![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | → | Archive 20 |
User:RegentsPark and User:El C, as you may be aware there have been excessive WP:FILIBUSTERing on Talk:Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019. I understand that this is a controversial article under AC DS and we all need to discuss disputes, but we have continuous display of "Not hearing" and Walls of text on the talk page there (also in the archives), and it is becoming a big time sink, when the editors could have been utilizing their precious volunteer time in actually editing the article. Any suggestions ? -- DBig Xrayᗙ 11:31, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Kmoksha, I looked into this first edit about which you have complained several times. The
you made on Christmas Day replaced the existing sources with egazette (the text of the Act) for the lead sentence and somewhere down the line the government FAQ. Both of these are
WP:PRIMARY sources, which should be used with much caution, if at all, and certainly not for the lead sentence. You also removed existing content about the relation to the NRC, using your own arguments as to what the page should cover.
DBigXray's revert, done within minutes, said "Pov edits with poor sourcing, discuss on the talk page please
". The "POV" refers to the fact that you were pushing the Government viewpoint. "Poor sourcing" refers to the fact that you were using PRIMARY sources. And he invited you to discuss it on the talk page.
The warning message you received is the standard template message for WP:NOR. There is no separate template message for using PRIMARY sources. However, if you had clicked on the link given, and read through at least one section of it, you would have known that the issue was PRIMARY sources. They do not fit into the five categories of sources listed as being acceptable "reliable sources". DBigXray's "original research" complaint also possibly refers to your arguments in your summary:
3. NRC is not part of CAA and its rules and procedures are yet to be decided and so NRC should not be discussed in this wiki article. 4. Bill does not exclude anyone, it does not include people other than those who meet certain criteria.
If you want to raise points like that, you need to do so on the talk page and obtain CONSENSUS, not in an edit summary where nobody can respond to you.
You
removed the warning message within 20 minutes. It is not clear whether you had read the policy page by then. Your next action
a few hours later, was to write on DBigXray's talk page, saying "You have not pointed even a few sources which were not according to Wikipedia policy
". You also seemed to be accusing him of bad faith and possible conflict of interest, neither of which was warranted. "Discuss on the talk page please" is a perfectly polite and welcoming conduct on the part of DBigXray. His
response was also equally polite.
The normal course of action we expect of experienced editors at this stage, both as a response to "discuss on the talk page please" and reference to WP:BRD, is to post a message on the article talk page, asking for why your edit was reverted. The subsequent discussion on your talk page, in the presence of two admins, is certainly not edifying.
Your eventual post on the article talk page is perfectly ok. It is the right thing to do. But, after having made the post, I think you didn't carefully listen to the objections that were raised, and find other solutions. For example you could have dug up the "IE Explained NRC+CAA" article, which does cover the Government FAQ in the context of its own discussion, and proposed content based upon it. You are yet to do that. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 14:20, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
"Before reverting, first consider whether the original text could have been better improved in a different way or if part of the edit can be fixed to preserve some of the edit,..."
Hi, is this source reliable. It was used by the sock master here. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 08:33, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for the intro before for my edits in Mian family. Appreciate it. However, I need your help. My edit here has been reverted for the fact that that article is “high-level”. But, my thought is, I am trying to improve a section of a high level article. It was nothing but good information I used from INC article. INC as you know, is the most premiere organization of the Indian independence, however, it only got a footnote, so I added much needed material. Can you double-check for mistakes and put it back, if possible? ( 2600:1001:B020:408:6566:F30A:A8C2:BDFE ( talk) 15:58, 1 February 2020 (UTC))
Please remove the term lieutenant governor's rule because it is no where described by the government of India so please remove it.Some citations are also given which tell central rule to remain in union territory through Lieutenant Governor not that term .So please do something with it. Arjunuws ( talk) 13:30, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
I am talking about the page president's rule and List of chief ministers of Jammu and Kashmir. Arjunuws ( talk) 10:13, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Sir Arjunuws ( talk) 04:28, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Ring a Ring-of Roses
the Door to Secularism Closes
Hush-a-Hush
We all fall sown
[1]
The CAA certainly fulfils a longstanding demand of Hindu Bangladeshi immigrants in West Bengal-mostly from the Matua community who entered India after 1971. As per the 2011 Census, Matuas comprise 17 per cent of the state's population of 100 million. They are a force to reckon with in as many as 70 assembly constituencies, out of the total 294 in Bengal. They have voting rights, but are yet to get citizenship certificates. With CAA, the BJP seeks to consolidate the support of Matuas, who helped the party secure 9-10 seats in the general election in May 2019. [2]
-- Kautilya3 ( talk) 23:22, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Shah made sure to communicate exactly this order of events at his April 22 rally in the state. “Mamata Banerjee is lying that all refugees will have to leave as a result of the NRC,” he said. “First we will bring in the Citizenship Amendment Bill, which will give citizenship to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist and Christian refugees. Then we will flush out infiltrators.” [3]
In the 1990s, communalising the migrant became one of the electoral strategies of the BJP and its allies... And such actions were not confined to the BJP. ... The implementation of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2003, marked the return of the debate on refugee versus infiltrator (saranarthi banam onuprobeshkari) by freezing the category of ‘illegal migrant’. In West Bengal, the binary gained considerable attention; it translated into a poll agenda for mobilising electoral support in the border districts. During the campaign for the 2014 Lok Sabha election at Krishnanagar town in the border district of Nadia, which is predominantly populated by Namasudras and Muslims, Narendra Modi asserted: ‘There are two types of people who have come in—infiltrators and refugees. Those who are refugees are our family’.[54]... However, despite the rhetoric of claiming Namasudras as part of the larger Hindu family, my research reveals that neither trust nor civility has been extended to Namasudras post-Partition, as they continue to live under a perpetual threat of disenfranchisement and have to struggle to achieve substantive citizenship. [5]
References
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lipulekh Pass, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Burang ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 12:08, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
I have made a DRR here and I hope you respond there. Thanks!— Spasiba5 ( talk) 14:26, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Can you confirm if Sharjeel Imam is 'notable' enough for a Wikipedia page? You have also reverted my edits to Sonia Gandhi's page. Perhaps we'll discuss that on that talk page. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sachi bbsr ( talk • contribs)
Notoriety is also a variety of notability, isn't it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sachi bbsr ( talk • contribs) 07:05, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
this tweet says that CAA has open the flood gates of creativity on social media.-- DBig Xrayᗙ 18:51, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
{{The Citizenship Amendment Act protests, also known as the CAA and NRC protests, the Citizenship Bill and National Register of Citizens protests, or the CAB and NRC protests, are a series of ongoing ...
