User talk:Kautilya3

Balija article edit reason

Mr. Kautilya3 The caste content will take us before british raj era its not about scientific article to update with current reference its about culture and origin of caste so it is historical so old approved government documents will be useful for this article andcalso if we want to update new reference then we cant write about old historical articles. I used a reference Madras district gazeeters in Balija which is approved and used by Government its not a fake or unknown writer's book till now "Madras district gazeeters" is preserved by Government. Thank You Sathyanarayana naidu (talk) 03:11, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Edit-warring raised at WP:ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Cluebat needed on Balija. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:54, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Expressinng dissent towards you removing sections with proper references

Dear Kautilya,

You may be an experienced Wikepedia contributor. I appreciate you for the same. But you have been removing sections that I have added at Uniform Civil Code page with proper references. This is uncalled for from an experienced person like you. You can instead say why the references quoted are not acceptable. Instead you chose to remove them with arbitrary reasons. Kindly let me know why you removed the same. Don't you understand Hindi ?

Sriramadas.mahalingam (talk) 11:13, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Golwalkar and Malkani are not reliable sources. You have been referred to the policy on reliable sources repeatedly. You need to drop it now. - Kautilya3 (talk) 12:04, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

What as Leader of RSS, Shri Golwalkar said is relevant to the topic Uniform Civil Code and Hindu Code Bills. Hope you get the point.

Sriramadas.mahalingam (talk) 13:58, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

@Bishonen:, can you help? This user is badgering, while making no effort to understand policy.— Kautilya3 (talk) 14:29, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, Kautilya. I have warned the user on their page. Er, don't you want to move this section down to the bottom of the page? Sriramadas.mahalingam, please post at the bottom of talkpages, not the top. People may not find your post if it's in an unusual place. Bishonen | talk 16:25, 8 February 2020 (UTC).

Redoing ping to Sriramadas.mahalingam. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:35, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

With regard to your comment at my User_talk:Sriramadas.mahalingam on Wikipedia:Reliable_sources, on the article Uniform Civil Code, like Jawaharlal_Nehru and B._R._Ambedkar stand on the the issue, the stand of M._S._Golwalkar is also important. He was the leader of Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sangh and the sources that I have cited are his own published by his own Organization. User:Kautilya3 certainly seems to in favour of the what the article intend to bring about and hence isn't letting the other sides of the opinion to come out to the external world. He removed sections bluntly saying they arent from reliable sources. They are indeed reliable sources.I have provided pages from the book published itself. User:Kautilya3 is attempting to suppress other side of the opinions. He is suppressing facts and freedom of expressing duely backed by facts and mis-using his privileges. —Preceding undated comment added 08:43, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Sathyanarayana naidu (talk) 10:31, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Golla (caste)

Kaudilya3 why you removed my articl in Golla (caste) page Sathyanarayana naidu (talk) 10:56, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Sathyanaraya naidu, , I have already given my explanation at Talk:Golla (caste)#Original research galore. Please continue the discussion there. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:59, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Sorry Request

Kautilya3 brother i want to say Sorry, Sorry, Sorry for my behaviour in past which may hurt you. Please forgive me Please and also iam new user of wikipedia so i know only little about wiki but you are much more senior than me please Guide me like this in future too. I want you to be my master in wikipedia. can you guide me master. Please accept my sorry request and forgive me master. Please , please, please, please Sathyanarayana naidu (talk) 15:43, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Ethnic groups of Asia - Non-indigenous minorities

HI, can you take a look at this section recently created by an IP hopper from Netherlands. I took care of some blatant WP:OR, but a lot of the refs themselves look unreliable. IP seems to be pushing some sort of racialism based agenda. I wonder whether the section should be there at all. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:06, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, I took a look at the section you mentioned. I am not at all comfortable with the content that has been added here. Some specific issues:

• "Non-indigenous minorities" is a terribly POV term, and I doubt if any reliable sources used it.
• This is not a list article, and there should not be a list unless such a list appears in some reliable source. Even there, there needs to be a narrative, again reliably sourced, in line with the rest of the content on that page.
• I tried to verify the numbers given for India, but I couldn't, from the cited sources. So, we need to check if the sources are actually saying what the content does.

Unfortunately, I am quite busy at this time, and expect to be so for at least another month. So I will leave it in your good hands.

Talk page watchers! If you are able to help, please do so. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:38, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

The original header as edited by the IP was on racial lines "Europeans and Eurasians" [1]. I found that header rather "colonial" so changed it to "Non-indigenous minorities". A term also used in Ethnic groups in Europe. Since the IP is very active in the article (also in similar articles) I thought it would be better to take care of things after they stop editing. I just removed some of the obvious original researches and nerfed clearly racialist terms like mixed race, white, etc in the section. Apparently the IP thinks US, UK and Russia are 100% "European" countries. As for the numbers, most are likely original researches. Thanks and regards. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:01, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

It seems that I prefer the term "Europeans and Eurasians" because that is an ethnic description without any value judgement. Calling them "non-indigenous" would require a reliable source. For the most part, these people are descendants of former European colonisers. They might have never seen any country other than the one they live in, and may regard themselves as "indigenous". Even in the Ethnic groups in Europe page, it would be better to call them "Asians and Eurasians" without saying anything about indigeneity.

