This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Jammu and Kashmir (princely state) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
India,
Pakistan, and
Afghanistan, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on October 26, 2011. |
A tag has been placed on Kashmir and Jammu, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{
hangon}}
on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.
If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. gppande «talk» 16:33, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
I hadn't seen this page before. The article Kashmir is mostly about the princely state, and what details can't go in there belong to History of Jammu and Kashmir (that was the decision made in the Kashmir article when the name was changed from Kashmir region to Kashmir). There is no reason for a separate article. It will simply create more confusion. Also, the Imperial Gazetteer of India content here is not even minimally paraphrased. Notice, in the Kashmir article it is in quotes. At best this page can be a dab page, but even that is recipe for confusion: imagine a new reader contemplating: Kashmir, History of Jammu and Kashmir, Princely State of Kashmir and Jammu (which, by the way, was also called the Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir; in fact the instrument of accession to India by Hari Singh was signed by him with that title.), and Jammu and Kashmir, not to mention Azad Kashmir and lord knows what else. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 14:11, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
(unindent) But the Kashmir article is about the region as it existed until 1947. That was the decision made when the name of the page was changed from Kashmir region to Kashmir and follows the precedent in Britannica. There is very little difference between Kashmir, History of Kashmir and Kashmir and Jammu (princely state). Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
(unindent) Thanks, Pahari Sahib. In light of UMZ's comments above, I am willing to give this new name a try and see how things proceed with the different Kashmir or Kashmir-related pages. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
I am bringing to your attention some pages related to the princely state that have been the focus of irredentist edits, especially by one editor, user:Hindutashravi. The pages are Hindutash, Sumgal, and Aksai Chin. See in particular, Talk:Aksai Chin for my perspective on these edits. In addition one image file, File:Hindutash_in_Kashmir.jpg, which Hindutashravi ( talk · contribs) claims belongs to the Simla Convention of 1913, but which seems completely bogus, needs to be deleted ASAP. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I have taken the first sentence in the history section from this article. Would an editor from here please check and, if correct, revert this edit by the IP, please? TerriersFan ( talk) 22:32, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:56, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
There have been no responses to my statement above that the princely state was called "Jammu and Kashmir", not "Kashmir and Jammu". Accordingly, I propose to change the page name to "Jammu and Kashmir (princely state)". Are there any objections? Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:34, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Jammu and Kashmir (princely state). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The infobox was recently changed from {{ Infobox former subdivision}} to {{ Infobox former country}} without explanation by @ VSK1008:. Given that princely states were part of the British Raj, it would seem the former subdivision infobox should be used. But it could be that the princely states could be considered former countries (not counting the brief period of technical independence of J&K during the 1947 transition to the Indian Union). So - which infobox is better for princely states? Dl2000 ( talk) 02:49, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Government of India conceded the desires of the state's people and the monarchy was abolished
This contentious new WP:OR added yesterday is not supported in the Gupta citation haphazardly added to it after I removed it for being unaccompanied by the required citations. I will ignore the edit summary because of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and keep the dispute to this talkpage.
A consultation with the Gupta book cited shows no support for Kautilya3's unnecessary credits for the Indian Government role.
Without consulting New Delhi, Abdullah, as Chairman of the said Committee, addressed the Constituent Assembly on 10 June and stated that the Committee considered the institution of monarchy "a relic of the feudal system" and therefore recommended replacement of it by an elected Head. The Constituent Assembly approved the report and ordered the Drafting Committee to submit proposals for its approval within a month. Earlier, the Constituent Assembly of Kashmir adopted, without any reference to India, a new Kashmir State Flag in the form of a white plough on a red background, with three white vertical stripes running parallel to the staff, thus replacing the old State flag. The reaction in India was quite sharp. Prime Minister Nehru deplored the tone of Abdullah's Ranbhirsinghpura speech but he had no doubt that the Praja Parishad's agitation had a big hand in this retrogade development of Kashmir's politics. Officially, a deputation of the Kashmiri leaders was summoned in Delhi on 12 June which then held a series of discussions with the Government of India in order to resolve the constitutional deadlock...The combined efforts bore results in the form of an agreement reached between the leaders of Kashmir and the Government of India...The Government of Kashmir lost no time in implementing those provisions of the agreement to which they cheerfully subscribed. On 21 August 1952, the Constituent Assembly of Kashmir unanimously adopted a resolution abolishing the monarchy and accepting the principle of an elected Head of State for a five year term.