Injuries: 175 (reported as of 16 December) Death(s): 27(including 3 minors) Arrested: 3000+ (reported as of 17 December) Date: 4 December 2019 – present Location: India Gurpreet Singh khalsa67 ( talk) 11:37, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
Mr. Kautilya3 The caste content will take us before british raj era its not about scientific article to update with current reference its about culture and origin of caste so it is historical so old approved government documents will be useful for this article andcalso if we want to update new reference then we cant write about old historical articles. I used a reference Madras district gazeeters in Balija which is approved and used by Government its not a fake or unknown writer's book till now "Madras district gazeeters" is preserved by Government. Thank You Sathyanarayana naidu ( talk) 03:11, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Cluebat needed on Balija.
Andy Dingley (
talk) 12:54, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Dear Kautilya,
You may be an experienced Wikepedia contributor. I appreciate you for the same. But you have been removing sections that I have added at Uniform Civil Code page with proper references. This is uncalled for from an experienced person like you. You can instead say why the references quoted are not acceptable. Instead you chose to remove them with arbitrary reasons. Kindly let me know why you removed the same. Don't you understand Hindi ?
Sriramadas.mahalingam ( talk) 11:13, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Golwalkar and Malkani are not reliable sources. You have been referred to the policy on reliable sources repeatedly. You need to drop it now. - Kautilya3 ( talk) 12:04, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
What as Leader of RSS, Shri Golwalkar said is relevant to the topic Uniform Civil Code and Hindu Code Bills. Hope you get the point.
Sriramadas.mahalingam ( talk) 13:58, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Bishonen:, can you help? This user is badgering, while making no effort to understand policy.— Kautilya3 ( talk) 14:29, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Sathyanarayana naidu (
talk) 10:31, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Kaudilya3 why you removed my articl in Golla (caste) page Sathyanarayana naidu ( talk) 10:56, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Kautilya3 brother i want to say Sorry, Sorry, Sorry for my behaviour in past which may hurt you. Please forgive me Please and also iam new user of wikipedia so i know only little about wiki but you are much more senior than me please Guide me like this in future too. I want you to be my master in wikipedia. can you guide me master. Please accept my sorry request and forgive me master. Please , please, please, please Sathyanarayana naidu ( talk) 15:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Had you guys followed
The five pillars of Wikipedia Contributing to Wikipedia How to edit a page Editing tutorial Picture tutorial How to write a great article Naming conventions Simplified Manual of Style
Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites. Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies. Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources. No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts. If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so. Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing. Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.
No need of guys like me to come here, thanks again. 2405:204:3323:9B54:C52E:6E2D:E178:BB9 ( talk) 11:31, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
HI, can you take a look at this section recently created by an IP hopper from Netherlands. I took care of some blatant WP:OR, but a lot of the refs themselves look unreliable. IP seems to be pushing some sort of racialism based agenda. I wonder whether the section should be there at all. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 18:06, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Junaid Azim Mattu is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Junaid Azim Mattu until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. S. M. Nazmus Shakib ( talk) 15:12, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
look at the recent history of Gawkadal massacre. unknown editors are changing the lead with all sorts of outlandish changes. I dont want to revert any change myself in case it causes an edit war or something. You seem to have a better handle of things here, can i suggest the page be reverted to the status quo and placed under protected status ? Mhveinvp ( talk) 18:10, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
The matter I had put up at, "Religious conversions in Pakistan" was removed because I had copied it from the, " Forced conversion to Islam in Pakistan" article. I have now created a new draft here: Draft:Religious conversions in Pakistan . Please improve the draft and move it to where it belongs (so as to re-create the article). Thanks!— Spasiba5 ( talk) 15:20, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
In the Uniform Civil Code page, just like Tufail Ahamed a noted journalist, another journalist Madhu Kiswar had expressed her opinions on the topic. That portion represents alternate important view points on the topic. She is also a women. The source cited was from a noted magazine Swarajya, where she writes. Could you explain your problem with that source. Rajarajan2020 ( talk) 20:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
The name of the section on Wikipedia is: Mathematics in medieval Islam It is written here "Mathematics in medieval Arabia"? It doesn't matter how many Arabophile illiterate writters want to make everything Arabic. It must be very unwise to think that since non-Arab scholars (such as Berbers and Persians) wrote in Arabic, we should call all the achievements of the golden age of Islam Arabic. RedEye98 ( talk) 11:16, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
If you think so, go in the Arabian horse page, write Arabic Zoology! What you are talking about is a fallacy. They call it Arabic because it was used in the Arab Caliphate. In fact, Persian Khwarizmi made it from Indian numbers. You know that RedEye98 ( talk) 20:18, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Dear Kautilya3, Thanks for your guidance Knowiunderstandit ( talk) 18:19, 20 February 2020 (UTC). but i need guidance regarding what to do if i need to add content in a topic in semi protected pages.
Hello user, thank you for your contributions on Wikipedia it would be better if you take time out to refer to those neutrality articles of Wikipedia than suggesting them to others while taking sides yourself. You mentioned "BJP bagged 40 percent of the vote by raising allegations of 'Muslim appeasement' against Mamata Banerjee." without any references and it does belongs to something which is related to Lok Sabha elections. So few other things can also be mentioned which are important in the run up to Assembly elections. And the most important thing is I have provided references to everything I wrote and none of it were my own words, all of it were taken from those news articles.
You also wrote "Soon afterwards, the party passed the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA), promising citizenship to Hindu immigrants from Bangladesh and hoping to win the election by garnering their vote" which also had no reference.
Soon after forming government, Central government not only passed CAA but abrogated article 370, 35(a), triple talaq so these things are also required to be mentioned. And by the way CAA not only provides citizenship to only Hindus but also Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists and Parsis who are religiously persecuted not only from Bangladesh but also Pakistan and Afghanistan.
With best regards.
