan's failure provoked him to begin 5th invasion of India. He rapidly routed Marathas and regained lost territories within 2 months. Also Mian Ghulam Shah Kalhoro, was ruler of Sindh, won a battle against Rao of Kuch, a prominent vassal of the Marathas, and evicted Sindh from Maratha vassalage. He was nominally subordinate to Afghans since 1762.

Sincerely,Cemsentin1 (talk) 02:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Cemsentin1, thanks very much for your contributions and also for this detailed response. I reverted your edit initially precisely for the reasons stated in the edit summary, the lack of a source and unclear writing. You reinstated it with a source and clearer statement. I didn't revert it any further. However, your sentence:

However regions of Kashmir, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Western Punjab, were captured by Marathas between 1758 and 1759, remained in Afghan rule before ascension of Sikh power

is still needs a grammatical correction. It should be "which were captured by Marathas" ["which" missing]. Secondly, please add full citations for your all your sources: author, title, publisher and, most importantly, page numbers. Plain URL's should never be used as citations. Please see WP:Link rot. All the best! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:32, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

References

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Photography

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Photography. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Gilgit-Baltistan

These are sourced materials. We are from that region. you being an indian are taught that pakistan forcefully included us but thats not the truth, i have already notified the admin about this issue until he comes back with a reply, the edit needs to remain the same. Thnakyou. i havent removed anything but we gbians know our history, what your sources say is nothin, you click on the sources and it redirects back to the same page. Even UNPO website uses the same word unconditional attachment to pakistan. Have a look at this link as well. Many other credible sources mention that we invited pakistan to take over not the other way around.

Please refer to these sources .Saladin1987 04:53, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

These are sourced materials. We are from that region. you being an indian are taught that pakistan forcefully included us but thats not the truth, i have already notified the admin about this issue until he comes back with a reply, the edit needs to remain the same. Thnakyou. i havent removed anything but we gbians know our history, what your sources say is nothin, you click on the sources and it redirects back to the same page. Even UNPO website uses the same word unconditional attachment to pakistan. Have a look at this link as well. Many other credible sources mention that we invited pakistan to take over not the other way around.

Please refer to these sources .Saladin1987 04:53, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

References

June 2016

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hyderabad State. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

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

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

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:39, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

It wasn't me who edited Hindu (something). I know nothing about Hinduism at all. My IP does change occasionally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.51.199.80 (talk) 22:31, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jeremy Searle

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jeremy Searle. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Umar Khalid

@Kautilya3, @ChunnuBhai, continue to suppress material sourced from news sources and suppress facts. Arbitration requested. Wish to file complaint against them.

Are you threatening me again? What I provided is fully backed from reputed sources. You and @ChunnuBhai have started this again. I request this to be escalated to the arbitration team.2602:30A:C7D7:E590:50C9:E982:EC9C:EE66 (talk) 12:33, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

ChunnuBhai rightly reworded your text to be WP:NPOV. If you want to make a complaint, please do so at WP:ANI. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:37, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Order of Friars Minor

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Order of Friars Minor. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Input required

Your input is required at Talk:Burhan Muzaffar Wani#Indian and Pakistani reactions. Please comment on it. 117.214.245.178 (talk) 21:09, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Burhan Wani and 2016 Kashmir Unrest page edits

I appreciate your neutral stand. Also, I am not here just with a different point of view (I could have a blog of my own for that). It's about correct information (Wikipedia still provides that, I hope). Just explain, how is it neutral when you mention a State recognized terrorist and a terrorist organization as just a militant and separatist group respectively just because of political correctness (if I am not wrong). The govt. of India already declared him as a terrorist. Getting corresponding references won't be difficult. In the wiki page Hizbul Mujahideen itself, it is mentioned as a terrorist organization. So, it is necessary to call something what it really is. There is nothing neutral when it comes to information sharing, it is must always be correct to every bit.

Thanks - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bishupriyaparam (talk • contribs)

@Bishupriyaparam: Please review WP:TERRORIST. Secondly, a state, any state, is not necessarily considered a reliable source for Wikipedia. Only if the state's view is endorsed by the majority of reliable sources, typically scholarly sources, would it be considered a reliable view. Hizbul Mujahideen is declared a terrorist organisation by multiple governments, and it is treated as such by scholarly sources. For Burhan Wani, we don't have that, and it is not our job to synthesize such information. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:14, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

@Kautilya3:

If that's the case why did you revert the 2016 Kashmir unrest edits. Just asking, which scholarly source declares Wani as a poster boy? The link redirects to a Times of India article, I don't know how this is reliable and who synthesized the information before putting it on Wikipedia. Bishupriyaparam

I don't know which revert you are talking about. But there are thousands of sources describing him as a "poster boy." [2]. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:05, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Kashmir Unrest 2016

May be this will help you editing better in future. [3] . Feel the emotion of a boy whose sister was cloth torn to nude by a brutal Indian security officer. Edit WP for humanity and neutrality not for nationalistic occupation biases. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.32.66.100 (talk) 14:19, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

This is not in response to a well-known long time sock, but for the sake of all my talk page watchers.

Things are pretty chaotic in Kashmir at present, and nothing is known with any clarity. But as far as the system is concerned, Law and Order is a state subject in the Indian constitution, and the Chief Minister of the state is ultimately responsible for it. Mehbooba Mufti is a first time Chief Minister, and the first woman chief minister of Kashmir. How much control she has over the state administrative apparatus is anybody's guess. Omar Abdullah, the former Chief Minister, came out very critically about the administration, going so far as to say that "nobody seems to be in charge in Srinagar." The news blackout fiasco confirms this position, because we all know that there was a news blackout but the Chief Minister says that she ordered nothing of the sort. So, what exactly she did order, and how much the Police have taken into their own hands is a big question.

India is a democracy, and Kashmir is a democracy. The state government of Kashmir is elected by the Kashmiris themselves. There is no central rule in Kashmir, and they are is no martial law either. It is sort of understandable if the Kashmiris conveniently blame India for everything that goes wrong in their lives, but we are going to play our responsible part by stating things as they are. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:40, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

References

Anti-India sentiment; NYT on the India's NSG membership

Hello, Thank you for your suggestions kautilya.

The issue of NY Times opposition to India's membership in the NSG is a fairly clear case of bias because it is odd that the New York Times would be in opposition to a democratic country's membership supported by all other major democracies in the world. This is not what western newspapers normally do, so that is worth highlighting.

However, as you say as per wikipedia policy the viewpoints need to come from third parties.

I will re-write the section to reflect the neutrality.

Best wishes, Ibankquant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibankquant (talk • contribs) 18:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

It is not uncommon for newspapers to take positions based on principle rather than realpolitik. The Economist and Guardian are also known to oppose the admission of India into nuclear clubs. In any case, it is not for us to argue about why they take these positions and make inferences from them. Thanks for your understanding. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:46, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:McCarthyism

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:McCarthyism. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Assault rifle

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Assault rifle. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Marxist Historian

I was surprised at your deletion of the word Marxist which accurately describes Ramachandra Guha but it is okay as I do not feel strongly about it. The only thought which arose for a fleeting instant was that you are insecure about revealing the real affiliations as you are too embarrassed to admit it, but then I realized it is unimportant.

Your reaction caught me by surprise but I came here to ask about something I noticed on your user page. Before that, the sentence in question is itself a POV of a "historian" whose credentials are dubious ("historian" is in in quotes because writing about cricket matches is not the same as being a historian). So feel free to make an equivalent negative claim but use some other source such as India Today or something.

