User talk:Per Honor et Gloria/Archives2

Scythianus and Terebinthus

Hi, I'm concerned about your articles Scythianus and Terebinthus as religious teachers from the early centuries CE. In particular, the references in the articles don't seem to be properly cited, at least I can't fully make sense of them. I'll go into more detail on the talk pages of the articles, but for example you cite Isaiah in the Septuagint on both pages and the passage in question (45:16-17) doesn't seem relevant to the articles and isn't the same as the quote text you provide. I'd like to help clear this up, because I think it's important to have properly verifiable references for articles. FrankP 15:20, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your pics

I checked out your user page. You hand-drawn pictures are beautiful. How did you create them? Hand-drawn and scanned or did you use any software? - Ganeshk (talk) 22:27, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You said you play on contrast,lightness, what software do you use to do that? The one that comes with the scanner? On a different note, when I click the section edit links on your talk page, I am getting a new blank page. That is not normal. Could you check why? - Ganeshk (talk) 22:54, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should do a archive? - Ganeshk (talk)

The Christian date marauder

As you've seen, apparently User:Eldarone, also going by some anon IP addresses, joined WP for the sole purpose of semi-vandalizing neutral dates. I happened across it via List of political philosophers, which is a page I created and have been a maintainer on. But then once I clicked on Eldarone's edit history, I saw s/he seems to have done only the same harm (BCE->BC) in all her/his edits. I saw you fixed some of it too. Frustrating. Not sure what moral or point I'm trying to make... I guess just a friendly note to praise your good work in reverting it. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 18:16, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please verify: 29 martyrs in Nanban trade timeline

One of your edits to the Nanban trade period timeline claimed that 29 Christians were martyred in Nagasaki in 1597. Does this mean there were 3 more people along with the 26 saints? There was no source for the extra 3 people. Please verify it.

Map request

I was wondering if you would have some time to create a map showing the spread of scripts in Asia, for the article Linguistic history of India, based on this map. Thanks a ton! deeptrivia (talk) 03:03, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drawings

Those drawings are simply amazing! I hope you know, one of them has been featured for long on Portal:Buddhism. Cheers :) deeptrivia (talk) 00:37, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks PHG. No hurry for the map. Take your time. deeptrivia (talk) 00:47, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion on refuge?

Hi PHG. I just wanted to ask you if you, if you have time, could have a look at the discussion at Talk:Refuge (Buddhism) and and contribute with a thought on the subject? It would be appreciated. Regards Andkaha^(talk) 17:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:EukratidesCoin.JPG

Hi, you revoked all rights to this image and released it to the public domain in February 2005. Several months later you changed the tag and claim you own the copyright. I don't think you can not claim copyright on works in the public domain. Thuresson 22:27, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for edit summary

Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 31% for major edits and 48% for minor edits. (Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace.)

This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 23:31, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inangodonus?

Since we are discussing Sotelo's book over at Hasekura Tsunenaga and its talk page, I thought I might as well invite you to look at my question at Talk:Toyotomi Hidetsugu. Do you have any guesses? --Iustinus 22:48, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:BoardmanWarrior.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BoardmanWarrior.jpg. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 06:06, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hermaeus

Hi! I have just found your page on Hermaeus, the Indo-Greek king. I really enjoyed the layout and wonderful reproductions of Hermaeus' coins.

However, I plan to make a couple of minor changes and thought I should, out of courtesy, let you know. Mainly, I will change "Hou Hanshu" to "Hanshu 96A" which is, in fact, where all those details you have given from the Chinese histories really came from, plus a few other less important changes and a reference.

But, also, may I sugest you edit it so that all the romanizations of Chinese names are given in one system - preferably Pinyin? At the moment you have some in Pinyin and some in what seems to be an aberrant (and incorrect) form of the older Wade-Giles. If you wish, I could do these corrections for you - if and when I can find the time.

Also, do you have some reason (other than a rough correspondence of dates)for identifying Wutoulao with Spalirises?

Cheers,

John Hill

Thank you and sorry.

Thank you for inserting the images you took [1]. I've been busy and I'd missed that your change wasn't a simple revert. I'm sorry for my haste. --Gmaxwell 01:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions

Hi SanjayMohan. Thank you for your research on the sources. Should they be inexistant, they have to be eliminated, but please refrain doing so until you do clarify the situation. In the meantime, I will reinstate the article in its original form. Your previous comments clearly indicate your dislike for alternative views, but that's no basis to erase them. Wikipedia policy of No original research means that individual opinions or interpretations have no place in the editing of article, but instead only referenced/ published work should be relied on. Conversely, a published opinion, even if marginal or to your dislike, has the right to be presented on the page. I didn't write any of the article content, so please consider my intervention as quite neutral. PHG 11:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your intervention is not neutral. The sources are existing, but they do not support the text. I have no dislike for alternative views. But they must be grounded on solid evidence. There is no evidence here. Pure rumor mongering. The text of this article is purely opinions. Here are some examples:

1. Dr Spooner observes: "After Alexander's death, when Chandragupta marched on Magadha, it was with largely the Persian army (Shaka-Yavana-Kamboja-Parasika-Bahlika) that he won the throne of India. The testimony of the Mudrarakshasa is explicit on this point, and we have no reason to doubt its accuracy in matter of this kind" [27]. This important factor again points to north-west connections of Chandragupta Maurya.