[1]
Kautilya3's text which attributes the abolition of monarchy by the Indian Government to "conceding" the desires of people in the state has no basis in the sources. This contravenes WP:V and more seriously might even be a case of WP:FAKE. And I also say that we refer to the reliable source I attached which like Gupta tell us that Abdullah and the Kashmiri state government (not the Indian Government) abolished the monarchy.
Abdullah also eliminated the hereditary monarchy, which had in any event become inconsequential after October 1947. By 1952 the Dogra monarchy was formally abolished, IJK proclaimed a "republic," and the last king's son, the erstwhile heir-apparent Karan Singh, relegated to a largely ceremonial position styled Sadr-e- Riyasat (Head of State)..
[2]
Of course the fact that the monarchy itself was inconsequential even before it was officially abolished raises questions about WP:DUE for this edit too. JosephusOfJerusalem ( talk) 14:14, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
References
Recently this page was moved to the title Kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir, which I have reverted since the renaming was undiscussed, potentially controversial, and (at a quick glance) the new name didn't match the content of the article. However I have no firm opinion about the right name yet, and only suggest that anyone interested in renaming the article should start a formal discussion about it so that evidence/sources can be properly considered and consensus reached. (Pinging @ Arimaboss: who had originally moved the page). Abecedare ( talk) 16:08, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot ( talk) 16:52, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Under the subheading 'End of Princely State', the article says that the Princely State passed into India's control after the signing of the Instrument of Accession, but immediately after that, it says that a part of it(Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan)came under Pakistan's control, with no explanation whatsoever of how Pakistan seized control of the regions. Hence, it is quite misleading. If anyone knows of the explanation, please edit the page. Royal trumpet ( talk) 11:28, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
This flag and emblem is officially abandoned after removing article 370. Ck3141 ( talk) 14:50, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Maharajah of Kashmir and Jammu. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 2#Maharajah of Kashmir and Jammu until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 (he) talk contribs subpages 14:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Maharajah of Kashmir. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 2#Maharajah of Kashmir until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 (he) talk contribs subpages 14:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
We need to use the official UN maps for Kashmir which are here: https://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/kashmir.pdf https://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/SouthAsia.pdf https://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/world.pdf UNMOGIP map for Kashmir is here https://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/dpko/UNMOGIP.pdf
This name didn't stick. Google ngram viewer. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 22:55, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Flag of Jammu and Kashmir (1936-1953).svg | Flag of the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir (1846-1936).svg |
---|---|
There seems to be a disagreement about which flag should appear in the infobox. For the last few years, the infobox displayed . But a new editor changed it to , which somebody else reverted.
@ Awais Ali pahadi: would you like to comment?-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:04, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
The real flag of Jammu Kashmir princely state is that who i set on infobox you can also see it on Jammu Kashmir coat Awais Ali pahadi ( talk) 09:05, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
While reading on Jammu and Kashmir I found a source by G. W. Hayward that says that quote: "The Maharajah of Kashmir, it is believed, considered his territory to extend up to the Kilian [Kunlun] range, north of Shadula [Shahidulla]." (which makes sense since the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir built the fort to extend his territory northward.). However, the map on this page shows the claim not reaching Shahidulla, which lead me to question the source of that border. BonkeySmoke ( talk) 18:55, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
I have added a Aksai Chin in the "today part of" in the article and we are having a rebuttal about this by Capitals00. I have added Aksai chin as it considered to be a part of princely state. Although it was undemarcated, Government of China in its map untill 1933 shown as the border between British India and Tibet which is also mentioned in the Aksai Chin page with ref and Official maps published by Government of China. Curious man123 ( talk) 05:42, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Indian troops took two-thirds of the territory, and Pakistan seized the northern remainder. China occupied eastern parts of the state in the 1950s.
Curious man123 (
talk)
19:07, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
The 1946 unofficial maps of India (this one by National Geographic) did show both Aksai Chin and Trans-Karakoram Tract as part of Jammu and Kashmir. It is not hugely important, but we should be consistent with other pages. So they should be included. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 16:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Kautilya3 or anyone else, I tried to fix the url for one of my citations (see
this) but could not do so correctly. Please correct it.-
Haani40 (
talk)
14:37, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Souniel Yadav
Reverted good faith edits by Haani40 (talk): Nah, it was disputed long before 1962. Please see the sources in the article." and was meant to say that the dispute started before the war. It doesn't confirm that India never controlled Aksai Chin. Aksai Chin was occupied by China between 1959 and 1962; see this edit.- Haani40 ( talk) 23:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
The British left Aksai Chin area as “undefined” at the time of their transfer of power in 1947. Nehru himself once stated that "it is a matter of argument as to what art of it (Aksai Chin) belongs to us and what part of it belongs to somebody else..."" [7]
Cinderella157's mediation will be quite welcome. I don't know what to make of your source. It is written by a certain "Dr. S. K. Shah", but with no biography of the author. Vij Books is not a scholarly publisher. And I don't see any citations or evidentiary basis in the book, but I see plenty of typos.