Anyway, the reason I am posting this is because I wanted to point out some unprovable claims in the description of yourself. In reality, NO ONE, absolutely NO ONE, knows anything about the history of Hinduism. Not Hindu nationalist historians, not Mrxists and not Romila Thapar or Wendy Doniger. Repeating their conjectures makes you look foolish and you come across as a person who will accept anything as long as a white skinned person utters it. Why not just admit that no one knows the history of Hinduism instead of claiming conjectures as facts?

BTW, you are probably shaking your head thinking Wendy Doniger is whiteskinned and therefore automatically intelligent and so her claim that Jesus had a conversation with "Saint" Thomas is an actual historical fact. Believe me, it is fiction. She is clearly a fool for claiming it is an actual event with actual dates. Believe me, it is pure fiction. and only low IQ people will claim it is an actual event. However, her stupidity is understandable because only low IQ people unfit for science or business end up in humanities and when she was admitted, there was a conscious push in the US to get more girls into college and so they expanded humanities because in the minds of the Democratic Party administration (many were part of KKK too) women were inferior and could not do science and humanities had to be expanded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.0.199.187 (talk) 03:13, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Dear anonymous editor, I have reverted your edit labelling Ramachandra Guha a "Marxist historian," for the simple reason that you have provided no reliable source for it. Please make sure to familiarise yourself with the Wikipedia policies, whose links I posted on your talk page, especially the "Five pillars of Wikipedia." Any edits that violate these policies will be reverted. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:02, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 25 July

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

• On the Balochistan page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Battle of Ia Drang

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Battle of Ia Drang. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Jammu and Kashmir

I can tell you are a neutral editor without any nationalism issues. I have added a very new report on the armed forces act and how amnesty international condemns it and added a quote could you please watch out if any vandals try and remove this third party reliable source? thanks lot. Asim Sahi (talk) 07:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi friend are you busy? you still not respond me Asim Sahi (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:30, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

@Asim Sahi: thanks for writing. I am always glad to debate issues, especially on difficult subjects like Kashmir. That is the best way to avoid conflicts.

• The content you added is more or less fine. However, it needs to go in the Insurgency subsection, where it is already being discussed.
• Please also make sure to add full citations, not plain URLs. Author, publisher and date should always be present, and page numbers when citing books.
• As you have mentioned on Talk:Azad Kashmir, quotations are pointy, and they should be used with care. Please see WP:QUOTEFARM.
• On Talk:Azad Kashmir, you have also tried to make comparisons between Azad Kashmir and Jammu and Kashmir. Please note that there are significant differences between the two situations. In the case of Azad Kashmir, the government is being criticised for lack of political freedom. However, political freedom is not an issue in Jammu and Kashmir. (For example, JKLF is banned from contesting elections in AJK, but it is allowed in J&K, even though it voluntarily boycotts elections.) On the other hand, we have an active insurgency in J&K and draconian counter-insurgency measures by the government. So, the two situations are quite different.
• On the other hand, a more direct parallel exists between the J&K situation and the Balochistan conflict. I would invite your participation in the latter.

Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 10:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Personally I think the amnesty article is very relevant (its also update and not 10 years old like brad adams) to the government subpage because it only discusses the laws and its implications not other stuff to move it to insurgency section and blow it of as a response to insurgency is pov. I agree all quotes need assessment maybe we should reduce quotes on both sides as it will prevent users from justifying their edits on other pages? Asim Sahi (talk) 11:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Also I personally beleive adding these quotes on the main article page will always attract people because they are their to prove a point and people will retaliate if they think both regions should have equal coverage of quotes from human rights people it is things like these which mean the Indo-Pak pages are a cess pit of nationalist morons (except you and few other editors). Asim Sahi (talk) 11:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

I am very upset on the deaths of Kashmiri peoples may Allah rest their souls in Peace and my question is why Indian army killing these peaceful peoples?????? Inshah Allah Kashmir will be a part of Pakistan shpk (talk) 10:21, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

Any attempt to bring the purported or deduced or imagined ethnic or nationality identities of any users will lead to an immediate block. This includes an editor's own stated ethnic identity or nationality.

You have been sanctioned As a result of this arbitration enforcement request.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 11:58, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your nice comments — Preceding unsigned comment added by Durgahprasad (talk • contribs) 22:02, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Separate article for Kashmiri separatists

I was surprised to see there is no article on the Kashmiri separatist movement considering they are regularly featured in news articles by Indian media. Problem is I don't even know where to start. Considering you've been such a big help, please suggest how to make it and what to add. If there's any page on Wikipedia where I can ask for suggestions what to add in an article, please suggest me that page as well. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 00:25, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

@DinoBambinoNFS: There is indeed Kashmiri separatist movement, but it is not very good at present. If you want to expand it, here are some good sources:

• Behera, Navnita Chadha (2007), Demystifying Kashmir, Pearson Education India, ISBN 8131708462
• Bose, Sumantra (2003), Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace, Harvard University Press, ISBN 0-674-01173-2
• Swami, Praveen (2007), India, Pakistan and the Secret Jihad: The covert war in Kashmir, 1947-2004, Asian Security Studies, Routledge, ISBN 0-415-40459-2

Behera's book, originally published by Brookings Institution, is quite influential in policy circles. Bose is a well-known pro-peace activist scholar. Swami probably gives the most detail on insurgency groups.

There is also Schofield, Victoria (2003) [First published in 2000], Kashmir in Conflict, London and New York: I. B. Taurus & Co, ISBN 1860648983, which is slightly out of date, but it is still valuable. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:52, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

That is about the Kashmiri insurgent separatists. I was only talking about the non-violent political separatists like Hurriyat who aren't part of the insurgency. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 16:36, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, once you start adding content to the page, we can ask for it to be retitled. I don't think there is much point in in separating the violent and nonviolent groups. They support and sustain each other, and some of them move from one to the other. The sources for both kind of groups are still the same. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:43, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Iraq War

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Iraq War. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. —MRD2014 T C 18:59, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Mahmud of Ghazni

User:Huangdi has added the phrase, "According to tradition", once before.1 March 2016, which is the same as 3 August 2016. Could we be seeing some sort of POV editing? --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:50, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Possibly. No need to worry unless they persist with the edit again. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 15:55, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

RSS

I have reverted your edit, 1) Because you included the Op-ed again (are we considering the Op-Ed as RS now, not much objection to the other source) 2) Why so much details about one ban in the lead ? -sarvajna (talk) 18:04, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Elizabeth Dilling

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Elizabeth Dilling. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

User:DnDamubit likely a sockpuppet

This user's behaviour oddly seems similar to that of the sock User:Exciting2015. I have detailed all of my suspicions and evidences at the User talk:NeilN#Please open sockpuppet investigation about User:DnDamubit and have also asked him to open a sockpuppet investigation. Please have a look and keep a watch on DnDamubit's edits. If you want to instead, please open an investigation against him. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 11:44, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) DinoBambinoNFS: This particular sock seems to have been blocked. Just for future reference, however, you can easily open a sockpuppet investigation yourself, by using the twinkle options on their userpage. Of course, if you are asking an admin familiar with the situation to block based on WP:DUCK, then this may not be necessary; but you don't need to be an admin to open an SPI, is what I'm saying. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 13:01, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

I was unsure of what to add in the comolaint, that's why I asked NeilN. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 14:12, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Input request

I will like to hear your input on Talk:2016 Kashmir Unrest on multiple issues especially as nobody responded when I raised them. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 18:21, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Akhil Bharatiya Sharirik Pramukh