Note: The fact that ChandraGupta Led an army of north-western tribes does not "automatically" mean that he himself was north-western in origin. This is just like saying that since an iberian rose to become Caesar of Rome, therefore he was also a Roman.

2. Some small particulars which happen to be recorded are sufficient to show that in the time of the early Maurya Emperors, the court was affected by Iranian practices. The Arthashastra of Kautiliya advises that the king when consulting the Physicians and ascetics should be seated in the room where the sacred fire has been kept. Likewise, there was a custom of burning sacred fire in the room where the meetings of Council of Ministers were held. This attests that the Zoroastrian rituals were practiced and honored at Mauryan court. Moreover, the ceremonial washing of king's hair was made the occasion of a splendid festival when courtiers offered rich tributes to the king. This observance recalls the ancient Persian hair-washing ceremony on the sovereign's birthday as described by Herodotus.

Note: The text says that mention of a sacred fire means "Persian origin of Ch. Maur.". This is false interpretation. Sacred fire has been keep in India since at least as long as Persia and probably much more earlier. In India its called agnihotra. All Hindu ceremonies in India including marriage rites involve fire altars.

3. Scholars of this school are also not convinced as to "how an inexperienced youth far from Bihar with no social, political or military standing in the north-west and with inadequate monetary and other resources of his own" could have conquered the TOUGH AND HARDY people of Punjab and north-west frontiers. It had taken Alexander, the world conqueror, over 16 months to subdue the land from east Afghanistan to river Bias spanning over a distance of just 500 miles. This calculates to conquering only one mile per day.[25] The scholars also argue that it is not a custom to assume a family name after one's mother's name. Thus, to say that Chandragupta had adopted the Maurya name after his Dasi mother Mura does not sound at all convincing. Moreover, Chandragupta would have certainly disliked to be recognised as the son of dasi (Hindi:maid) Mura, a keeper of pea-cocks (Mayuras).[26] .

Note: The scholars of this school have wild theories. The text says "how can an inexperienced youth from Bihar...". This is blatant speculation. "How could he?", "...Does not sound at all convincing...", CONVINCING TO WHOM?. Speculators of course!

Note 2: Who said it is not customary to go after mother's name. The customs of today can be quite different from customs of yesterday.

4. Dr J. W. McCrindle thinks that they both POSSIBLY belonged two different sections of the Ashvakas [21].

Note: This is again a speculation. There is no ancient source which says ChandraGupta belonged to Ashvakas.

5. Appian of Alexandria (95CE-165CE), author of a Roman History attests that Chandragupta, the king of the Indians, lived near river Indus which evidence again points at the north-west frontier borderlands.

Note: Just because a german lives in France, should we interpret that this German is French. Blatant non-sense. We do not even know during which years exactly or approx. Ch.Maur. Lived. How can we make such sweeping claims that he was from Indus. There is a light year gap between "from Indus" and "Lived in Indus". Even today millions of Indians live away from their native provinces. bengalis live in Punjab. Punjabis live in Karnataka. Rajasthanis live in Orissa. etc etc.

6. Plutarch: Plutarch himself is not sure what and who he is mentioning. Even today it is a matter of open debate whether the person whom Plutarch mentions as Sandrokottus was ChandraGupta or not. IMPORTANT NOTE: There was not just one person by name ChandraGupta. Chandra and Gupta are very common names in India. Besides, Plutarch has mentioned several different variations of Ch. throughout.

SO, unless you have solid unspeculative sources, these speculations are worth and legitimately worth deleting. Your statement also shows that you havent paid any attention to the article itself and simply jumped to conclusions. SanjayMohan 12:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

more info on ChandraGupta Maurya

I have added more information on talk page. Kindly visit it. I am a well-wisher of Wikipedia and therefore I am very particular about what is being written here and what sources are being considered. The thruthfulness of sources have to be considered too. SanjayMohan 12:48, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions in Chandragupta Maurya

Thanks for your posting. The quote you are mentionning are from published sources, and, honestly, the suggestions made cannot be totally rejected. I have long read, in numerous books, that Chandragupta Maurya may have been from the northwestern area. You cannot just reject such sources just because of your judgement that they are "speculations": this is just your POV. I suggest you keep them in the article, and relabel them something like "Alternative hypothesis" if you wish. Regards PHG 13:17, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to PHG

They have to be totally rejected because these are speculations without "any historical basis".

You have long read, in numerous books. Which books? May I know? Which books tell you he was from North-Western Area. Your wishy-washy language makes me extremely suspicious of your agenda here. Till now you have not provided a single ancient source which points to these north-western origins. My judgement that they are speculations is because they are. When some modern author is writing an account of something more than 2000 years ago, he/she must provide references from that era. This is not my POV. This is commonsense. I also strongly feel that you are accusing me of POV so that you can put me on a defensive! This strategy will not work.