Vanamonde93, can you give your view? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Off the top of my head, "Europeans and Eurasians" is preferable to "non-indigenous minorities", but I haven't the time to evaluate the sources. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:55, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Junaid Azim Mattu for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Junaid Azim Mattu is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Junaid Azim Mattu until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 15:12, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Jamia attack

A video of library --DBigXrayᗙ 10:06, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

[2] Creativity of SM users. fyi User:DiplomatTesterMan--DBigXrayᗙ 11:30, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Lol... Phir Hera Pheri if I am guessing correctly; Akshay Kumar is a patriotic one too and Madhu was Mr. Raval (Uri boss)... as patriotic as it gets... if the links made consciously then even better, and what the scene in the movie itself represents. Anyway no thesis on this..... Wonder why no one has created a page for Amit Malviya as yet. Not even a deletion tag. DTM (talk) 13:43, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

And yes if I remember correctly those three end up getting the money at the end of the movie....DTM (talk) 14:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan, :D . I did not understand " Madhu was Mr. Raval (Uri boss)'" ? I am not sure which movie, may be you are right. The pic is very funny indeed. Even bigger wonder is there is no page for the IT cell. I discussed about it here [3] DBigXrayᗙ 14:15, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

The 'stone' story was propagated by:

• India Today
• Aaj Tak
• Times of India
• The Quint
• Daily News and Analysis
• India TV
• NDTV India

and others I don't need to mention.

And watch this video from 04:10 and again at 22:15. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:15, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

"Madhu was Mr. Raval (Uri boss)" In the meme the lady refers to Madhu Kishwar as far as I can tell, hence the Madhu. Mr Rawal... her face is cropped onto the face of Paresh Rawal, the actor, if I am a guessing the movie and movie scene correctly. Paresh Rawal also play the role of Govind Bhardwaj, the National Security Advisor in the movie Uri. So I was thinking AltNews, if they have created the meme, sure chose to depict an uphill battle in all ways, chasing Akshay Kumar (Mission Mangal ISRO star) and Paresh Raval (NSA)....( I mean all this in a funny way, though I am terrible at humour so just forget all this I am overthinking since the movie isn't what is being referenced to, it is just a background. The meme was a good one.)

As for video/s related to JMI, I wonder what will happen over here in the page move request - 'attack' or 'violence'.... both? But that is best left for the closer. And that article maybe could do with some more additions now, this stone story for one. While the stone story can be passed off as a something small, it isn't, like the people in the Wire video connecting things to the larger picture. DTM (talk) 13:01, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

References

Help

The matter I had put up at, "Religious conversions in Pakistan" was removed because I had copied it from the, "Forced conversion to Islam in Pakistan" article. I have now created a new draft here: Draft:Religious conversions in Pakistan . Please improve the draft and move it to where it belongs (so as to re-create the article). Thanks!—Spasiba5 (talk) 15:20, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Spasiba5, I am quite short of time to be able to branch out into new topics at this stage. I should admit that I am also not particularly interested in religious conversions. I notice that El_C gave you some good advice on how to improve the page. Please use it and submit it for review whenever it is ready. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:21, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

gawkadal massacre page is being altered

look at the recent history of Gawkadal massacre. unknown editors are changing the lead with all sorts of outlandish changes. I dont want to revert any change myself in case it causes an edit war or something. You seem to have a better handle of things here, can i suggest the page be reverted to the status quo and placed under protected status ? Mhveinvp (talk) 18:10, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Mhveinvp, please feel free to revert whenever you find such vandalism. All you need to do is to write a clear edit summary and post warning/welcome message on their talk page. If they reinstate the content, please open a talk page discussion and ping me or admins from there. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:19, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Why were edits to Uniform Civil Code removed

In the Uniform Civil Code page, just like Tufail Ahamed a noted journalist, another journalist Madhu Kiswar had expressed her opinions on the topic. That portion represents alternate important view points on the topic. She is also a women. The source cited was from a noted magazine Swarajya, where she writes. Could you explain your problem with that source. Rajarajan2020 (talk) 20:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

I didn't remove the Madhu Kishwar content. But I also thought your write-up was pretty pointless. I will clean it up when I get time to look at it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:14, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Mathematics in medieval Islam