Could you have a look at Akhil Bharatiya Sharirik Pramukh and use your expertise to determine what should be done? — Sam Sailor ^Talk! 00:05, 9 August 2016 (UTC) (please  mention me on reply)

@Sam Sailor: Thanks for alerting me. I nominated it for speedy deletion. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:46, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

As you can understand, I turn to you because I don't speak Hindi. But are you sure it's WP:MADEUP? The little I could understand from a Google search was, that his might be some kind of honorary title or position. Or am I wrong? — Sam Sailor ^Talk! 01:20, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I took a look at this, and based on what I know about the RSS I don't think A11 actually applies. For that matter, I don't believe that there is really any CSD criterion that applies, because although the subject (a certain rank within the RSS, I believe) is not notable, it has sufficient detail to make it ineligible for A3 or A1. It might be best to leave it unreviewed so it does not pop up on a search, and then PROD it. Vanamonde (talk) 05:10, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. It is a pity. Are we supposed to wait before we PROD it? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:04, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

For a brand new article, yes, but this is a couple of days old: I think you can go ahead. Of course, if the PROD tag is removed, it might have to be sent to AfD, although in that case I might just redirect it. Vanamonde (talk) 08:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hindupur

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hindupur. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Another input request

Sorry I'm asking you again. My request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Separate infobox for militants is going nowhere. We're stuck on definitions of military person and militant. It will be highly helpful if you can give your opinion there whatever it may be. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 18:17, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

@DinoBambinoNFS:, please don't sweat over it. Obviously Burhan is not the first militant in the world. When it works for everybody else, it can work for him too. If you would like, you can change it to infobox officeholder. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:15, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

The infobox creates confusion for those not in the know about it. Ofcourse I know it is used for every militant, thereare however many others who don't know that and that is why the edit-warring over the infobox keeps happening. It won't do much good arguing endlessly. I'll try to just have the military infobox modified. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 19:20, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

The project members agreed to my proposed changes. Now we can change names of service years and rank in a military person infobox if we want to. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 20:13, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I admire your persistence! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:17, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Learn to Give Citation

When editing articles add citations/reference and not delete "citation needed" tag. If you don't know how to provide reference/citation, learn it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.162.207.191 (talk) 17:06, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

IP, read the edit-summary, and the citations at the end of the sentence(s), before you start sending messages like this. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:50, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

122.162.207.191, if you have checked the sources and the content is not in the sources, please state it in your edit summary. Every edit you make gets reviewed by other involved/uninvolved editors. If it is not clearly explained, it is likely to get reverted. Good luck! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:36, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Kashmir unrest location

The Kashmir unrest has started spreading to Chenab valley of Jammu Division. However it has mostly been minor and peaceful. Do you think the Chenab valley should be listed as a location in the infobox and if yes in what way, should it be added that unrest has been minor in Chenab valley or should only name of the region be added? DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 06:24, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

"Chenab valley" is a vague and informal term. We shouldn't elevate it to the same level as the Kashmir valley. In fact, the Chenab valley page has serious OR issues. What they want to talk about is the post-1947 Doda district, which has now been split into three.

There is no need to put it in the infobox yet. But in the body, we should of course mention the disturbances in these districts, but mention the districts by name rather than clubbing them together as "Chenab valley." Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 10:22, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

The "Doda district" has a Kashmiri-majority and has been part of the insurgency-prone areas for quite a while [4]. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:33, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Happy Independence Day

Happy Independence Day fellow Indian. May this 69th year of independence be full of prosperity and harmony for everyone. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 09:48, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Amen to that DiniBambonoNFS, especially for the harmony for everyone! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:56, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Philippines v. China

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Philippines v. China. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016

Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you.

I apologize for making a mistake while typing your user-name. I assure you that he was a genuine mistake and wont be repeated—TripWire ︢ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︢ ︡ ︡ ︢ ︡  ^ʞlɐʇ 05:00, 17 August 2016 (UTC).

Thanks for that TripWire. If you are uncomfortable with me mentioning you in a section heading, please feel free to change it to something. Talk page discussion without reverting is preferable to discussion after reverting. Assume good faith please. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:01, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Opinion

Hello I just wanted to ask if you would help me add a new section to Human rights in Jammu and Kashmir article? Its about international reactions to Indian atrocities but I wanted an experianced editor backing my edits when other people object to my edits as the comments are quite harsh. Rotunga (talk) 16:48, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Rotunga, sure, as long as it is well-sourced and neutrally worded, I will be happy to back you. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 16:51, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes its just Turkey, OIC, Pakistan and other entities condemning Indian atrocities but there are qoutes so sound very critical. I will get back to you when I have added. Rotunga (talk) 16:54, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Edits

why are you changing my edits? I don't understand this policy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.177.89.19 (talk) 22:24, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

As stated in the edit summary, you cannot add WP:OR in the middle of a passage attributed to a reliable source. In fact, you cannot add WP:OR anywhere. That article is under pending-changes review. Every edit will be reviewed by an experienced reviewer. So, you can quit doing this. You need to find reliable sources for whatever you want to say. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:35, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

ok but what about the other page "demographics of azad kashmir"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.177.89.19 (talk) 22:54, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

As I said, you can't add WP:OR anywhere, especially not in contentious topics like Kashmir. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

ok, thanks. are you a moderator on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.177.89.19 (talk) 23:01, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

There are no moderators on Wikipedia. Only editors and administrators. But it is Wikipedia policies you need to worry about. I have posted them on your talk page. Please read through them. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:03, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, i will read it later. im going to sleep now. Enjoy your day/night. Thanks.109.177.89.19 (talk) 23:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Han Chinese

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Han Chinese. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Look at this - A rare GoI press release on a work of ASI

Ancient camping site dating 8500 BC discovered by ASI . Keeping an eye on this. --Ghatus (talk) 14:37, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

A camping side on an ancient trade route on the "geographical border" of India could prove that "Aryans" were not the first ones who "migrated" to India. It could give a new spin to/on the people of IVC. -- Ghatus (talk) 14:47, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Hmm. I doubt if this settles anything. Humans migrated to India long before 8500 BC. For that part of the country, given the ethnicity of Ladakh and Baltistan, I am pretty sure all the DNA there, if any is to be found, would be Tibetan. That doesn't change anything. If the DNA were to be Indo-European, that would be earth-shattering, but I really doubt it would be. The Indo-Aryans clearly came via Afghanistan, not through the Karakoram pass.

Incidentally, there is some discussion on Talk:India about where the Vedas were composed. What is your view? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:58, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

1)A trade route is an entry/exit route. They were never used by one ethnicity alone in history. Further, if there was one such camp on a route and trade was conducted, there could be another camp on another trade route. Trade requires human beings and it proves that there were enough human being in India at that time to conduct international trades. The identity of those people we want to know.

2) As for Vedas, the place of composition varies from Afghanistan to Punjab to Gangetic plane. Again, we need to understand that Vedas were written hundreds of years after they were originally composed. It caused Interpolation (manuscripts). But, Atharva Veda was surely written well within today's India, though same can not be said on Rig Veda.Ghatus (talk) 04:55, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Slow down, my friend. There is no evidence of "trade" in 8500 BC yet. They could have been nomads, migrating between different pastoral habitats. And, don't call it "India." It was Ladakh, culturally Tibet. Ladakhis fell out with the wider Tibetans well after Mohammad bin Qasim invaded Kangra. What happened earlier is not much known.