I also see weird statements that I can't make sense of, such as, "The [Simon] Commission accordingly adopted a line roughly along the crest of the Karakoram range, excluding the Aksai Chin area
". The official Indian demarcation of the border runs along the "crest of the Karakoram range" and also includes the Aksai Chin area. The two are not mutually exclusive. It is possible that he is referring to the Laktsung range as Karakoram, which was done in a map by Trelawney Saunders in 1873. If that is what means, then his idea of "Aksai Chin" is the Aksai Chin lake basin to the east of that range. But that is not what is understood by Aksai Chin in the present day.
On the other hand, here is Hoffmann, Steven A. (2018) [1990], India and the China Crisis, University of California Press, p. 27, ISBN 978-0-520-06537-6. ( 300 citations on Google Scholar.) Talking directly about the Jammu and Kashmir territory.
Thus, on the Aksai Chin, the Indian government chose to endorse the Ardagh-Johnson line, partly because it allegedly showed where the jurisdiction of the Kashmir (Dogra) Kingdom traditionally ended. This was the Kashmir government's view, supported by the reports of W.H. Johnson and other explorers. To buttress its claim to the Aksai Chin, the independent Indian government could later produce a regular sequence of official records, stretching over many years," on "such matters as revenue assessment, police jurisdiction, public works projects, census returns, control of trade routes and survey and mapping operations".[43] It also pointed to the findings of British Indian and Kashmir government explorers, travellers, traders, and hunting parties. Such evidence came from Kashmir archives and other documentary sources available to the MEA.
The reference to "Ardagh-Johnson line" should be understood as its eastern part. In the north, the official Indian boundary runs along the Karakoram range. It doesn't go as far as the Ardagh-Johnson line. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 00:28, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Is there any reason for there being twenty common languages in the infobox? Isn't five enough? PadFoot2008 ( talk) 04:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Jammu and Kashmir (princely state) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
India,
Pakistan, and
Afghanistan, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on October 26, 2011. |
A tag has been placed on Kashmir and Jammu, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{
hangon}}
on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.
If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. gppande «talk» 16:33, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
I hadn't seen this page before. The article Kashmir is mostly about the princely state, and what details can't go in there belong to History of Jammu and Kashmir (that was the decision made in the Kashmir article when the name was changed from Kashmir region to Kashmir). There is no reason for a separate article. It will simply create more confusion. Also, the Imperial Gazetteer of India content here is not even minimally paraphrased. Notice, in the Kashmir article it is in quotes. At best this page can be a dab page, but even that is recipe for confusion: imagine a new reader contemplating: Kashmir, History of Jammu and Kashmir, Princely State of Kashmir and Jammu (which, by the way, was also called the Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir; in fact the instrument of accession to India by Hari Singh was signed by him with that title.), and Jammu and Kashmir, not to mention Azad Kashmir and lord knows what else. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 14:11, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
(unindent) But the Kashmir article is about the region as it existed until 1947. That was the decision made when the name of the page was changed from Kashmir region to Kashmir and follows the precedent in Britannica. There is very little difference between Kashmir, History of Kashmir and Kashmir and Jammu (princely state). Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
(unindent) Thanks, Pahari Sahib. In light of UMZ's comments above, I am willing to give this new name a try and see how things proceed with the different Kashmir or Kashmir-related pages. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
I am bringing to your attention some pages related to the princely state that have been the focus of irredentist edits, especially by one editor, user:Hindutashravi. The pages are Hindutash, Sumgal, and Aksai Chin. See in particular, Talk:Aksai Chin for my perspective on these edits. In addition one image file, File:Hindutash_in_Kashmir.jpg, which Hindutashravi ( talk · contribs) claims belongs to the Simla Convention of 1913, but which seems completely bogus, needs to be deleted ASAP. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I have taken the first sentence in the history section from this article. Would an editor from here please check and, if correct, revert this edit by the IP, please? TerriersFan ( talk) 22:32, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:56, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
There have been no responses to my statement above that the princely state was called "Jammu and Kashmir", not "Kashmir and Jammu". Accordingly, I propose to change the page name to "Jammu and Kashmir (princely state)". Are there any objections? Kautilya3 ( talk) 21:34, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Jammu and Kashmir (princely state). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The infobox was recently changed from {{ Infobox former subdivision}} to {{ Infobox former country}} without explanation by @ VSK1008:. Given that princely states were part of the British Raj, it would seem the former subdivision infobox should be used. But it could be that the princely states could be considered former countries (not counting the brief period of technical independence of J&K during the 1947 transition to the Indian Union). So - which infobox is better for princely states? Dl2000 ( talk) 02:49, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Government of India conceded the desires of the state's people and the monarchy was abolished
This contentious new WP:OR added yesterday is not supported in the Gupta citation haphazardly added to it after I removed it for being unaccompanied by the required citations. I will ignore the edit summary because of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and keep the dispute to this talkpage.