SamanyaGyan ( talk) 15:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm open to suggestions if you have one. Thank you!" Did you really mean that? Then how do you explain the fact that you have completely ignored a clearly written edit summary with a policy link, as well as the suggestion I made on your talk page? Let us talk about those first. If there is need, we can get to your issues later. Do you have any idea what WP:UNDUE means? If so, please explain it. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 17:08, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I just wanted to drop in and see if you remember me :) I believe it's been years since we last interacted. I hope all is well with you x
Tiger7253 ( talk) 14:26, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Dear Kautilya,
I am sorry for copy paste of message but Inside Pakistan Administrated Kashmir few family have surname "Sardar". Sardar Muhammad Ibrahim Khan was a very famous person of 1950s, United Nations invited him to New York during Kashmir Crises to brief about possible solutions. We have thousand of Articles related to his name "Sardar Muhammad Ibrahim Khan". Even his invitation of UN was "Sardar Muhammad Ibrahim Khan". He was a Professional Lawyer and practicing in Poonch, Mirpur and Srinagar. He was Popular of his case on Poonch Court for Double tax and he was only person from Tehsil of Poonch who got 1st Position among other candidates of Poonch. Maharaja Hari Singh support him for his studies. Even in Indian Documentaries he is considered as a Barrister. There are a lot of information available related to this person. So, it is my appeal please at least we should have correct title of a person. Thanks
Knowiunderstandit (
talk) 16:35, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
A video of library -- DBig Xrayᗙ 10:06, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
The 'stone' story was propagated by:
and others I don't need to mention. [1]
References
here, I cracked up. User:DiplomatTesterMan-- ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 09:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Fogstar, on Hindustani language, you reverted my edits, I put Urdu to the top, because untill the end of 18th century or 1857, the language may not call Urdu, but it was written in Urdu alphabets, and call the language of Muslims (from British Raj), but I want to add that, now it is a Hindi dialect, indeed it was a language of Muslims. —Preceding undated comment added 08:58, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
IS very helpful. Recommended. ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 10:57, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
The editor wants Hindus to fight the war -- ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 12:35, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Taseer :D DTM, Dey ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 14:14, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Saffron terror; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Pectore talk 00:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible
conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. —
Sanskari
Hangout 09:20, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Kho article's "History" section has been changed today by some new user. Skimming through the 'updated' section, it seems that some of the sources are not that reliable, not to mention the usage of news sources (I came across one). Would you check it, in your time? Regards. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 18:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
This riot is purely organized by people with anti-india mind set. Many hindus and muslims has been killed. Stopping labelling this as Islamophobia. Thats totally absurd. Write an article only if you know the truth. Half baked knowledge, one-sided articles cannot make the truth from showing itself. For this article i could also call Hinduphobia, will you accept?!!. "Truth alone triumphs". Sri Dhanalakshmi ( talk) 12:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
by Jharkhand CM is pretty badass. -- ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 08:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Kautilya. I've asked you a rather urgent question in response to your e-mail. I hope you'll be able to reply soon. Bishonen | tålk 18:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC).
Please check the recent edits at the caa protest article 1 and 2. Lot of materials are being removed, in the name of sock puppet who was blocked months ago I think. But do you think this users are itself a case of sock puppetry ?? Dey subrata ( talk) 06:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=User:Mhveinvp/sandbox i wrote the page on my sandbox and i need your help. Should i go ahead with creating a new page for this as there is a similar page for blocked websites in china. I could just create this and would see later but i am just asking for your opinion here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhveinvp ( talk • contribs) 10:00, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply. /info/en/?search=Websites_blocked_in_mainland_China i am referring to this page. there is an entire table of the websites. Because the situation has NOT eased up entirely and the government still hasnt fully lifted the ban, i am hoping in coming days as things progress, we would see changes to the list and that could be done. Mhveinvp ( talk) 15:42, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
DTM, Dey subrata be safe. ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 14:00, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Interesting article, that I found today. This Opinion piece covers most of the points. Do take a look at it ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 21:10, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
---> Consolidating the contents from another section with the same heading ------- Hi User:Kautilya3, I hope you're doing well. I noticed that you changed the spelling of the Hindi-Urdu word for traitor (it may have been an accidental click on your end). This is the entry from a Hindi dictionary and this is the entry from an Urdu dictionary (you can click on the first audio sample in the Hindi dictionary to hear how it is pronounced). The word is romanized as Ghaddār from ग़द्दार / غدار. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam Talk 19:13, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Takbir source given please see. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:7065:6C8D:AD1B:E694 ( talk) 14:07, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
I find it impossible to correct the narrative especially when someone has a full-time job and other commitments. You suggesting some contents for your review as I have seen mostly one-sided stories so far on wiki pages
Rkb76in ( talk) 16:53, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
References
Diff of revert at Conversion of non-Islamic places of worship into mosques]
I have posted the citation while doing the changes let me share them again 1) https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/ap-art-history/west-and-central-asia/a/the-kaaba ( from an islamic origin) 2) https://www.al-islam.org/story-of-the-holy-kaaba-and-its-people-shabbar/kaaba-house-allah ( from non islamic origin)
Regarding the Ram Janm Bhoomi I have posted the reference and report of ASI which was cited by the hindu news paper Which clearly state that no temple was demolished to built the mosque also a structure do exist but it is not temple. for further clarity please read the verdict of Supreme court of india https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/The-ASI-Report-a-review/article16052925.ece — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedfalah7711 ( talk • contribs) 10:32, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello Regentspark, Coming to kaaba first well both domains are of very high authority khanacademy is being sited by many big publishing sources like newsweek and here is the britanica source which clarifies it further more.
Now coming to ramjanmbhoomi ram lala land dispute feel free to read it out here is the hd (check on page 530) "One of the objections before the High Court was that the ASI report did not specifically answer whether there was any pre-existing structure which was demolished for the construction of a mosque and whether the pre-existing structure was a temple." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedfalah7711 ( talk • contribs) 15:10, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Your mention of Haider over at JKPSA got me thinking. The Haider monologue (Hum hain ya hum nahin?/Are we or are we not?/ To be or not to be) could have it's own article! That would be a splendid! Here's a citational start -
An official statement later said all the central laws, applicable to the whole of India except the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir before October 31, 2019, are now applicable to Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir from October 31, 2019.( HT)
The question is why draconian laws enacted by the erstwhile state assembly such as the Public Safety Act (PSA) are still operative... To rebuild the trust deficit and to win over the confidence of the Kashmiris, the government must immediately repeal the PSA – which should have become ultra vires, in the first place ( ORF 28 Jan 2020)
Are you sure it is the Asia-Pacific edition of WaPo? As far as I'm aware, it doesn't have any, unlike Time or Newsweek. Is it the Asia-Pacific section of the newspaper? Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
You are most welcome.
Fylindfotberserk (
talk) 17:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
It is really a big mystery why people forget these things:
Boya ped babul ka amua kahan se paye? A thought taking birth in brain of a person is just like a child taking birth from womb. Yatha Drishti, tatha Srishti!
Gupt daan is shresth daan
The Vedas says "Satha hastha samahara sahasra hastha samkira" which means earn as if you have hundred hands but donate as if you have thousand hands.
"Bhagwaan ke yanha der hai andher nahi" - Copyright is poison of mankind and open source is boon for mankind. It may seem for a while that devils are powerful but the eternal truth is angels only start working when the time ticks and duty force them to act.
What did Ravana do in his last moments? Hiding truth for Dharma is totally valid but hiding truth for Adharma is totally invalid. A building constructed on base of falsehood can never last long.
Your username and userpage inspires many people so thought to keep this on your talk page.
Satyameva Jayate | Micchami Dukkadam | Bhul Chuk Maaf
-- Sooryavanshi ( talk) 04:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Kautilya3, I believe I missed signing my edit. I can add my signature as you suggested. But according to Wikipedia guidelines, the cited reference to the edit I had proposed is a tweet from the verified account of the co-founder of the news outlet. I request you to suggest me a proper way to get the revert that you made to be restored back. Thank you. Vishal Telangre ( talk) 15:24, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
There is lot of discussion about the destruction of the temple. But, the motives for the same havent been discussed in the article. As far as my edit the word manycould have been inappropriate, Instead if I use: The purpose of the raid were Political, Economic in nature and Undoubtedly Iconoclasm was also one of the reason. or can I quote the auther of the book verbattim? Santoshdts ( talk) 08:30, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
References
With all due respect, what the heck are you on about here? That's what the source says. You know as well as I do that original research in this topic is grounds for a topic ban, so please don't throw that accusation around lightly. Vanamonde ( Talk) 16:57, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
this claim, without the associated context, is egregiously misleading". What makes you think the second source provides the context for the first? That is in fact wrong, let alone SYNTHESIS. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 17:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Request you to help me out in developing a page I created 2020 Tablighi Jamaat Congregation Crisis. It would be very helpful if you would add on to this page. Thank you. Karnatakapolatics ( talk) 05:26, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 Tablighi Jamaat coronavirus hotspot in Delhi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 Tablighi Jamaat coronavirus hotspot in Delhi until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Shanze1 ( talk) 07:27, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Stop your disruptive editing Wikipedia is not the place to edit the article with your own opinions. It is unlawful to blame the supreme authority of India prime minister Narendra Modi. Write ur opinions in your diary Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah ( talk) 13:50, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Not on Wikipedia Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah ( talk) 13:51, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Here article supports by references work Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah ( talk) 13:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Not your Original research Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah ( talk) 13:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Next time Be aware Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah ( talk) 13:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Regarding revert of my edit on ABVP edits. Dear author you seems to be biased and more interested in putting you own opinions about any such group,incident,place or person. It is okay to have your own opinions but since you are on a page like Wikipedia you have to follow NPOV (neutral point of view). You gave no reason why and how my edit violates any of Wikipedia Terms. Please give valid reason how my edits were against any condition? Until you don't provide a valid reason to revert my edit , You will be called ideologically biased and may i report this to authority. You should be neutral why being on sites like wikipedia. I saw your many or all edits are specifically biased toward a specific Religious-Political part of India. Some of your Edits Violates wikipedia's terms and condition. And some of your article are reverted. I want you to be as neutral as you can restore my edits to maintain neutrality of article on ABVP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nilabh Shivam 333 ( talk • contribs) 14:17, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
the onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is upon those seeking to include disputed content.El_C 14:29, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Can you explain this message? And how you think it only applies to me and but not you? And if you admit that it applies to you please explain what you have done differently than me? VR talk 16:08, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Kautilya3, you reverted some of my recent edits to the 2020 coronavirus lockdown in India article citing WP:NOTNEWS. While some of my reverted edits in the page seemed like news but this article says hundreds of people gathered together and it seemed notable to me. Or is it because i included more intricate details about the incident in the "Effectiveness" section? Please forgive my ignorance here as i'm still in the learning stage. SUN EYE 1 16:57, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
For talk page stalkers, here is a radical thought. It is becoming clear that recovery from COVID for under-65s can be essentially taken for granted (unless they have other risk factors), whereas for over-65s it can be deadly. So the thing to do seems to be isolate the over-65s from under-65s. The under-65s need to mingle so that they develop herd immunity and become able to break the chains of transmission, while the over-65s need to stay away from them until a vaccine becomes available. Viewed from this angle, the lockdowns in Italy and India seem to be headed in the wrong direction. When the lockdowns are lifted, the same situation will recur. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 11:14, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Sad to see people being ostracised for exposure to COVID. [8] Even worse to see COVID being regarded as a 'dirty' disease. [9]
The fact is that COVID is a form of cold/flu with an added complication of attack on the respiratory system. The mortality rate is somewhere between 0.5–1.0%, but it is a lot higher for the people around 65 year old or higher. While we don't have detailed statistics, I would venture to say that the mortality rate might be something like 10% for people over 65, and something like 0.01% 0.1% for people under 65. Plenty of younger people that get COVID don't even know that they got it. Here is a very informative tutorial:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOJqHPfG7pA
If you get COVID and recover (with or without knowing), you can be proud of it. You will be part of the the valuable 'COVID fighting force' that will block the chains of transmission. Next time you get the virus, you will kill it without passing it on. Be proud. Be proud. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 12:07, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
A sobering read here. Has great links to other information too:
-- Kautilya3 ( talk) 10:15, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
Pyrrhic victory is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat. Someone who wins a Pyrrhic victory has also taken a heavy toll that negates any true sense of achievement or damages long-term progress.