If we plot trade routes, we would probably find a triangle there, the western flank along the Karakoram Highway, the eastern flank through the Karakoram Pass, and the southern flank passing through the Kashmir valley. The western flank is Dardic, the eastern Tibetan, with the dividing line between them occurring somewhere near Kargil. Whether there was such a dividing in line pre-historic times, I can't say. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:36, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of European countries by average wage

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of European countries by average wage. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Republic of China general election, 2016

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Republic of China general election, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Slut-shaming

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Slut-shaming. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Rewriting Shyama Prasad Mukherjee

The article has several issues. From unreliable sources to wrong grammar and even probable bias like omission of probable contradictory details. It even uses BJP as source which can't be called reliable and is not scholarly. It needs to be rewritten properly. I will try to rewrite it and include all details and claims about him. Please try to contribute to it with any suggestions and any reliable sources. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 06:19, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Dino, the reliable sources are listed in the Further reading section. Unfortunately, they are not available online. Jaffrelot's book has little bits and pieces of information. I have the page on my watch list, and I will be happy to look any information you need. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 08:09, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

I've rewritten it. Do check and let me know what you think. Feel free to make corrections and edits. DinoBambinoNFS (talk) 06:04, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

References

regarding changes in IPCS.org

hi,

my name is ashu gupta and i have been asked to change info for IPCS.org, The institute is going thru streamlining things. the address and logo is to be changed. Please do not revert changes made on ipcs wiki page.

i am contactable at mailforashu@gmail.com for any doubts. however please free to talk to IPCS for any doubts also.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcsipcs (talk • contribs) 11:56, 1 September 2016 (UTC) 

Please comment on Talk:New York

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:New York. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

PratyushSinha101's edits

Hi, I noticed that you reverted an edit by PratyushSinha101 where he change the Wikiproject status for Chanakya. Could you please look at his other edits as well? He's been doing this for a number of articles and I'm unsure of what's kosher and what isn't. Thanks.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 17:17, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

@Cpt.a.haddock: I think he was mostly trying to add WP Patna and Bihar workgroup to articles. I gave him guidance on how to do assessments for WP India. It should be ok. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:26, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aryan, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Hittite and William Jones. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:05, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Diesel engine

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Diesel engine. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Alexander the Great

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Alexander the Great. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

History if Hinduism

Hello,

Please see talk page of History of Hinduism so we can get to the bottom of it. Thank you. (68.194.224.242 (talk) 16:25, 3 September 2016 (UTC))

Hey, are you going to respond or no? (68.194.224.242 (talk) 16:27, 5 September 2016 (UTC))

I have responded. (68.194.224.242 (talk) 13:46, 10 September 2016 (UTC))

I have responded. (68.194.224.242 (talk) 03:43, 11 September 2016 (UTC))

Please comment on Talk:Antisemitism in 21st-century France

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Antisemitism in 21st-century France. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Thank you for the "heads up" on scholarly research for Aman ki Asha Kautilya! Svabhiman (talk) 10:06, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Svabhiman. Glad to be of help. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:09, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

AN3 report about Kashmir

The party you reported did not break 3RR, and it's a very busy article. It would have been hard to justify a block for reasons of edit warring. If you think there's a serious violation of neutrality, you could try to persuade some admin, but the average admin is unlikely to be familiar with the issues of that part of the world. Better to have an RfC. Make the issue extremely clear on the talk page, so if you want to argue a claim of bias it can be substantiated. EdJohnston (talk) 02:06, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Thanks for responding. I would be satisfied with a warning issued to the user. It would be a bit ironic if the edit-warring isn't enough to issue a warning, but enough to full-protect the page! The user made a a long series of edits, deleting loads of sourced content, and stuck to his guns saying that his deletions cannot be reverted "blindly." The discussion on the talk page [5] is hogwash, a continuation of his WP:OR. If we let users behave in this way then WP:CONSENSUS would have no meaning.

RegentsPark, Vanamonde93, can you take a look at this, please? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 02:31, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: I took a look at this dispute, and while there was not enough recent edit-warring to block in my view, the removal of sourced content, and the arguments on the talk page that constitute original research, cannot evenly be blamed on all parties. Treating this as purely a content dispute would be a mistake, and I think a warning about OR (and also ARBIPA) is in order. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 05:10, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Vanamonde93. I don't see a recent ARBPIA alert on their talk page so I've posted it. Specific warnings, if any are necessary, I'll leave to Ed. --regentspark (comment) 13:37, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Hyderabad State

Hi Kautilya, I have reverted your reversion of my edits. In what way was Operation Polo not an invasion, one of many that India has carried out against enclaves (see also Goa, for instance)? And in what way was the incorporation of Hyderabad into the Union not an annexation? I don't recall any referendum in Hyderabad, or even passage of an act of union by any Hyderabadi body. Clearly, your view of India's behaviour is much more favourable than mine. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 20:27, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

@Acad Ronin: this discussion needs to happen on the article's talk page, and I suggest that you first look at the discussion that already exists there. As you well know, Wikipedia is not meant for writing your views or mine, but for writing the views of reliable sources. The extent of WP:OR in your argumentation is quite surprising. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:37, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cedar Fire (2003)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cedar Fire (2003). Legobot (talk) 04:24, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited History of Poonch District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Loran. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

2009 bombing of Indian embassy in Kabul

[6] "Indian and U.S. officials have since said it was carried out by a Taliban-allied insurgent group known as the Haqqani network, with assistance from Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence spy agency" Best American Political Writing 2009 page 272 also says Americans have said evidence of ISI involvement is overwhelming 45.125.128.202 (talk) 14:45, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

We will need at least one peer-reviewed source to put intelligence agencies in the infoboxes. If the US officials have said it, we could probably put it with "(alleged)" in brackets. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 16:51, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Best American Political Writing 2009 page 272 Is peer reviewed, it is an academic publishing house 45.125.128.70 (talk) 23:29, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

No, the article is from 2008. See p.325. So, it is talking about the 2008 bombing. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:51, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Menelik II

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Menelik II. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Re - this

Hindustan Times is the leading Indian Newspaper so when it is giving factually correct information why are you reverting my edit. BBC might not be correct as it is not based in India! VarunFEB2003 13:12, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Actually, BBC might be more useful in this case, because it is further removed from the events, and therefore its report is less likely to fall victim to the sensationalism that tends to overwhelm local media after such an incident (this is not specific to India, but a general phenomenon). What might be even better is to check a number of independent sources, and see what the consensus or predominant view among them is. Vanamonde (talk) 13:23, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jill Stein

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jill Stein. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

2016 Uri Attack

Recent changes by you are overriding the facts presenting in citations. Please Specify any citations that contradicts with specified text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smart.maverick (talk • contribs) 21:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@Smart.maverick: That is not how it works. The WP:BURDEN is on the user who adds text to provide citations that support the content. You have far exceeded three reverts for today because nobody has been watching. One more edit by you is liable to result in a block. Please be warned. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: Your last update has been a bulk update in which you have removed citations also. please specify what detail is not given in citations so that i can correct the text.

@Kautilya3:

Current changes done by you seems prejudice and biased. please specify reasons behind following sections.

1. Pakistan Section 2. Afghanistan Section 3. Russia Section

Rest seems fine.

In the first place, I wrote a talk page post a couple of hours ago pointing out contentious edits. You need to participate in the discussion there.

You have added further contentious edits since then such as changing "terrorists" to "insurgents" without providing any reliable source.