A consultation with the Gupta book cited shows no support for Kautilya3's unnecessary credits for the Indian Government role.
Without consulting New Delhi, Abdullah, as Chairman of the said Committee, addressed the Constituent Assembly on 10 June and stated that the Committee considered the institution of monarchy "a relic of the feudal system" and therefore recommended replacement of it by an elected Head. The Constituent Assembly approved the report and ordered the Drafting Committee to submit proposals for its approval within a month. Earlier, the Constituent Assembly of Kashmir adopted, without any reference to India, a new Kashmir State Flag in the form of a white plough on a red background, with three white vertical stripes running parallel to the staff, thus replacing the old State flag. The reaction in India was quite sharp. Prime Minister Nehru deplored the tone of Abdullah's Ranbhirsinghpura speech but he had no doubt that the Praja Parishad's agitation had a big hand in this retrogade development of Kashmir's politics. Officially, a deputation of the Kashmiri leaders was summoned in Delhi on 12 June which then held a series of discussions with the Government of India in order to resolve the constitutional deadlock...The combined efforts bore results in the form of an agreement reached between the leaders of Kashmir and the Government of India...The Government of Kashmir lost no time in implementing those provisions of the agreement to which they cheerfully subscribed. On 21 August 1952, the Constituent Assembly of Kashmir unanimously adopted a resolution abolishing the monarchy and accepting the principle of an elected Head of State for a five year term.
[1]
Kautilya3's text which attributes the abolition of monarchy by the Indian Government to "conceding" the desires of people in the state has no basis in the sources. This contravenes WP:V and more seriously might even be a case of WP:FAKE. And I also say that we refer to the reliable source I attached which like Gupta tell us that Abdullah and the Kashmiri state government (not the Indian Government) abolished the monarchy.
Abdullah also eliminated the hereditary monarchy, which had in any event become inconsequential after October 1947. By 1952 the Dogra monarchy was formally abolished, IJK proclaimed a "republic," and the last king's son, the erstwhile heir-apparent Karan Singh, relegated to a largely ceremonial position styled Sadr-e- Riyasat (Head of State)..
[2]
Of course the fact that the monarchy itself was inconsequential even before it was officially abolished raises questions about WP:DUE for this edit too. JosephusOfJerusalem ( talk) 14:14, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
References
Recently this page was moved to the title Kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir, which I have reverted since the renaming was undiscussed, potentially controversial, and (at a quick glance) the new name didn't match the content of the article. However I have no firm opinion about the right name yet, and only suggest that anyone interested in renaming the article should start a formal discussion about it so that evidence/sources can be properly considered and consensus reached. (Pinging @ Arimaboss: who had originally moved the page). Abecedare ( talk) 16:08, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot ( talk) 16:52, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Under the subheading 'End of Princely State', the article says that the Princely State passed into India's control after the signing of the Instrument of Accession, but immediately after that, it says that a part of it(Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan)came under Pakistan's control, with no explanation whatsoever of how Pakistan seized control of the regions. Hence, it is quite misleading. If anyone knows of the explanation, please edit the page. Royal trumpet ( talk) 11:28, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
This flag and emblem is officially abandoned after removing article 370. Ck3141 ( talk) 14:50, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Maharajah of Kashmir and Jammu. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 2#Maharajah of Kashmir and Jammu until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 (he) talk contribs subpages 14:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Maharajah of Kashmir. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 2#Maharajah of Kashmir until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 (he) talk contribs subpages 14:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
We need to use the official UN maps for Kashmir which are here: https://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/kashmir.pdf https://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/SouthAsia.pdf https://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/world.pdf UNMOGIP map for Kashmir is here https://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/dpko/UNMOGIP.pdf
This name didn't stick. Google ngram viewer. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 22:55, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Flag of Jammu and Kashmir (1936-1953).svg | Flag of the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir (1846-1936).svg |
---|---|
There seems to be a disagreement about which flag should appear in the infobox. For the last few years, the infobox displayed . But a new editor changed it to , which somebody else reverted.