Can't figure out what this is about
|
---|
|
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | → | Archive 20 |
User:RegentsPark and User:El C, as you may be aware there have been excessive WP:FILIBUSTERing on Talk:Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019. I understand that this is a controversial article under AC DS and we all need to discuss disputes, but we have continuous display of "Not hearing" and Walls of text on the talk page there (also in the archives), and it is becoming a big time sink, when the editors could have been utilizing their precious volunteer time in actually editing the article. Any suggestions ? -- DBig Xrayᗙ 11:31, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Kmoksha, I looked into this first edit about which you have complained several times. The
you made on Christmas Day replaced the existing sources with egazette (the text of the Act) for the lead sentence and somewhere down the line the government FAQ. Both of these are
WP:PRIMARY sources, which should be used with much caution, if at all, and certainly not for the lead sentence. You also removed existing content about the relation to the NRC, using your own arguments as to what the page should cover.
DBigXray's revert, done within minutes, said "Pov edits with poor sourcing, discuss on the talk page please
". The "POV" refers to the fact that you were pushing the Government viewpoint. "Poor sourcing" refers to the fact that you were using PRIMARY sources. And he invited you to discuss it on the talk page.
The warning message you received is the standard template message for WP:NOR. There is no separate template message for using PRIMARY sources. However, if you had clicked on the link given, and read through at least one section of it, you would have known that the issue was PRIMARY sources. They do not fit into the five categories of sources listed as being acceptable "reliable sources". DBigXray's "original research" complaint also possibly refers to your arguments in your summary:
3. NRC is not part of CAA and its rules and procedures are yet to be decided and so NRC should not be discussed in this wiki article. 4. Bill does not exclude anyone, it does not include people other than those who meet certain criteria.
If you want to raise points like that, you need to do so on the talk page and obtain CONSENSUS, not in an edit summary where nobody can respond to you.
You
removed the warning message within 20 minutes. It is not clear whether you had read the policy page by then. Your next action
a few hours later, was to write on DBigXray's talk page, saying "You have not pointed even a few sources which were not according to Wikipedia policy
". You also seemed to be accusing him of bad faith and possible conflict of interest, neither of which was warranted. "Discuss on the talk page please" is a perfectly polite and welcoming conduct on the part of DBigXray. His
response was also equally polite.
The normal course of action we expect of experienced editors at this stage, both as a response to "discuss on the talk page please" and reference to WP:BRD, is to post a message on the article talk page, asking for why your edit was reverted. The subsequent discussion on your talk page, in the presence of two admins, is certainly not edifying.
Your eventual post on the article talk page is perfectly ok. It is the right thing to do. But, after having made the post, I think you didn't carefully listen to the objections that were raised, and find other solutions. For example you could have dug up the "IE Explained NRC+CAA" article, which does cover the Government FAQ in the context of its own discussion, and proposed content based upon it. You are yet to do that. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 14:20, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
"Before reverting, first consider whether the original text could have been better improved in a different way or if part of the edit can be fixed to preserve some of the edit,..."
Hi, is this source reliable. It was used by the sock master here. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 08:33, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for the intro before for my edits in Mian family. Appreciate it. However, I need your help. My edit here has been reverted for the fact that that article is “high-level”. But, my thought is, I am trying to improve a section of a high level article. It was nothing but good information I used from INC article. INC as you know, is the most premiere organization of the Indian independence, however, it only got a footnote, so I added much needed material. Can you double-check for mistakes and put it back, if possible? ( 2600:1001:B020:408:6566:F30A:A8C2:BDFE ( talk) 15:58, 1 February 2020 (UTC))
Please remove the term lieutenant governor's rule because it is no where described by the government of India so please remove it.Some citations are also given which tell central rule to remain in union territory through Lieutenant Governor not that term .So please do something with it. Arjunuws ( talk) 13:30, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
I am talking about the page president's rule and List of chief ministers of Jammu and Kashmir. Arjunuws ( talk) 10:13, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Sir Arjunuws ( talk) 04:28, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Ring a Ring-of Roses
the Door to Secularism Closes
Hush-a-Hush
We all fall sown
[1]
The CAA certainly fulfils a longstanding demand of Hindu Bangladeshi immigrants in West Bengal-mostly from the Matua community who entered India after 1971. As per the 2011 Census, Matuas comprise 17 per cent of the state's population of 100 million. They are a force to reckon with in as many as 70 assembly constituencies, out of the total 294 in Bengal. They have voting rights, but are yet to get citizenship certificates. With CAA, the BJP seeks to consolidate the support of Matuas, who helped the party secure 9-10 seats in the general election in May 2019. [2]
-- Kautilya3 ( talk) 23:22, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Shah made sure to communicate exactly this order of events at his April 22 rally in the state. “Mamata Banerjee is lying that all refugees will have to leave as a result of the NRC,” he said. “First we will bring in the Citizenship Amendment Bill, which will give citizenship to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist and Christian refugees. Then we will flush out infiltrators.” [3]
In the 1990s, communalising the migrant became one of the electoral strategies of the BJP and its allies... And such actions were not confined to the BJP. ... The implementation of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2003, marked the return of the debate on refugee versus infiltrator (saranarthi banam onuprobeshkari) by freezing the category of ‘illegal migrant’. In West Bengal, the binary gained considerable attention; it translated into a poll agenda for mobilising electoral support in the border districts. During the campaign for the 2014 Lok Sabha election at Krishnanagar town in the border district of Nadia, which is predominantly populated by Namasudras and Muslims, Narendra Modi asserted: ‘There are two types of people who have come in—infiltrators and refugees. Those who are refugees are our family’.[54]... However, despite the rhetoric of claiming Namasudras as part of the larger Hindu family, my research reveals that neither trust nor civility has been extended to Namasudras post-Partition, as they continue to live under a perpetual threat of disenfranchisement and have to struggle to achieve substantive citizenship. [5]
References
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lipulekh Pass, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Burang ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 12:08, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
I have made a DRR here and I hope you respond there. Thanks!— Spasiba5 ( talk) 14:26, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Can you confirm if Sharjeel Imam is 'notable' enough for a Wikipedia page? You have also reverted my edits to Sonia Gandhi's page. Perhaps we'll discuss that on that talk page. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sachi bbsr ( talk • contribs)
Notoriety is also a variety of notability, isn't it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sachi bbsr ( talk • contribs) 07:05, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
this tweet says that CAA has open the flood gates of creativity on social media.-- DBig Xrayᗙ 18:51, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
{{The Citizenship Amendment Act protests, also known as the CAA and NRC protests, the Citizenship Bill and National Register of Citizens protests, or the CAB and NRC protests, are a series of ongoing ...