When edit wars break out, we revert the content back to what it was before the edit war. All contentious edits must be discussed and consensus reached before they are made again. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:39, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: None of my edits include changes specified by you. I have mentioned in my first post also that a bulk of changes have been modified by you which included valid citations also. I have mentioned valid cited sections above. 1. Pakistan Section 2. Afghanistan Section 3. Russia Section.

Please revert these sections to earlier state.

@Kautilya3: Awaiting your response ... -- smart.maverick (talk)

@Kautilya3: You haven't given any response on reasons for deletions of above mentioned sections. It clearly specifies your intent. I have seen in multiple pages your biased and prejudiced response and using your experience to keep the fact finder engaged in technical stuff ... -- smart.maverick (talk)

You are right. The "insurgents" term was introduced by another editor and you merely reinstated it.

But you are not entirely faultless. You have reinstated the content that I had already objected to on the talk page. The right thing to do in that situation is to discuss it on the talk page. Your reinstatement seems to have caused further edit-warring, to which you were indirectly responsible.

You have also reverted my large revert after I have given an edit-warring notice on your talk page.

I haven't looked through all your content in detail, but your edits to the Pakistan section were no good, because you were citing a WP:PRIMARY source and reproducing polemics which is against WP:NPOV. You have been warned about the NPOV violation by another user, but you removed the warning from your talk page. That kind of behaviour indicates an WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT attitude.

You also ignored writing edit summaries. You wrongly marked all your edits as "minor". So it is very hard to figure out which edits are which.

But right now you have more important things to worry about, the SPI case for example. If you survive the SPI case, you are welcome to reinstate your content. Otherwise, I will look at them when I get time and salvage the good parts. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:12, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: As stated earlier and confirmed now by your reply, your statements are fully biased and prejudiced. You only want to put your point of view WP:NPOV and when some body intervene you take them on through rules violation which you haven't followed also. Most of your edits are Pro-Hindustan and Pro-Hinduism WP:RNPOV. As seen in this article, all your edits include pre-determined agenda and are focused on referencing one sided views. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smart.maverick (talk • contribs)

Please note that accusing people without evidence constitute WP:ASPERSIONS. Repeatedly making them will lead to a block. Requesting NeilN or any passing admin to advise you. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:55, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Blocked by RegentsPark --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:08, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Two reverts

Hi,

You've made two reverts on the page 2016 Uri attack (one and two). Both were made without any discussion, regarding those particular edits, on the talk page. The page you made them on has a 1RR restriction and no reverts without discussion restriction. Please self-revert, otherwise I'll have to report. I want to cooperate with you here. If you self-revert, I'm willing to put this behind us and start fresh.VR _talk 22:51, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

I have self-reverted for now. But, if this is what 1RR means, it is going to be unworkable. It would mean that somebody can do 10 bad edits in a day, and I am only allowed to revert one of them! It is a quick recipe for the articles to degenerate. I will ask RegentsPark for his advice. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

1RR only applies to the same edit so you can do ten reverts if they're all reverting different things and I don't see a problem with the revert you undid. Drop a note on the talk page when you do revert, that way other editors can chime in and we can see what the consensus is. --regentspark (comment) 23:27, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. That was my understanding too. But the WP:3RR page agrees with Vice regent's view. Strange! I will drop a note on the talk page. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 23:30, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the self-revert. Now I would also appreciate if you discussed the matter. I objected to your revert here.VR _talk 23:38, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) just adding a note that consecutive edits count as a single revert, as does rolling back ten edits at one go. If the disruption becomes too severe, page protection is also an option. Vanamonde (talk) 05:11, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Ravana

Ravana page is constantly being vandalized by user User:K.shayanthan, who keeps removing various source contents. I have already told him that Ravana appears in Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism (Jain version of Ramnaya) but he keeps removing the sources. On top of that, he seems to be pushing some pesodo-history of eelam nationalism.

He also seems to have vandalisted, removed various source contents from other wikipedia pages, where Buddhist stupa is being pushed as "tomb" of some Chola rule, see here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dakkhina_Stupa&diff=prev&oldid=496451968. 59.93.78.137 (talk) 09:12, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I am unfortunately busy with other stuff. It looks like RegentsPark is monitoring the page. Plus, you can take issues to WP:ANI if they get out of hand. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 09:27, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

I didn't expect that the inline ref put some 4-5 sentences after it would be meant to cover the entire paragraph.[7] So, thanks! - LouisAragon (talk) 16:45, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

You are welcome, Louis Aragon. My preferred form of citations is to put them at the end of paragraphs so that the text doesn't get broken up. It is not always possible of course. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:18, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Protected

Hi Kautilya3. I've semi-protected your page for a bit. Let me - or some other admin - know if you'd rather leave it unprotected. --regentspark (comment) 21:30, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:David (Michelangelo)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:David (Michelangelo). Legobot (talk) 04:24, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Confused

Sorry to disturb, but, can the IP people post Edit War Warnings? My talk page is being vandalised by some socks I suppose. What's the remedy available? Can you please help since I see the same happening to your page. Thanks. Also VR is engaging in edit war, I don't know how to respond to that. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 04:41, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Pankaj, you can file a request at WP:RfPP to get your talk page semi-protected. I am a bit unwell at the moment, but I will look at the page hopefully later today. We might need to go to WP:DRN. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 06:31, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Please go through all the sources VR has cited, and check if any of them mention the Unrest as the "background" for the Uri attack. You can also check if they mention anything else as the background, as done in The Diplomat article. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 06:43, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Final Warning

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

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.192.111.235 (talk) 20:39, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey are you aware what this is about? I have just closed the same thing he gave me here. Do you have any idea? He gave Vice regent a thumbs up while a thumbs down to us? Any idea? VarunFEB2003 07:15, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, well-known troll. See below under "Confused". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:12, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Maybe too many to remember :P

Regarding Darkness Shines there might be too many to mention. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:53, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Well, if he wants in, he needs to do the work! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:56, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Reference formatting

Greetings. Just a quick note about formatting online news citations: while there are many aesthetic choices to be made that are really up to you, it would be very helpful if you could use an access date whenever you use a url. Most links to news sites will break in a few years, but if an accessdate is used, rescuing the links using the wayback machine becomes a lot easier (and can probably be handled by a bot). Cheers, Vanamonde (talk)

Ok, I will keep it in mind. Unfortunately, I don't use the citation templates for news sources because I find it too much work formatting them. You seem to know how to get the old reflinks tool to work. Can you tell me how? Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 08:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Honestly my technical skills are nothing to write home about: it so happens that I installed the script before the first crash, and now mine works again. One of these links should work: [8], [9], or there are installation instructions for a userscript (eminently worth it, IMO) at [10]. Just be careful: it will often pull the title of the publication into the title of the article, and also sometimes generates odd entries for "author", both of which need to be edited out in the preview window. If Reflinks does not work there is an alternative at [11]. Finally, if none of these do the job, you can manually add it by typing |acccessdate=26 September 2016 (for today). Vanamonde (talk) 10:21, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Sanctions

I saw your message. You said "Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions." My question is what are the sanctions you're referring to?VR _talk 23:41, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Please read the notice in that edit. It includes links to the relevant sanctions and you can click through to them. - Sitush (talk) 23:48, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

(ec) Glad that you asked, Vice regent. If you click on the link for ARBIPA, you will find the famous India-Pakistan arbitration case, which then authorised admins to impose discretionary sanctions for the misconduct they see. At the bottom of the page, you will find a log of sanctions recently imposed, which gives you an idea what kind of behaviour gets sanctioned.

