User talk:Fowler&fowler: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:33, 13 January 2019

I will no longer be working on India-related topics. I'm taking them off my watchlist. Consider me site banned.The advent of the metaphorically professional graduate students with infinite time, obsessive bias, and ready access to sources which they have failed to fully comprehend has made this decision both inevitable and irrevocable. When I began editing India-related articles in August 2006, I had much more energy and enthusiasm to counter bias. I don't any more. I would like to than some fantastic people I met along the way such as Nichalp, Saravask, Dab, Ravichandar, RegentsPark, and Sitush. There were many others whose names I don't recall just this minute Best regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 06:01, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by .

ANI Notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

That discussion can be found here Ad Orientem (talk) 03:38, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion on tagging some Kashmir articles

Could you please take a look at 1947 Poonch rebellion? I have been reviewing many of the articles on the 1947 events in Kashmir and can't say I am impressed. These include Timeline of the Kashmir conflict, Indo-Pakistani War of 1947–1948 and quite a few others. The content in these articles are both structurally and textually biased. Much of the sources used in these articles are either low quality or undue. And a lot of the content is written with a methodology of plucking out one thing from 1 source then synthesising it with something else from a different source. Being familiar with the historiography, different perspectives and academic canon of this subject, I have concluded that these articles don't represent the scholarship on Kashmir at all.

Before attaching POV and SYNTHESIS templates onto these articles I thought I should consult with you because you are our most knowledgeable editor on both the sources and the topic. Would you take some time out to review this issue? If you come to the same conclusion as me that these articles are suffering from pov and synthesis issues then I will add the templates. Code16 (talk) 19:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I did read your post, but then forgot to reply. I'll take a look at the pages you mention and get back to you in the next 24 hours. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 23:06, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing, I will wait :)′Code16 (talk) 19:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Code16, I was just reading a survey of Kashmir's historiography. (Vernon Hewitt, "Never Ending Stories: Recent Trends in the Historiography of Jammu and Kashmir," History Compass, 2007, Vol. 5 Issue 2, pp. 288–301)

It does seem to me from reading 1947 Poonch rebellion and comparing it with the survey's listing of the various views, pertaining to each stage of Kashmiri history, that the 1947 Poonch rebellion is shrewdly written to side with the Indian POV.

Not only is there no WP:BALANCE but the bibliography reveals the heavy use of Indian government sources, primary sources and articles with low cites.

Hewitt's survey dismisses the "I was there" kind of memoirs/biographies, which these article's sources are just often repeating.

These Kashmir articles need to be based entirely on the main and prominent works of Kashmiri history, so it doesn't go beyond whats widely accepted. ~~ User:Arslan-San (talk) 13:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you elaborate on the "Pro-India POV" To be fair there are good quality sources in the bibliography like Victoria Schofield and Christopher Snedden, but are cited for subsidiary things. The main narrative is based off primary sources like Saraf, Suhrawardy, partisan sources such as Jha (see Taylor and Wirsing reviews) and low level journal articles by Ankit.Code16 (talk) 19:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 Could you please take a look at [[1947 Poonch rebellion]]? I have been reviewing many of the articles on the 1947 events in Kashmir and can't say I am impressed. These include [[Timeline of the Kashmir conflict]], [[Indo-Pakistani War of 1947–1948]] and quite a few others.  The content in these articles are both structurally and textually biased. Much of the sources used in these articles are either low quality or undue. And a lot of the content is written with a methodology of plucking out one thing from 1 source then synthesising it with something else from a different source. Being familiar with the historiography, different perspectives and academic canon of this subject, I have concluded that these articles don't represent the scholarship on Kashmir at all.
-Before attaching POV and SYNTHESIS templates onto these articles I thought I should consult with you because you are our most knowledgeable editor on both the sources and the topic. Would you take some time out to review this issue? If you come to the same conclusion as me that these articles are suffering from pov and synthesis issues then I will add the templates. ~~
+Before attaching POV and SYNTHESIS templates onto these articles I thought I should consult with you because you are our most knowledgeable editor on both the sources and the topic. Would you take some time out to review this issue? If you come to the same conclusion as me that these articles are suffering from pov and synthesis issues then I will add the templates. [[User:Code16|Code16]] ([[User talk:Code16|talk]]) 19:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 :Sorry, I did read your post, but then forgot to reply.  I'll take a look at the pages you mention and get back to you in the next 24 hours.  Regards, [[User:Fowler&amp;fowler|<span style="color:#B8860B">Fowler&amp;fowler</span>]][[User talk:Fowler&amp;fowler|<span style="color:#708090">«Talk»</span>]] 23:06, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
+:::Sure thing, I will wait :)′[[User:Code16|Code16]] ([[User talk:Code16|talk]]) 19:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 ::Interesting. Code16, I was just reading a survey of Kashmir's historiography. (Vernon Hewitt, "Never Ending Stories: Recent Trends in the Historiography of Jammu and Kashmir," ''History Compass,'' 2007, Vol. 5 Issue 2, pp. 288–301)
 ::It does seem to me from reading [[1947 Poonch rebellion]] and comparing it with the survey's listing of the various views, pertaining to each stage of Kashmiri history, that the [[1947 Poonch rebellion]] is shrewdly written to side with the Indian POV.
@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 ::Hewitt's survey dismisses the "I was there" kind of memoirs/biographies, which these article's sources are just often repeating.
 ::These Kashmir articles need to be based entirely on the main and prominent works of Kashmiri history, so it doesn't go beyond whats widely accepted. ~~ [[User:Arslan-San]] ([[User talk:Arslan-San|talk]]) 13:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
+:::Can you elaborate on the "Pro-India POV" To be fair there are good quality sources in the bibliography like Victoria Schofield and Christopher Snedden, but are cited for subsidiary things. The main narrative is based off primary sources like Saraf, Suhrawardy, partisan sources such as Jha (see Taylor and Wirsing reviews) and low level journal articles by Ankit.[[User:Code16|Code16]] ([[User talk:Code16|talk]]) 19:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)