Injuries: 175 (reported as of 16 December) Death(s): 27(including 3 minors) Arrested: 3000+ (reported as of 17 December) Date: 4 December 2019 – present Location: India Gurpreet Singh khalsa67 ( talk) 11:37, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
Mr. Kautilya3 The caste content will take us before british raj era its not about scientific article to update with current reference its about culture and origin of caste so it is historical so old approved government documents will be useful for this article andcalso if we want to update new reference then we cant write about old historical articles. I used a reference Madras district gazeeters in Balija which is approved and used by Government its not a fake or unknown writer's book till now "Madras district gazeeters" is preserved by Government. Thank You Sathyanarayana naidu ( talk) 03:11, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Cluebat needed on Balija.
Andy Dingley (
talk) 12:54, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Dear Kautilya,
You may be an experienced Wikepedia contributor. I appreciate you for the same. But you have been removing sections that I have added at Uniform Civil Code page with proper references. This is uncalled for from an experienced person like you. You can instead say why the references quoted are not acceptable. Instead you chose to remove them with arbitrary reasons. Kindly let me know why you removed the same. Don't you understand Hindi ?
Sriramadas.mahalingam ( talk) 11:13, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Golwalkar and Malkani are not reliable sources. You have been referred to the policy on reliable sources repeatedly. You need to drop it now. - Kautilya3 ( talk) 12:04, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
What as Leader of RSS, Shri Golwalkar said is relevant to the topic Uniform Civil Code and Hindu Code Bills. Hope you get the point.
Sriramadas.mahalingam ( talk) 13:58, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Bishonen:, can you help? This user is badgering, while making no effort to understand policy.— Kautilya3 ( talk) 14:29, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Sathyanarayana naidu (
talk) 10:31, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Kaudilya3 why you removed my articl in Golla (caste) page Sathyanarayana naidu ( talk) 10:56, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
Kautilya3 brother i want to say Sorry, Sorry, Sorry for my behaviour in past which may hurt you. Please forgive me Please and also iam new user of wikipedia so i know only little about wiki but you are much more senior than me please Guide me like this in future too. I want you to be my master in wikipedia. can you guide me master. Please accept my sorry request and forgive me master. Please , please, please, please Sathyanarayana naidu ( talk) 15:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Had you guys followed
The five pillars of Wikipedia Contributing to Wikipedia How to edit a page Editing tutorial Picture tutorial How to write a great article Naming conventions Simplified Manual of Style
Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites. Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies. Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources. No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts. If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so. Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing. Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.
No need of guys like me to come here, thanks again. 2405:204:3323:9B54:C52E:6E2D:E178:BB9 ( talk) 11:31, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
HI, can you take a look at this section recently created by an IP hopper from Netherlands. I took care of some blatant WP:OR, but a lot of the refs themselves look unreliable. IP seems to be pushing some sort of racialism based agenda. I wonder whether the section should be there at all. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 18:06, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Junaid Azim Mattu is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Junaid Azim Mattu until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. S. M. Nazmus Shakib ( talk) 15:12, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
look at the recent history of Gawkadal massacre. unknown editors are changing the lead with all sorts of outlandish changes. I dont want to revert any change myself in case it causes an edit war or something. You seem to have a better handle of things here, can i suggest the page be reverted to the status quo and placed under protected status ? Mhveinvp ( talk) 18:10, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
The matter I had put up at, "Religious conversions in Pakistan" was removed because I had copied it from the, " Forced conversion to Islam in Pakistan" article. I have now created a new draft here: Draft:Religious conversions in Pakistan . Please improve the draft and move it to where it belongs (so as to re-create the article). Thanks!— Spasiba5 ( talk) 15:20, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
In the Uniform Civil Code page, just like Tufail Ahamed a noted journalist, another journalist Madhu Kiswar had expressed her opinions on the topic. That portion represents alternate important view points on the topic. She is also a women. The source cited was from a noted magazine Swarajya, where she writes. Could you explain your problem with that source. Rajarajan2020 ( talk) 20:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
The name of the section on Wikipedia is: Mathematics in medieval Islam It is written here "Mathematics in medieval Arabia"? It doesn't matter how many Arabophile illiterate writters want to make everything Arabic. It must be very unwise to think that since non-Arab scholars (such as Berbers and Persians) wrote in Arabic, we should call all the achievements of the golden age of Islam Arabic. RedEye98 ( talk) 11:16, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
If you think so, go in the Arabian horse page, write Arabic Zoology! What you are talking about is a fallacy. They call it Arabic because it was used in the Arab Caliphate. In fact, Persian Khwarizmi made it from Indian numbers. You know that RedEye98 ( talk) 20:18, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Dear Kautilya3, Thanks for your guidance Knowiunderstandit ( talk) 18:19, 20 February 2020 (UTC). but i need guidance regarding what to do if i need to add content in a topic in semi protected pages.
Hello user, thank you for your contributions on Wikipedia it would be better if you take time out to refer to those neutrality articles of Wikipedia than suggesting them to others while taking sides yourself. You mentioned "BJP bagged 40 percent of the vote by raising allegations of 'Muslim appeasement' against Mamata Banerjee." without any references and it does belongs to something which is related to Lok Sabha elections. So few other things can also be mentioned which are important in the run up to Assembly elections. And the most important thing is I have provided references to everything I wrote and none of it were my own words, all of it were taken from those news articles.
You also wrote "Soon afterwards, the party passed the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA), promising citizenship to Hindu immigrants from Bangladesh and hoping to win the election by garnering their vote" which also had no reference.
Soon after forming government, Central government not only passed CAA but abrogated article 370, 35(a), triple talaq so these things are also required to be mentioned. And by the way CAA not only provides citizenship to only Hindus but also Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists and Parsis who are religiously persecuted not only from Bangladesh but also Pakistan and Afghanistan.
With best regards.