If you are wondering what you did wrong to warrant the alert, you didn't do anything wrong yet, but I see a lot of tendentiousness which, if continued over a long term, will be considered disruptive. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:06, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Can you gives examples of Wikipedia:Tendentious_editing that I do? Thanks, VR _talk 03:55, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Murder of Milly Dowler

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Murder of Milly Dowler. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 15:07, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Kautilya3, please read the warning I posted at AN3. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:58, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, I came across this a little late, it would seem. I'm afraid that @RegentsPark: was either incorrect, or more likely just didn't express himself very clearly. The 1RR does apply over different edits, unless you revert multiple edits with only a single edit of your own. Part of the blame also lies with me, as I didn't catch the ambiguity when I posted on the same thread. K, I hope the clarification helps: but if you have further doubts please let me know. Vanamonde (talk) 16:07, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Van. In the light of this ruling, I would like to request RegentsPark to amend his edit restriction to one that makes sense for this page. What we don't want is a repeated back-and-forth of edits, but that is apparently not what either 1RR or 3RR are talking about. 3RR at least gives enough leeway so that we are not caught out by it. But 1RR has no leeway. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 17:24, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Han Chinese

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Han Chinese. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

User:Bubblegum Rains

Who is Bubblegum Rains (talk • contribs)? They have removed an edit stating it as an "obvious sock". They also seem to have some sort of prior knowledge of WP:STEALTH. This user itself seems to be sock of another user. Thanks. Filpro (talk) 18:10, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

I have no idea. A lot of new accounts are being created for influencing the controversies at play. You should ignore them unless you know who they are, in which you can file SPIs. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:15, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

India and state-sponsored terrorism

They keep adding these "notes", I see no reason not to add them for Topgun, Nadirali, and Code16 too. I'm hoping you could do that. This whole AfD has truly become a shitshow. Filpro (talk) 15:49, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, the notes will help the closing admin decide how much weight to attach to their input. I hope you have learnt a good lesson. Those editors might have come there anyway, but your Canvassing will now devalue their input. You need to pay closer attention to policies, or at least use your common sense to decide what is proper. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:27, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Unfair discussion

Hey, I have recently saw the discussion at the page "India and state-sponsored terrorism", and feel as if there are a lot of people there that are not contributing to the discussion and voicing concerns, but just making personal attacks on other editors. In addition, there has been a good quantity of people who i strongly suspect are creating accounts just to vote. I just wanted to bring this to another editor's attention as I saw that you were fairly involved in the thread. Thoughts? Vagbhata2 (talk) 17:56, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Vagbhata2, the page is on my watch list of course. I nominated it for AfD. So, I am of course watching the discussions. Vanamonde is quite experienced in the topic and he is checking the details. Let us see how it shapes up (if it survives the AfD). -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:58, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Shooting of Keith Lamont Scott

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Shooting of Keith Lamont Scott. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

This and the Diplomat

You use op-eds from the Diplomat all the time. What is the difference between the source here and an op-ed from the Diplomat? VR _talk 05:22, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

We only have one policy for WP:NEWSORG.

Good newspapers often mark op-eds as "opinion", "op-ed" or "comment" or some such. The News International does not seem to do so. Or, at least their web site is omitting the information. The very article that you tried to use troubled me, because it is apparently an opinion piece but it wasn't marked as such. I asked about it at WP:RSN [12]. There wasn't a great deal of response but at least one editor thought it was mostly opinion. Another editor explained why we don't use op-eds.

The articles that I am using from The Diplomat are not op-eds. They are news articles with analysis. However, "news magazines" cover larger chunks of information than daily newspapers. Thus they are valuable. India has several such: India Today, Frontline (magazine), Outlook (magazine), etc. But other Asian countries don't seem to have them. The Diplomat fills this void, and it is also international. So we can regard it as a WP:THIRDPARTY source. Even if the reporters belong to one country or the other, they are writing on behalf of an international source with an international audience. (The same goes for The New York Times etc.) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:53, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Just an FYI as I am 100% sure you will not be aware - someone accused of sockpuppetry here VarunFEB2003 12:52, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

One big happy family, right? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:52, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Photograph of Pakistan's surrender in on Surrender (military) page.

Hi Kautilya, I wanted your help and support for a particular edit. I am seeking to add an iconic picture of 1971 Pakistani surrender on the Surrender (military) page, I added the picture but that was reverted by a user(apparently a Pakistani him/herself) citing "lack of consensus". I have started a discussion regarding the addition on the talk page, kindly intervene and help in building the consensus, also you being a senior user can also guide me regarding the edit. I have added my case for the pic on the talk page. Please check out. Thanks. Barthateslisa (talk) 05:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Barthateslisa, sorry, these are contentious areas. We need to follow the policies that have been laid out for the purpose of controlling the disputes. There are ethnicity claim restrictions about making claims against editors. Secondly, your kind of approach is often considered as WP:CANVASSing by the warring editors. Please ping me from the talk page so that everybody is aware of your invite. And please note that the opposing editors will do their own invites. In the long run, it may not help to broaden the dispute. Better to deal with it using the standard dispute resolution mechanisms such as WP:RfC and WP:DRN. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:37, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I also think that, India-Pakistan tensions being quite high at the moment, it may be best to stay away from such India-Pakistan references on such neutral pages. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 07:41, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, WP:RfC seems appropriate. Barthateslisa (talk) 08:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

To Ping

Can you tell me the exact procedure of how to Ping you from the talk page? Thanks. Barthateslisa (talk) 08:54, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

You can use {{U|Kautilya3}}. [[User:Kautilya3]] might also work. But sometimes I noticed that the pings get lost in the system. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@Barthateslisa: See also WP:ECHO VarunFEB2003 17:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Misspelled name

Do you remember who it was who consistently referred to you as Kutilya? It was a while back and, I think, the editor was later indef blocked.--regentspark (comment) 14:42, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi RP, you were probably thinking of FreeatlastChitchat. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:05, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Actually, this is enough to block the user, as per NeilN's criterion. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:28, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Blocked anyway for socking. --regentspark (comment) 18:02, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

FreeatlastChitchat's misspelling was missing letter L from it. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:32, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Han Chinese

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Han Chinese. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Question

Dear Admin , i had question first of all plz conform me how the information been put in here at wikipedia i mean news sources .. I had notice mostly all information is against pakistan and different as compare to actual history example Indo Pak Wars of 1947 1965 totally different . Why ? Why i cant makr it correct Sangakkara1 (talk) 21:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Sangakkara1, I just noticed that nobody has bothered to give you a welcome message. So, I just gave you one, belatedly. Please go through the links given in the message, which explain how Wikipedia works and what policies to follow.

I notice that you have made some edits to Indo-Pakistani War of 1947 which have been reverted, mainly because you were attempting to change content that was already supported by reliable sources. You can't write your own ideas on Wikipedia (called OR), but you must support all content by reliable sources. If you think something is incorrect in an article, it is a good idea to post a note on the article's talk page (just like you did here), or submit an edit request, and somebody will look into the issue. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 21:26, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

(By the way, I am not an admin. But I think an admin would tell you the same thing.)

2016 Kashmir unrest

Mr kautilya3, Please read the article. Do you really think there is human rights violation in Kashmir as a cause of unrest. To my best sources, i have never heard so and that made me edit the article. I added a special comment for Miss Adrabi that she has been arrested on several grounds recently. Isn't it correct? I even added that Burhan Wani was a self proclaimed terrorist, which is true to the best of my knowledge after hearing the conversation with his family, who are admitting the fact. So what you are doing, by reverting the changes, is, hiding the facts. Make sure Prateeksaxena (talk) 02:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

In the line you deleted here, there is a citation included. Did you look at that source? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:11, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Blind reverts

Every time you revert an edit, you should look at the changes you're making. After all, you said on my talk page that a user's edits are his responsibility. In this revert, you introduced a spelling error that someone before you had fixed.VR _talk 16:49, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Surrender_(military)#Rfc_:_Shouldn.27_this_Photograph_of_Pakistan.27s_surrender_in_1971_be_added?