Moved to Talk:Hindu–Arabic numeral system § Arabic mathematics

 – content discussion

The name of the section on Wikipedia is: Mathematics in medieval Islam It is written here "Mathematics in medieval Arabia"? It doesn't matter how many Arabophile illiterate writters want to make everything Arabic. It must be very unwise to think that since non-Arab scholars (such as Berbers and Persians) wrote in Arabic, we should call all the achievements of the golden age of Islam Arabic. RedEye98 (talk) 11:16, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

RedEye98, the title of the page you are editing is Hindu-Arabic numerals. It is not Hindu-Islamic numerals. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:27, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

If you think so, go in the Arabian horse page, write Arabic Zoology! What you are talking about is a fallacy. They call it Arabic because it was used in the Arab Caliphate. In fact, Persian Khwarizmi made it from Indian numbers. You know that RedEye98 (talk) 20:18, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Take time to update yourself on neutrality

Hello user, thank you for your contributions on Wikipedia it would be better if you take time out to refer to those neutrality articles of Wikipedia than suggesting them to others while taking sides yourself. You mentioned "BJP bagged 40 percent of the vote by raising allegations of 'Muslim appeasement' against Mamata Banerjee." without any references and it does belongs to something which is related to Lok Sabha elections. So few other things can also be mentioned which are important in the run up to Assembly elections. And the most important thing is I have provided references to everything I wrote and none of it were my own words, all of it were taken from those news articles.

You also wrote "Soon afterwards, the party passed the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA), promising citizenship to Hindu immigrants from Bangladesh and hoping to win the election by garnering their vote" which also had no reference.

Soon after forming government, Central government not only passed CAA but abrogated article 370, 35(a), triple talaq so these things are also required to be mentioned. And by the way CAA not only provides citizenship to only Hindus but also Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists and Parsis who are religiously persecuted not only from Bangladesh but also Pakistan and Afghanistan.

With best regards.

SamanyaGyan (talk) 15:51, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

SamanyaGyan, welcome to Wikipedia. At the top of your talk page, you wrote "I'm open to suggestions if you have one. Thank you!" Did you really mean that? Then how do you explain the fact that you have completely ignored a clearly written edit summary with a policy link, as well as the suggestion I made on your talk page? Let us talk about those first. If there is need, we can get to your issues later. Do you have any idea what WP:UNDUE means? If so, please explain it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:08, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

• I'm open to suggestions but not from manipulative and biased persons. I have not overlooked anything, I have made edits to an article with proper references so I don't have to justify those edits on someone's talk page. If someone have doubt about the edits they can visit the references which are from reputable media agencies and not some sham media sites or bloggers.

My edits aren't undue expansion of the article. The "Background" section requires information about what has happened in the run up to the polls and I mentioned them only. But it is ironical that other things were fine before my edit because they helped to promote a particular ideology!

Why aren't you explaining how these edits "BJP bagged 40 percent of the vote by raising allegations of 'Muslim appeasement' against Mamata Banerjee." without any references or partial facts like "CAA promises citizenship to Hindu immigrants from Bangladesh" are justifiable? SamanyaGyan (talk) 17:40, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

@SamanyaGyan: I see. So I am a "manipulative and biased person". So my suggestions mean nothing. You are quick to jump to judgements. Well, let us leave that aside.

How do you decide what is undue in a section on "Background" on an election that has not even happened yet? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:05, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

• Since you mentioned what was written on my talk page so I thought to clarify that I'm not open to suggestion from manipulative and biased persons, if you take it on yourself then nobody can help. Leaving that aside it is you who should explain what undue expansion is because it was you who appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at 2021 West Bengal Legislative Assembly election. But if you want to hear from me then:

1. In the aforementioned article you edited "BJP bagged 40 percent of the vote by raising allegations of 'Muslim appeasement' against Mamata Banerjee." without any references and I request to produce any reference which solely credits "allegations of 'Muslim appeasement' against Mamata Banerjee." for the BJP's performance in the Lok Sabha elections. So I improved the article by adding other factors which were responsible for BJP's win and with proper references and also added how BJP alleged 'Muslim appeasement' against Mamata Banerjee.

2. In the same article you wrote "Soon afterwards, the party passed the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA), promising citizenship to Hindu immigrants from Bangladesh and hoping to win the election by garnering their vote" which also had no reference. Since the central government also cleared other legislation before CAA so I mentioned them there which holds importance for the assembly elections.

3. In the same line you wrote "promising citizenship to Hindu immigrants from Bangladesh" which are partial facts mentioned in a particular way to satisfy a particular section of people and promote a particular ideology violating the neutrality of the article, please refer to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV) to know more. In reality CAA provides citizenship to Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and Parsi immigrants fleeing the 3 officially declared Islamic countries Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan due to religious persecution which has been officially notified by the Government of India.

4. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. So you should also explain how you could add partial and biased facts without any references violating Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV).

Hello, I'm SamanyaGyan. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks.

Thanks Message

Dear Kautilya3, Thanks for your guidance Knowiunderstandit (talk) 18:19, 20 February 2020 (UTC).