SamanyaGyan ( talk) 15:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm open to suggestions if you have one. Thank you!" Did you really mean that? Then how do you explain the fact that you have completely ignored a clearly written edit summary with a policy link, as well as the suggestion I made on your talk page? Let us talk about those first. If there is need, we can get to your issues later. Do you have any idea what WP:UNDUE means? If so, please explain it. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 17:08, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I just wanted to drop in and see if you remember me :) I believe it's been years since we last interacted. I hope all is well with you x
Tiger7253 ( talk) 14:26, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Dear Kautilya,
I am sorry for copy paste of message but Inside Pakistan Administrated Kashmir few family have surname "Sardar". Sardar Muhammad Ibrahim Khan was a very famous person of 1950s, United Nations invited him to New York during Kashmir Crises to brief about possible solutions. We have thousand of Articles related to his name "Sardar Muhammad Ibrahim Khan". Even his invitation of UN was "Sardar Muhammad Ibrahim Khan". He was a Professional Lawyer and practicing in Poonch, Mirpur and Srinagar. He was Popular of his case on Poonch Court for Double tax and he was only person from Tehsil of Poonch who got 1st Position among other candidates of Poonch. Maharaja Hari Singh support him for his studies. Even in Indian Documentaries he is considered as a Barrister. There are a lot of information available related to this person. So, it is my appeal please at least we should have correct title of a person. Thanks
Knowiunderstandit (
talk) 16:35, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
A video of library -- DBig Xrayᗙ 10:06, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
The 'stone' story was propagated by:
and others I don't need to mention. [1]
References
here, I cracked up. User:DiplomatTesterMan-- ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 09:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Fogstar, on Hindustani language, you reverted my edits, I put Urdu to the top, because untill the end of 18th century or 1857, the language may not call Urdu, but it was written in Urdu alphabets, and call the language of Muslims (from British Raj), but I want to add that, now it is a Hindi dialect, indeed it was a language of Muslims. —Preceding undated comment added 08:58, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
IS very helpful. Recommended. ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 10:57, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
The editor wants Hindus to fight the war -- ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 12:35, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Taseer :D DTM, Dey ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 14:14, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Saffron terror; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Pectore talk 00:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible
conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. —
Sanskari
Hangout 09:20, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Kho article's "History" section has been changed today by some new user. Skimming through the 'updated' section, it seems that some of the sources are not that reliable, not to mention the usage of news sources (I came across one). Would you check it, in your time? Regards. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 18:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
This riot is purely organized by people with anti-india mind set. Many hindus and muslims has been killed. Stopping labelling this as Islamophobia. Thats totally absurd. Write an article only if you know the truth. Half baked knowledge, one-sided articles cannot make the truth from showing itself. For this article i could also call Hinduphobia, will you accept?!!. "Truth alone triumphs". Sri Dhanalakshmi ( talk) 12:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
by Jharkhand CM is pretty badass. -- ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 08:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Kautilya. I've asked you a rather urgent question in response to your e-mail. I hope you'll be able to reply soon. Bishonen | tålk 18:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC).
Please check the recent edits at the caa protest article 1 and 2. Lot of materials are being removed, in the name of sock puppet who was blocked months ago I think. But do you think this users are itself a case of sock puppetry ?? Dey subrata ( talk) 06:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=User:Mhveinvp/sandbox i wrote the page on my sandbox and i need your help. Should i go ahead with creating a new page for this as there is a similar page for blocked websites in china. I could just create this and would see later but i am just asking for your opinion here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhveinvp ( talk • contribs) 10:00, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply. /info/en/?search=Websites_blocked_in_mainland_China i am referring to this page. there is an entire table of the websites. Because the situation has NOT eased up entirely and the government still hasnt fully lifted the ban, i am hoping in coming days as things progress, we would see changes to the list and that could be done. Mhveinvp ( talk) 15:42, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
DTM, Dey subrata be safe. ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 14:00, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Interesting article, that I found today. This Opinion piece covers most of the points. Do take a look at it ⋙–DBig Xrayᗙ 21:10, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
---> Consolidating the contents from another section with the same heading ------- Hi User:Kautilya3, I hope you're doing well. I noticed that you changed the spelling of the Hindi-Urdu word for traitor (it may have been an accidental click on your end). This is the entry from a Hindi dictionary and this is the entry from an Urdu dictionary (you can click on the first audio sample in the Hindi dictionary to hear how it is pronounced). The word is romanized as Ghaddār from ग़द्दार / غدار. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam Talk 19:13, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Takbir source given please see. 2405:204:3318:B8D4:7065:6C8D:AD1B:E694 ( talk) 14:07, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
I find it impossible to correct the narrative especially when someone has a full-time job and other commitments. You suggesting some contents for your review as I have seen mostly one-sided stories so far on wiki pages
Rkb76in ( talk) 16:53, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
References
Diff of revert at Conversion of non-Islamic places of worship into mosques]
I have posted the citation while doing the changes let me share them again 1) https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/ap-art-history/west-and-central-asia/a/the-kaaba ( from an islamic origin) 2) https://www.al-islam.org/story-of-the-holy-kaaba-and-its-people-shabbar/kaaba-house-allah ( from non islamic origin)
Regarding the Ram Janm Bhoomi I have posted the reference and report of ASI which was cited by the hindu news paper Which clearly state that no temple was demolished to built the mosque also a structure do exist but it is not temple. for further clarity please read the verdict of Supreme court of india https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/The-ASI-Report-a-review/article16052925.ece — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedfalah7711 ( talk • contribs) 10:32, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello Regentspark, Coming to kaaba first well both domains are of very high authority khanacademy is being sited by many big publishing sources like newsweek and here is the britanica source which clarifies it further more.
Now coming to ramjanmbhoomi ram lala land dispute feel free to read it out here is the hd (check on page 530) "One of the objections before the High Court was that the ASI report did not specifically answer whether there was any pre-existing structure which was demolished for the construction of a mosque and whether the pre-existing structure was a temple." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedfalah7711 ( talk • contribs) 15:10, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Your mention of Haider over at JKPSA got me thinking. The Haider monologue (Hum hain ya hum nahin?/Are we or are we not?/ To be or not to be) could have it's own article! That would be a splendid! Here's a citational start -
An official statement later said all the central laws, applicable to the whole of India except the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir before October 31, 2019, are now applicable to Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir from October 31, 2019.( HT)
The question is why draconian laws enacted by the erstwhile state assembly such as the Public Safety Act (PSA) are still operative... To rebuild the trust deficit and to win over the confidence of the Kashmiris, the government must immediately repeal the PSA – which should have become ultra vires, in the first place ( ORF 28 Jan 2020)
Are you sure it is the Asia-Pacific edition of WaPo? As far as I'm aware, it doesn't have any, unlike Time or Newsweek. Is it the Asia-Pacific section of the newspaper? Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
You are most welcome.