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Surrender_(military)#Rfc_:_Shouldn.27_this_Photograph_of_Pakistan.27s_surrender_in_1971_be_added.3F Barthateslisa (talk) 09:01, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@Barthateslisa: thanks for the invite. However, you need to depend on the RfC bot, which invites people in a fair manner. Good luck with the RfC! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:18, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Turkey

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Turkey. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Regarding Nalanda's importance assessment

I made that change because I think the article is of utmost importance to the WikiProject as events occurred on and around the subject of the article played a huge role in the history of the region. Pratyush (talk) 10:55, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I didn't notice that you changed it for only the Bihar task force. Reinstated it now. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:02, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jaish-e-Mohammed, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black Hawk. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Terry McAuliffe

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Terry McAuliffe. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Want to help test advanced new tools planned for Recent Changes?

Hi Kautilya3! I’m reaching out to you because our logs tell us you’re an active Twinkle new user welcomer. The WMF Collaboration team is working on new tools that we hope will be useful to people engaged in reviewing recent changes, fighting vandalism or supporting new users. We want to test them for usability with editors who are experienced with relevant wiki work. If you’re interested in helping to shape this new technology—we’d like to hear from you.

The testing should take about an hour, will be conducted online, and will take place during the next few weeks. To participate, please email dchen[at]wikimedia.org with the subject line Twinkle Welcomer. Include the following information:

• Username

• Email where we can reach you

• Your city or time zone

• Best time to talk to you

• Your primary use(s) of Twinkle or Recent Changes (e.g., reviewing recent changes, reviewing with a particular focus (specify), anti-vandalism, new-page review, welcoming new users, etc.)

Thanks! Dchen (WMF) (talk) 22:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Want to help test advanced new tools planned for Recent Changes?

Hi Kautilya3! I’m reaching out to you because our logs tell us you’re an active Twinkle new user welcomer. The WMF Collaboration team is working on new tools that we hope will be useful to people engaged in reviewing recent changes, fighting vandalism or supporting new users. We want to test them for usability with editors who are experienced with relevant wiki work. If you’re interested in helping to shape this new technology—we’d like to hear from you.

The testing should take about an hour, will be conducted online, and will take place during the next few weeks. To participate, please email dchen[at]wikimedia.org with the subject line Twinkle Welcomer. Include the following information:

• Username

• Email where we can reach you

• Your city or time zone

• Best time to talk to you

• Your primary use(s) of Twinkle or Recent Changes (e.g., reviewing recent changes, reviewing with a particular focus (specify), anti-vandalism, new-page review, welcoming new users, etc.)

Thanks! Dchen (WMF) (talk) 22:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of Hillary Clinton presidential campaign endorsements, 2016

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Hillary Clinton presidential campaign endorsements, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

WP:1RR

You have just violated WP:1RR at 2016 India–Pakistan military confrontation. (All India-Pakistan articles are subject to 1RR). Revert 1 and Revert 2. Please self-revert, else I'll have to report. Pinging RegentsPark. VR _talk 23:45, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi VR. The 1RR restriction was removed by me on 30 September (this edit). I think that this is a good time for you to engage at DRN. --regentspark (comment) 00:50, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that! VR _talk 02:10, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Also, regentparks, I have commented at the DRN. Yet despite by comments, I haven't gotten much specific responses from Kautilya.VR _talk 02:30, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I think you haven't been looking at the DRN board. Please do. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:39, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Haiti–United States relations

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Haiti–United States relations. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Invite

Hello Kautilya3/Archives. You have been invited to join WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the Asia-related articles on Wikipedia. You received this invitation due to your interest in, or edits relating to or within the scope of the project. If you would like to join or just help out a bit, please visit the project page, and add your name to the particpants. If you know someone who might be interested, please invite them by: {{subst:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge Invite (1)|~~~~}} Thanks, -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 04:18, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dinesh D'Souza

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dinesh D'Souza. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Did you notice this?

Definetely not a new user, seems to imply WP:OR at numerous occassions, and constantly cites clearly outdated sources from some 100 +/- years ago for the images he's uploading en masse on Wikimedia, and for the content he's adding here on Wikipedia. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:57, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: I have looked through some of the edits after you mentioned but they don't ring any bell. I guess we will just have to deal with him/her on policy grounds.

By the way, this kind of edit summary is currently not permitted under an arbitration enforcement restriction on India-Pakistan pages. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:16, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 23 October

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

• On the 2016 India–Pakistan military confrontation page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Diego Maradona

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Diego Maradona. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Washington Post

There's hope for this world: Wikipedia is fixing one of the Internet’s biggest flaws. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:31, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Great! You made my day! - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:32, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United States presidential election, 2016

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States presidential election, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Hindutva & Fascism

You recently removed the Fascism Tags from the Hindutva article, although Hindutva is an ideal example of Fascist ideology. It is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism, historically known to appose Liberalism and "Indian Secularism", it lies firmly in the conservative extreme right.

It is built upon and heavily inspired by Fascist Nazi Nationalism, as accepted by the founders of RSS.

It believes in the strengthening and Unification of India, through Hinduism and by expelling all forces & influences considered "foreign" or "Alien"(this mostly involves minority religions), and through manipulating history and placing heavy influences on historical Hindu figures supported by the ideology(Ignoring or demonising Mughal, Arab, Turkish or any non Aryan/North Indian influences on the continent's history, renaming streets, roads and cities to wash away any remnants of "foreign" history), like Patel and others as revealed by PM Modi and the BJP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Being the brainchild of Nazi inspired organizations, I'd purport that the Hindutva movement by its very nature is Fascist, which in its self is not a slur, nor derogatory, and having different opinions on matters doesn't change the fact that it falls neatly into the definition of a fascist movement. Hence labelling it as such should not be considered bias.

I would hereby request you undo your previous edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.75.41.49 (talk) 18:12, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for writing. As per WP:NPOV, we can only report as facts those ideas that form the consensus among reliable sources. Fascism is an overused word, so much so that nobody knows any more what it means. All I know is that there are authoritative scholars, such as Christophe Jaffrelot, who don't classify Hindutva as Fascism, and others like Jyotirmaya Sharma, who disagree that it is Fascism [13]. Instead of trying to do cheap branding, I would encourage you to find sources and write content that might or might not establish Hindutva as "Fascism". Then we can discuss. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:50, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cold War II

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cold War II. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United States involvement in regime change

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:United States involvement in regime change. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

New Email

Hello, Kautilya3/Archives. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.

