User talk:Kautilya3

Indian annexation of Hyderabad

You reverted my recent edit with the comment "we need to WP:STICKTOSOURCE; there is no evidence that Nehru ever thought of Hyderabad as an independent state". But this is utterly absurd! When the British withdrew from India in 1947, all their subsidiary alliances were abandoned. The princely states had never been part of British India, so they could not be handed over to the two new Dominions created from the British possessions. Pursuant to the Indian Independence Act 1947 they became completely independent, unless and until they acceded to one of the new Dominions, which most of them speedily did, although the process was slow in the case of the Princely States of Pakistan. A series of wars was fought between India and Pakistan precisely because Kashmir was left as an independent state. The Nizam of Hyderabad fought hard to retain his independence. Do you really not grasp any of this? Moonraker (talk) 05:31, 27 December 2017 (UTC) Moonraker (talk) 05:31, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

I am afraid this is a WP:FORUMy discussion. Please follow the Wikipedia policies on reliable sourcing. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:14, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

I am glad you do not dispute the historic facts I have mentioned above. If you have concerns about sourcing, it would be better for you to add a {{cn}} template, rather than removing information from am article because you have a POV objection to it. Moonraker (talk) 06:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC) Moonraker (talk) 06:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

The very fact that you call the above post "historical facts" is troublesome, because it is full of your personal interpretations. I do not care to "dispute them" because that is precisely what a WP:FORUMy discussion is. If you want to engage in such debates, please find Reddit or some such debating forum, not Wikipedia. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:53, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

You seem unable to comprehend that you have modified a direct quote (of Noorani's analysis of Nehru's views) with your own WP:OR is quite astonishing, given your experience. If you persist with this practice, I am afraid you will end up at WP:ARE. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:07, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump–Russia dossier

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump–Russia dossier. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Russian presidential election, 2018

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Russian presidential election, 2018. Legobot (talk) 04:30, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Warning

Hello, I'm Josephus. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit:[1] to Exodus of Kashmiri Hindus seemed less than neutral. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. JosephusOfJerusalem (talk) 09:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

A detailed warning

I see that you have removed content cited to RS with a tendentious edit summary. Very interestingly the sequence of events I see on the page is that Anmolbhat has added a wall of clobbered Hindu POV text (copyright too I suspect) [2] which you conveniently are not worried about. Then comes along NadirAli who has added properly cited information [3] which happens to be too neutral for Hindu POV. You first try to soften the wording from ″false propaganda″ to ″exaggerated″ [4]. When NadirAli then tells you to WP:STICKTOSOURCE [5] you then remove the entire text he added,[6] although you had no issue with that text's presence earlier. All this is a display of tendentious editing and if you do not cease this disruptive behaviour you will soon find yourself in an AE or ANI thread justifying why Wikipedia should still allow such editing. JosephusOfJerusalem (talk) 09:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are warning me about. I have deleted UNDUE content and explained why I did so on the talk page. All further discussion takes place there. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:23, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Oh you know perfectly well what you have done under the guise of WP:UNDUE. The content discussions can go on but the behavioural warning goes here. Any further display of tendentiousness will have severe consequences according to Wikipedia policies. JosephusOfJerusalem (talk) 10:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Ramgarhia#appalled

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Ramgarhia#appalled. You may be interested. Winged Blades^Godric 07:12, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Template:Z48

Your final warning

You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Kashmiris. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. JosephusOfJerusalem (talk) 15:01, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear Sir

I have responded at my talk page. --G (talk) 13:46, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Potential deliberate vandalism by Pakistani COI repeat offending user Mar4d on India topics

Dear Kautilya3 and MBlaze Lightning,

Please help with this suspected case of habitual repeat offender whom you both have tried to warn in the past, but he keeps repeating the same cycle. Please take it to the logical conclusion, by taking it to those forums/admins who can see this person either fix himself quickly or else he finally gets stopped permanently. He seems to be deliberately and repeatedly doing this to multiple editors on the multiple articles while covering/archiving his tracks. Experienced and smart enough to evade the perm banning by gaming the system for far too long. He is suspect for the systematic canvassing too.

1. Immediately and permanently sanction him from all the articles with India in namespace or category.

2. Put him on watch list of experienced admins.

3. Get some responsible unbiased admin to investigate his past tracks if those sufficiently warrant a perm ban on all his accounts and related IPs, specially if he does not own up and fix within next 24 hours.

He knows what he is doing (wrong). He is very experienced and extremely good at it (disguise and game). And, he has gotten away with it (time to bring the curtains down). Hence, he might even be beyond "cure him with compassion" (sadly).

I do not have the tools and sufficient knowledge of wikipedia to affect that. Hence, requesting you both to take it forward to permanently fix his "long-term below-the-radar successful-gamer-and-evader repeat-offender" behavior.

Thanks. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 20:19, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Dear IP, I am sure you feel pretty hard done by Mar4d's reverts of your edits. But you need to wait for him to respond and explain his reasons. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:44, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the concern. Actually, no, not at all, I do not feel hard done, because I am not emotionally attached to my edits. If you re-read my detailed comment on his wall, I already made it clear that I am okay for anything of mine to be chopped by the "unbiased" editors. This is not so much about my edits. I am more concerned by "his behavioral pattern". Yes, as I already said in my OP, wait for 24 hours. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 22:33, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

More refs and counter-refs, re our discussion few months ago

Kautilya3: Popular you are, your talk page is very active these days! I wiki-emailed you some sources from different sides on some topics we touched upon a few months ago. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 00:15, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Armenian Genocide

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Armenian Genocide. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018 India)

Greetings,

It is being planned to organize Wikigraphists Bootcamp in India, please fill out the survey form to help the organizers. Your responses will help organizers understand what level of demand there is for the event (how many people in your community think it is important that the event happens). At the end of the day, the participants will turn out to have knowledge to create drawings, illustrations, diagrams, maps, graphs, bar charts etc. and get to know to how to tune the images to meet the QI and FP criteria. For more information and link to survey form, please visit Talk:Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018 India). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:46, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

Atleast you seem reasonable on the Jammu article just wantes to balance article nothing new was added anyway common sense prevails. 82.132.187.153 (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

You are welcome. Please feel free to alert me if it gets vandalised again. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:03, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi sorry to bother you but someone again deleted it without a proper reason no one seems to discuss why a relevant subsection is not needed but the Mirpur article needs one? 82.132.220.38 (talk) 13:16, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Nangparbat you tried to play this game on RegentsPark's talk page[7] and all your socks were blocked by @Yamla: last month. Stop evading your ban over a section. Anmolbhat (talk) 13:35, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Southern Transitional Council

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Southern Transitional Council. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry More problems

Hello sorry to bother you but someone removed the heading and the article link again for no reason citing only "heading not needed" let me argue why it is. Its a historical demographic which no longer exists and merging it to current populations is diluting its historical importance plus the link to the causes of the demographics allows user to switch ti the main article explaining the change just like on the Mirpur page. 82.132.229.123 (talk) 19:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Well, you should have engaged in this discussion before you went ahead and did so many reverts. Nobody is going to take you seroiusly any more.

In any case, I think it sort of makes sense that we don't need a subheading in the Jammu article because the comminity still exists, even though it is vastly dwindled. I can't say the same for Mirpur, Pakistan. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)