User talk:Kautilya3

Suggestion & Request

Revolving around Akshant Kautilya Sharma, this story is an alarm for the Indian nation's authorities to rise before two major problems, namely misoriented youth and the caste-based reservation system take India to the depths of darkness. I also request that an article about the same be written if you consider it fit. It is somewhat popular on Facebook with a cult following for itself on its Facebook page.. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aks23121990 (talk • contribs)

References

Jammu and Kashmir

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Marxist Historian

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

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

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

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

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

Reference errors on 25 July

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

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

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

Please comment on Talk:Battle of Ia Drang

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

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

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

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

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

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

Thank you

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

Separate article for Kashmiri separatists

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Please comment on Talk:Iraq War

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

Speedy deletion nomination of Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas

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

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

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

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

Please comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016

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

Mahmud of Ghazni

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

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

RSS

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

Please comment on Talk:Elizabeth Dilling

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

User:DnDamubit likely a sockpuppet

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

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

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

Input request

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

Akhil Bharatiya Sharirik Pramukh

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

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

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

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

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

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

Another input request

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