Hi

I just edited the page "pathans of gujrat" but you again edited it

I am a Pashtun by ethnicity and belong to babai tribe . So i corrected some of the main mistakes which i knew are incorrectly feeded in Wikipedia or the wording isn't proper . That's why i felt the need to correct them as i have complete info related to Pashtuns of Gujrat Babai Khan (talk) 20:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Babai Tribe

I belong to babi or babai tribe . I have complete knowledge and information related to babai tribe and Pashtun tribes & family tree. So there is no such thing i mentioned and nothing was needed to be again edited by you . Can you explain the reason for editing my info which i shared regarding babi or babai tribe ? Babai Khan (talk) 21:32, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

@Babai Khan:, I am sorry, Wikipedia needs to be edited following reliable sources, not as per the editors' personal knowledge. You are welcome to redo your edits after adding reliable sources. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:47, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

No its not my Personal knowledge. I have gained this knowledge from different historical books and history of Pashtuns. All the babai tribesmen will agree to my points which i added because its not anything added from my own thinking or perception , its history and many pashto books have that data available in it . Please take out some precious time and read the history of babi pashtuns from the books not surfing over the internet . There is still big info and knowledge lacking over the internet. Babai Khan (talk) 22:07, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Babai Khan: If you have read this information in reliable sources, such as scholarly books, then you are welcome to add it to Wikipedia: except that you also need to cite those sources when you do so. Unsourced information will be removed, because it is not verifiable. Vanamonde (talk) 10:24, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Popular election

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Popular election. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Moazzam Begg

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Moazzam Begg. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Collegiate School (New York City)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Collegiate School (New York City). Legobot (talk) 04:29, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorry.

I may have lost my temper while changing the edits on List of wars involving India. It will not happen again however Sheikh17 is editing of the page with no information being provided and keeps putting in his own perspective. Nikhilmn2002 (talk)

Yes, they were clearly POV-pushers. But POV-pushers are not sent away by calling them names, rather by you demonstrating your knowledge of the subject as well as your knowledge of Wikipedia policies. Since these list articles are just summaries of the main articles, the information they present should just be summaries of the corresponding main articles. And, the main articles should be reliably sourced and satisfy WP:NPOV.

Pinging MBlaze Lightning to take a look. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 10:40, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mumtaz (actress)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Mumtaz (actress). Legobot (talk) 04:24, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Attlee

Hello, and thanks for your edit here. If it's a time about which you frequently write, you might want to note the correct spelling of Clement Attlee's surname, with two Ts. I do know about the famous film-maker and he's definitely not helping! :) Hope this is useful to you. All good wishes, DBaK (talk) 15:12, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you DBaK. I do know the double-t's but it was an instance of my fingers typing themselves. I ran a spell check on the whole article now.

I wonder if you have been watching The Crown. If so, what do you think of Attlee's portrayal there? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:45, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks very much - that's great to know! As for The Crown - we have been ignoring it BUT friends have been telling us we have to watch it, and now you have mentioned it too, so I think that will be next on the agenda. :) Thanks for the lovely reply, DBaK (talk) 08:05, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

PS We know an Attlee relative who still has the surname - will have to ask her if she has seen it or if there is an "official" family view! :) DBaK (talk) 08:06, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, the series is well worth watching and quite addictive too. Don't get your hopes up regarding Attlee, though. I think he was poorly done. Churchill is the centre of the action by the time the Queen came on, and he is portrayed quite brilliantly. The Duke also seems to be a weak point in the show. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:40, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm quite enjoying it thanks - we have watched 3 so far. Attlee hasn't had much of a look in. So far I quite like the DofE - Smith has quite a nicely angular face for the role. Thanks for the comments! DBaK (talk) 12:45, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Kautilya3. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

The IP at Shah Mir Dynasty

Speaking of baffling, this is really baffling. Apparently I have a shameful bias against, guess who — against the IP. Sometimes I wonder why I bother with any of it. Bishonen | talk 23:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC).

Well, the IP is evidently inexperienced. And, that is a good thing, right? It is the "experienced" IPs that are the problem! He is probably complaining that you froze Barthateslisa's version of the page for one week. He will get over it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:14, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Really? I can't say I care whether or not he gets over my "shameful bias". I'm surprised you would defend his post on my page. Bishonen | talk 23:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC).

No, I am not defending. But then you haven't seen what kind of stuff we have to put up with on our talk pages. I will post something to him/her. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:35, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:California

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:California. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Shah Mir Dynasty

This user seems to be just arguing, without providing any reference to support his claim. How do we close this? It seems like it will go on and on without any conclusion. (2600:1001:B010:93FE:9DF5:8A11:14FB:3A56 (talk) 16:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC))

You can start by registering an account. There is nothing much you can do with a constantly changing IP. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:31, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Sources?

Questionable sources? Excuse me? I cited the British home office which regards both the Balochistan liberation army as a terrorist organisation. It was proscribed in 2006, read the PDF file. If you remove my referenced material again I will take this to wikipedia administrators. This is the link I used today https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/538297/20160715-Proscription-website-update.pdf

Don't blackmail me by saying "off-topic again" that is a biased narrative which violates one of the five pillars of being a wikpedia editor, Wikipedia:Five pillars, and don't try to smokescreen what you wrote on the edit page "off-topic" with an accusation of unreferencing. False lies when I clearly referenced the UK home office. You can see it in the edit history. (Wiki id2(talk) 19:58, 24 November 2016 (UTC)}

Regarding the first edit that I reverted, you have added the United Kingdom is an "opponent" of the Baluchistan Liberation Army. The source does not say that. If the UK government has proscribed it, it just means that it recognizes it as a terrorist or unlawful organisation.

The second edit I reverted said that "The Balochistan militant group" was banned etc. But this is an article on Akbar Bugti, not any militant organisation. I have no idea what this sentence is doing here. Did you mean to put it in Baluchistan Liberation Army page? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:06, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes it is relevant, Al-Qaeda is a terrorist organisation and it mentions that on bin laden's page. (Wiki id2(talk) 20:21, 24 November 2016 (UTC))

Bin Laden is the founder and the head of Al-Qaeda, which is amply covered at the very top of the article. Nothing similar exists for Akbar Bugti. This is a really poor argument, and smacks of intense POV-pushing. Are you sure you know what you are talking about? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:28, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Balochistan conflict

Just so you know my edit on the Balochistan conflict is furnished with references to the 2011 Pakistan census regarding ethinc composition, and the voting patterns of Sindhis and Pashtuns have also been referenced. (Wiki id2(talk) 20:24, 24 November 2016 (UTC))

The citations you have you have added say nothing about the Baloch insurgency. You have just collected random tidbits from various places and claim that they support your content, which is truly WP:OR. The very first sentence of your content is unsourced. Enough said. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:34, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

That's the third edit you undid not the 2nd. Don't lie, I know how to count. Fool. It's obvious from the edit history. (Wiki id2(talk) 15:59, 25 November 2016 (UTC))

Please comment on Talk:Ronald Reagan

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ronald Reagan. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Burhan Wani is not a member of any armed force hence commander is inappropriate.

The number of people at his funeral is irrelevant to why he is notable. He is only notable as a trouble make insurgent and militant. He was apparently well known for impregnating Kashmiri-Muslim women if that is reliable then include that too. Please do not be selective. Wiki pages are not designed to make people look like folk heros. Stop deleting unreliable or poorly sourced information. There is not independent verification that he was a commander. A Commander is a Naval Rank just about Lt. Commander and below Captain. Otherwise commander is a generic term applied to the immediate head of a formation of any branch of any armed force belonging to a sovereign nation. KAshmir is not a sovereign nation and therefore does not have an armed force. He was never a member of the Indian Armed forces and there is no evidence that he belonged to Pakistan's either. Even if he did PAkistan vehemently denies it. Ragtag guerillas and insurgent do not merit such a write up.23:52, 26 November 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:C7D7:E590:9024:B75A:40CF:3883 (talk) 2602:30A:C7D7:E590:9024:B75A:40CF:3883 (talk) 23:56, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

This needs to go in Talk:Burhan Muzaffar Wani. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:18, 27 November 2016 (UTC)