User talk:King Zebu

Archives: 1

RE: Hinduism and Vegetarianism

Those were excellent edits you made to Vegetarianism, however, Bob reverted them because of lack of references. I suggest you find some references and add them back in. Hindu diet varies considerably and the articles need to reflect that.--Sikh-history (talk) 17:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry that I really didn't get your point. Does the gallery become relevant because it was imported from Indianized kingdom? Can you, please, explain why we need the same gallery on both of the articles? You said something about discussing before making an edit. Would you like to do the same, please? At least, would you, please, explain why that gallery is relevant and encyclopedic? And, finally would you, please, explain what was wrong with the sub-header "Evolution of the term"? You did remove the sub-header while you tried to restore the gallery. And, hey, what did tell you that I haven't been watching the article for years? Perhaps you need to take a closer look before coming to this kind of decision. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 15:46, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I am working on the images, and trying to put them in context. Since Wikiepdia is supposed to be an encyclopedia and not a picture book, it is always better to have the images in context. I'll take a look at the Indianized kingdoms article later. It isn't looking good enough for a stand alone article. Thanks for your concern. Bear with me for a bit more. I hope together we can bring the Greater India article to real good standards. Cheers. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 17:20, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. With loving care and fair diligence put into it, the article has great promise. Would you care to join in? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 17:27, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review

		Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the coordinators, for your help with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews April to June 2009, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. Roger Davies ^talk 12:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste `{{WPMILHIST Review alerts}}` to your user space

Indian Air Force

Hi, I have a question about the IAF inventory. I was wondering if you can give the page where you found the numbers. I think the page you provided in the citation,Official strength page is an abandoned page in Indian Armed Forces server. Even the IAF's official webpage claims approx. 1700 total ACs.

The 2006 CSIS Report (Pg 24) says 852 combat AC, 288+6 Transport and 260 Helis.

I'll appreciate your response. Thanks. Sumanch (talk) 09:38, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I am not the one who added those figures. --Nosedown (talk) 07:15, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A-Class review

Hi, I have just nominated the article for A-class review. Sumanch (talk) 01:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good job. I really appreciate your effort in improving the concerned article. Cheers --Nosedown (talk) 07:15, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, TomStar has raised a question that we should get rid of the weapons section. I agree with that; specifically the A-to-A and a-2-surface weapons. All the aircraft pages have weapon capabilities listed. Therefore the list of missiles do not improve the quality of the article. Let me know what do you think.

During this review I will need your help with copyedit because I don't have that skill. Thanks.Sumanch (talk) 08:17, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am moving tomorrow to a different city. So for the next week I don't think I will be able to contribute at all. I am sorry I put you in this precarious position to defend the A-class review by yourself. I should have planned better. Well! I will get back as soon as I can get my i-net connection. Sumanch (talk) 06:42, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, one thing I wanted to let you know about — when referencing, use {{cite web}} or {{cite book}} or other {{citation}} templates. This may be a factor in the review. Thanks & good luck. Sumanch (talk) 07:03, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lala Lajpat Rai

How do you know that Lala Lajpat Rai was not Aggarwal ? Agrasen (talk) 16:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

King Zebu: you shoul know that

Lala Lajpat Rai was an Agrawal (although his mother was Khatri).
Goenka are Agrawal. Note that majority of the "marwaris" (although not all) are Agrawal.--Navin gupt (talk) 22:37, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

white tiger caption

Mohan may not be the patriarch of all captive white tigers in zoos, especially if some of them really are pure Siberian tigers, in which case he definitely would'nt be. Thank you for all the improvements you made.72.1.195.4 (talk) 17:28, 18 July 2009 (UTC)PS regarding the other caption-white tigers are never seen in the wild. The last one seen in the wild was shot back in 1958.72.1.195.4 (talk) 17:46, 18 July 2009 (UTC)Also there's no reason to think that this gene has it's origins in just one country.72.1.195.4 (talk) 17:57, 18 July 2009 (UTC)I hope you don't mind. I made a few changes.72.1.195.4 (talk) 17:57, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adil your

All of his edits are problematic, usually YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 07:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Same for his mate Yousaf465 (talk · contribs) YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 07:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Solar power

Do you have any interest in it ? yousaf465'

Reverted page move

I have reverted your page move of Mika (singer) to Mika (British singer) because this controversial page move was not discussed using wikipedia's guidelines for requesting potentially controversial moves. Additionally, Mika (singer) is clearly far more well known and popular than Mika Singh and so this would only lead to connfussion for people looking for Mika (singer), even more so since he is not simply of British nationality, but also American. Freshpop (talk) 03:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your Nonsense

Shaheen-II page clearly states with sources that it is a IRM missile its time indians accept that and stop pushing your indian pov thanks 86.151.122.205 (talk) 13:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]