Fylindfotberserk (
talk) 17:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
It is really a big mystery why people forget these things:
Boya ped babul ka amua kahan se paye? A thought taking birth in brain of a person is just like a child taking birth from womb. Yatha Drishti, tatha Srishti!
Gupt daan is shresth daan
The Vedas says "Satha hastha samahara sahasra hastha samkira" which means earn as if you have hundred hands but donate as if you have thousand hands.
"Bhagwaan ke yanha der hai andher nahi" - Copyright is poison of mankind and open source is boon for mankind. It may seem for a while that devils are powerful but the eternal truth is angels only start working when the time ticks and duty force them to act.
What did Ravana do in his last moments? Hiding truth for Dharma is totally valid but hiding truth for Adharma is totally invalid. A building constructed on base of falsehood can never last long.
Your username and userpage inspires many people so thought to keep this on your talk page.
Satyameva Jayate | Micchami Dukkadam | Bhul Chuk Maaf
-- Sooryavanshi ( talk) 04:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi Kautilya3, I believe I missed signing my edit. I can add my signature as you suggested. But according to Wikipedia guidelines, the cited reference to the edit I had proposed is a tweet from the verified account of the co-founder of the news outlet. I request you to suggest me a proper way to get the revert that you made to be restored back. Thank you. Vishal Telangre ( talk) 15:24, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
There is lot of discussion about the destruction of the temple. But, the motives for the same havent been discussed in the article. As far as my edit the word manycould have been inappropriate, Instead if I use: The purpose of the raid were Political, Economic in nature and Undoubtedly Iconoclasm was also one of the reason. or can I quote the auther of the book verbattim? Santoshdts ( talk) 08:30, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
References
With all due respect, what the heck are you on about here? That's what the source says. You know as well as I do that original research in this topic is grounds for a topic ban, so please don't throw that accusation around lightly. Vanamonde ( Talk) 16:57, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
this claim, without the associated context, is egregiously misleading". What makes you think the second source provides the context for the first? That is in fact wrong, let alone SYNTHESIS. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 17:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Request you to help me out in developing a page I created 2020 Tablighi Jamaat Congregation Crisis. It would be very helpful if you would add on to this page. Thank you. Karnatakapolatics ( talk) 05:26, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 Tablighi Jamaat coronavirus hotspot in Delhi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 Tablighi Jamaat coronavirus hotspot in Delhi until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Shanze1 ( talk) 07:27, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Stop your disruptive editing Wikipedia is not the place to edit the article with your own opinions. It is unlawful to blame the supreme authority of India prime minister Narendra Modi. Write ur opinions in your diary Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah ( talk) 13:50, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Not on Wikipedia Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah ( talk) 13:51, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Here article supports by references work Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah ( talk) 13:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Not your Original research Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah ( talk) 13:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Next time Be aware Khadim ahlesunnah waljamaah ( talk) 13:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Regarding revert of my edit on ABVP edits. Dear author you seems to be biased and more interested in putting you own opinions about any such group,incident,place or person. It is okay to have your own opinions but since you are on a page like Wikipedia you have to follow NPOV (neutral point of view). You gave no reason why and how my edit violates any of Wikipedia Terms. Please give valid reason how my edits were against any condition? Until you don't provide a valid reason to revert my edit , You will be called ideologically biased and may i report this to authority. You should be neutral why being on sites like wikipedia. I saw your many or all edits are specifically biased toward a specific Religious-Political part of India. Some of your Edits Violates wikipedia's terms and condition. And some of your article are reverted. I want you to be as neutral as you can restore my edits to maintain neutrality of article on ABVP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nilabh Shivam 333 ( talk • contribs) 14:17, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
the onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is upon those seeking to include disputed content.El_C 14:29, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
Can you explain this message? And how you think it only applies to me and but not you? And if you admit that it applies to you please explain what you have done differently than me? VR talk 16:08, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Kautilya3, you reverted some of my recent edits to the 2020 coronavirus lockdown in India article citing WP:NOTNEWS. While some of my reverted edits in the page seemed like news but this article says hundreds of people gathered together and it seemed notable to me. Or is it because i included more intricate details about the incident in the "Effectiveness" section? Please forgive my ignorance here as i'm still in the learning stage. SUN EYE 1 16:57, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
For talk page stalkers, here is a radical thought. It is becoming clear that recovery from COVID for under-65s can be essentially taken for granted (unless they have other risk factors), whereas for over-65s it can be deadly. So the thing to do seems to be isolate the over-65s from under-65s. The under-65s need to mingle so that they develop herd immunity and become able to break the chains of transmission, while the over-65s need to stay away from them until a vaccine becomes available. Viewed from this angle, the lockdowns in Italy and India seem to be headed in the wrong direction. When the lockdowns are lifted, the same situation will recur. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 11:14, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
Sad to see people being ostracised for exposure to COVID. [8] Even worse to see COVID being regarded as a 'dirty' disease. [9]
The fact is that COVID is a form of cold/flu with an added complication of attack on the respiratory system. The mortality rate is somewhere between 0.5–1.0%, but it is a lot higher for the people around 65 year old or higher. While we don't have detailed statistics, I would venture to say that the mortality rate might be something like 10% for people over 65, and something like 0.01% 0.1% for people under 65. Plenty of younger people that get COVID don't even know that they got it. Here is a very informative tutorial:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOJqHPfG7pA
If you get COVID and recover (with or without knowing), you can be proud of it. You will be part of the the valuable 'COVID fighting force' that will block the chains of transmission. Next time you get the virus, you will kill it without passing it on. Be proud. Be proud. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 12:07, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
A sobering read here. Has great links to other information too:
-- Kautilya3 ( talk) 10:15, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
Pyrrhic victory is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat. Someone who wins a Pyrrhic victory has also taken a heavy toll that negates any true sense of achievement or damages long-term progress.
Can't figure out what this is about
|
---|
|