@ Awais Ali pahadi: would you like to comment?-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:04, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
The real flag of Jammu Kashmir princely state is that who i set on infobox you can also see it on Jammu Kashmir coat Awais Ali pahadi ( talk) 09:05, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
While reading on Jammu and Kashmir I found a source by G. W. Hayward that says that quote: "The Maharajah of Kashmir, it is believed, considered his territory to extend up to the Kilian [Kunlun] range, north of Shadula [Shahidulla]." (which makes sense since the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir built the fort to extend his territory northward.). However, the map on this page shows the claim not reaching Shahidulla, which lead me to question the source of that border. BonkeySmoke ( talk) 18:55, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
I have added a Aksai Chin in the "today part of" in the article and we are having a rebuttal about this by Capitals00. I have added Aksai chin as it considered to be a part of princely state. Although it was undemarcated, Government of China in its map untill 1933 shown as the border between British India and Tibet which is also mentioned in the Aksai Chin page with ref and Official maps published by Government of China. Curious man123 ( talk) 05:42, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Indian troops took two-thirds of the territory, and Pakistan seized the northern remainder. China occupied eastern parts of the state in the 1950s.
Curious man123 (
talk)
19:07, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
The 1946 unofficial maps of India (this one by National Geographic) did show both Aksai Chin and Trans-Karakoram Tract as part of Jammu and Kashmir. It is not hugely important, but we should be consistent with other pages. So they should be included. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 16:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Kautilya3 or anyone else, I tried to fix the url for one of my citations (see
this) but could not do so correctly. Please correct it.-
Haani40 (
talk)
14:37, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Souniel Yadav
Reverted good faith edits by Haani40 (talk): Nah, it was disputed long before 1962. Please see the sources in the article." and was meant to say that the dispute started before the war. It doesn't confirm that India never controlled Aksai Chin. Aksai Chin was occupied by China between 1959 and 1962; see this edit.- Haani40 ( talk) 23:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
The British left Aksai Chin area as “undefined” at the time of their transfer of power in 1947. Nehru himself once stated that "it is a matter of argument as to what art of it (Aksai Chin) belongs to us and what part of it belongs to somebody else..."" [7]
Cinderella157's mediation will be quite welcome. I don't know what to make of your source. It is written by a certain "Dr. S. K. Shah", but with no biography of the author. Vij Books is not a scholarly publisher. And I don't see any citations or evidentiary basis in the book, but I see plenty of typos.
I also see weird statements that I can't make sense of, such as, "The [Simon] Commission accordingly adopted a line roughly along the crest of the Karakoram range, excluding the Aksai Chin area
". The official Indian demarcation of the border runs along the "crest of the Karakoram range" and also includes the Aksai Chin area. The two are not mutually exclusive. It is possible that he is referring to the Laktsung range as Karakoram, which was done in a map by Trelawney Saunders in 1873. If that is what means, then his idea of "Aksai Chin" is the Aksai Chin lake basin to the east of that range. But that is not what is understood by Aksai Chin in the present day.
On the other hand, here is Hoffmann, Steven A. (2018) [1990], India and the China Crisis, University of California Press, p. 27, ISBN 978-0-520-06537-6. ( 300 citations on Google Scholar.) Talking directly about the Jammu and Kashmir territory.
Thus, on the Aksai Chin, the Indian government chose to endorse the Ardagh-Johnson line, partly because it allegedly showed where the jurisdiction of the Kashmir (Dogra) Kingdom traditionally ended. This was the Kashmir government's view, supported by the reports of W.H. Johnson and other explorers. To buttress its claim to the Aksai Chin, the independent Indian government could later produce a regular sequence of official records, stretching over many years," on "such matters as revenue assessment, police jurisdiction, public works projects, census returns, control of trade routes and survey and mapping operations".[43] It also pointed to the findings of British Indian and Kashmir government explorers, travellers, traders, and hunting parties. Such evidence came from Kashmir archives and other documentary sources available to the MEA.
The reference to "Ardagh-Johnson line" should be understood as its eastern part. In the north, the official Indian boundary runs along the Karakoram range. It doesn't go as far as the Ardagh-Johnson line. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 00:28, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Is there any reason for there being twenty common languages in the infobox? Isn't five enough? PadFoot2008 ( talk) 04:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC)