User talk:Kautilya3

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

About the JeM - separatist or terrorist adjectives

I was only trying to best describe the group while keeping a neutral standpoint. Now it says Islamist Militant group on the page instead of Terrorist. These definitions always lead to edit wars. I had no intent here other than this. Pranav (talk) 13:00, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pranav21391, The problem is not separatist or terrorist, but the "Kashmiri" label.

JeM is based on Bahawalpur in the southern Pakistani Punjab. It is the home town of its leader Maulana Masood Azhar. The majority of its members are Punjabis. Kashmir is just its battleground. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:32, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kammanadu

Hello Kautilya. Chinnaraiu (talk) 09:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I want to bring to your notice that kammanadu stretched beyond Krishna river. The first reference to kammanadu comes from inscription at jaggayyapeta located in modern day Krishna district Chinnaraiu (talk) 09:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cinnaraiu, you need to post this at Talk:Kammanadu and present your evidence. Please make sure you understanding WP:V and WP:RS. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:37, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok i added them. Please check it Chinnaraiu (talk) 20:51, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Ladakh division

Would you be able to have a look at Draft:Ladakh division? Appears legit, but this topic area has seen a bit of subtle hoaxing lately, so I can't be entirely sure. – Uanfala (talk) 19:45, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is news to me that the Ladakh Division is a new thing! I thought it was a division and created a redirect a couple of years ago. We don't need a new article for the Ladakh Division. The necessary administrative information can be added to Ladakh and that is all there is to it. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 20:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was already listed as a division in in 2009. So somebody jumped the gun. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:37, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, how have I missed that. OK, thanks. I guess I'll turn the draft into a redirect to Ladakh then. – Uanfala (talk) 20:39, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hikmatullah is a sock pupped of Rober Olivia and his other incarnations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hikmatullah_Sudhan

This person keeps on reincarnating as someone — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.38.137.66 (talk) 21:41, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Common-ground use of "Nation-State" in Peacebuilding in Jammu and Kashmir article

Please read the reply to your welcome on the talkpage for your reasonable answer. You contributed a second welcome126.243.85.139 (talk) 18:04, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I suggest you copy the post to Talk:Peacebuilding in Jammu and Kashmir. That is where the various editors will look for discussion. You cannot unilaterally alter the lead sentence of an article without reaching consensus. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 18:12, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestion, duly noted, yet the alteration was most certainly of good use to readers; it`s not as if one were trying to unilaterally change "Indian Ocean" to "African Ocean". II understand your pont, and stand embarrassed as my skin turned red. The image on nation-state does seem a bit pale, but I stand by the contribution.126.243.85.139 (talk) 18:43, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Following

Please stop following my edits. It's called WP:FOLLOWING. If you continue to do so you will find yourself at ANI. MehrajMir (talk) 16:37, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have an overactive imagination. These pages have been on my watch list for years. Try to chill a little! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:41, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And, your edits seem dubious anyway. If you continue doing such edits, I will indeed follow you, and quite rightly too. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:42, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

You might wish to see Template:Did you know nominations/Warwan Valley. ∯WBG^converse 19:06, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the same phenomenon. It is more dangerous to have WP:FAKE citations than to have none. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:56, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Forward policy

@Kautilya3 ~ You completely deleted my input. I'm not interested in a petty edit war but you asked me to provide sources in "The forward policy"

Forward policy is a famous policy made by Nehru

You want sources. Here they are ~

https://www.deccanherald.com/content/392828/forward-policy-nehru-govt-blamed.html

"The "Forward Policy" of the government under late Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and the then army leadership has been blamed for India's humiliating defeat in 1962 war against China in a top secret report accessed an Australian journalist" aka The Henderson Brooks report.

Chinese never accepted the McMahon Line. The Chinese know exactly where it lies; they simply don't recognize it as legitimate since they never signed the Simla Accord. So this isn't a case of reneging on a prior commitment / agreement; there was no agreement on the part of the Chinese.

And that's not all: the Simla Accord claimed that Tibet was under Chinese suzerainty. Suzerainty means control over domestic affairs but delegating control over foreign affairs to the suzerain. To me, it seems that the Simla Accord was never a valid agreement because the party that agreed to it, Tibet, did not have the legal capacity to agree to it under the terms of the agreement itself!

So to be clear, the Indian Army had set up outposts NORTH above the McMahon Line in what was Chinese territory: IF you go to wikipedia and lookup nehru and his forward policy.

"In June, local Indian commanders had estab- lished Dhola Post, in Tawang. The relevant issue was that Dhola Post was one mile north of the McMahon Line, in Chinese territory even by Indian standards."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1984/CJB.htm

All of this was after the Chinese had built a road across Aksai Chin. So there are plenty of sources and established reasoning behind my words

Undelete my input and add in the source. Don't just remove completely and fyi, i was not the one who originally added india into the article. So you deleted other people's work too.

also bear in mind everything is recorded and logged and you can't delete history ~ i'm not going to fight you over it as i don't really care about your beef with China. Not my problem but I am am aussie who read alot of chinese history, fascinated about it and know my stuff. And i didn't do anything wrong.

I also noticed that you have been flagged for petty edit warring in the past. 120.18.180.210 (talk) 18:27, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your post. I think you are talking about the article on Forward policy. I believe the content you have added to that article is off-topic. The topic of that article is described in its lead paragraph, and you have added completely unrelated content just because it happens to be referred to by the same term. Unless reliable sources show that this content belongs to the original topic, it doesn't belong there.

You might add your content to Events_leading_to_the_Sino-Indian_War#Forward_policy if it is not there already. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:38, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No offence mate, but please do not gaslight me as that is not a valid reason. If you read the first paragraph.

"A Forward Policy is a set of foreign policy doctrines applicable to territorial and border disputes, in which emphasis is placed on securing control of disputed areas by invasion and annexation, or by the creation of compliant buffer states.[1]"

It is not about a specific" forward policy". Forward policy in this article, is not a name for a historically specific policy but an umbrella term to categorise ALL forward policies doctrines in history and future, in general.

The "forward policy" in the Sino-imndiam war could not be more relevant to the article and is EQUALLY relevant to the "forward policy" used in the Great Game.

Nehru was the one who created the doctrine in response to the border disputes with China, in which emphasis is indeed placed on securing control of disputed areas by invasion. I explained that fully.

Also if you look at past history of the page. Other people have already added it in as they recognised and included it as a an example of a forward policy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Forward_Policy&oldid=724794837 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.18.180.210 (talk) 20:07, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If your English is lacking, i apologise for accusing you of gaslighting but i know you made a mistake here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.18.180.210 (talk) 20:05, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]