From my side I am providing a link on the entire online work from Plutarch, the famous Greek Author who was close to the times of ChandraGupta and Alexander. http://classics.mit.edu/Browse/browse-Plutarch.html

I will also report you to the "administrators" if you dont fix your rumor mongering as I suspect that you have some hidden agenda here.

All I am asking/requesting the writer of the text is to show where in ancient sources like Plutarch, Megasthenes or Mudrarakshas all three of which are from the same or closely following era explicitely say that ChandraGupta Maurya was from North-West? Is that too much to ask? The anonymous author of this speculative text should come out and show me where in the above mentioned writings of Plutarch is mentioned that Ch.Maur was a Punjabi?

It is not me who is engaging in False POVs it is you. SanjayMohan 15:09, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IS THIS FRAUDSTER CASTIEST, Mura and Maurya

This is with reference to version 11:26, 6 March 2006 PHG of ChandraGupta Maurya Article.

Fraudster argues that "...Moreover, Chandragupta would have certainly disliked to be recognised as the son of dasi (Hindi:maid) Mura, a keeper of pea-cocks (Mayuras).[26]...".

This is pure vandalism, without an iota of evidence from any ancient sources. I would like to know in which ancient source it has been mentioned that Ch.Maur. would have felt bad about his inter-caste heritage?

There are countless examples in ancient India where Sons of low class women have rose to attain status even higher than the "so called kshatriyas" which Fraudster is not probably aware of because of his lack of knowledge. Example one, Krishna Dwaipayana Vyasa the author of Mahabharat and the greatest living sage of his era was born from the womb of Satyavati, a shudra low class fisher woman. He fathered, Dhritrashtra the father of Kauravs and Pandu the father of Pandavs and Vidur. That means MOST of the warriors in MAHABHARAT had LOW-CLASS BLOOD.

Example two, Mark! Vidur was again born from the womb of a Shudra Daasi, or servant by Vyasa, and drank the milk from her breasts. And went on to write a celebrated work on Statecraft which is revered throughout India as Vidur-Niti.

There are other countless examples in ancient times. By all means ChandraGupta would never feel low or depressed, if anything, he would be proud of his inter-caste heritage. It is only the CASTIEST FRAUDSTER who is anxious to prove that Ch.Maur. was some sort of Pure Warrior! SanjayMohan 03:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Togo Heihachiro

Togo-Heihachiro respected the Yi admiral. This story doesn't have the record in before World War II.

Who made this story? This story was introduced for the first time in 1964. When was this story made? Japanese Korean laboratory (Socialist group that supports North Korea)

Please write accurately if you write this episode.

"The Yi admiral is a god of the war. Horatio Nelson and I are abilities that are lower than the Yi admiral. "

「おほめにあずかって恐れいるが、私に言わせればネルソンというのはそれほどの人物ではない。真に軍神の名に値する提督があるとすれば、それは李舜臣ぐらいのものであろう。李舜臣に比べれば自分は下士官にも値しないものである」『日・朝・中三国人民連帯の歴史と理論』(日本朝鮮研究所 1964)

Reference http://kaokaosama.hp.infoseek.co.jp/YiSunsin.html

I apologize for having made you revolted. And, I wait for your judgment. Please teach to me if there is necessary information. I can inquire of the researcher of Togo-Heihachiro. (But The answer will be delayed. )　　--Kamosuke 18:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Indo-Corinthian capital, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 14:28, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:CrossroadsP208.jpg)

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:CrossroadsP208.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that your image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If your image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why your image was deleted. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 19:11, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain?

Your edit says the image has been released into the public domain. But the site makes no mention of public domain, in fact the site clearly states:

All rights reserved. This information may be freely used and copied for educational and other non-commercial purposes, provided that any reproduction of data be accompanied by an acknowledgement of UNESCO as the source ( © UNESCO ). This does not apply to the pages and images with explicitely reserved reproduction right : © followed by the right owner and the year of first circulation. Reproduction of the latter requires prior authorization from the author.

Can you explain? --Gmaxwell 05:51, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ping--Gmaxwell 18:11, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the welcome. I'm glad to see you're still around. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 22:22, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Map requests

Hey PHG, it will be great if you can keep an eye on this map requests template, and give us a hand whenever you feel like. Regards, deeptrivia (talk) 04:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Reverts

Hi PHG, If I reverted your changes in Buddhism yesterday, that was, of course, unintended. Wanted to revert vandalism of the previous edit. I presumed that that MediaWiki has a resolution process for concurrent edits. Keep up good work!
--Klimov 10:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Routes, Wars, etc.

"Mongoloid" in Japanese palaeolithic...

I certainly do not support someone who by his own admission comes onto Wikipedia to make things politically correct and to support and ethnic minority rather than to make scholarly articles, but I agree that the term "Mongoloid" is out-dated and potentially offensive, as per the Concise Oxford English Dictionary. I will not revert to the less offensive version, as it could be inaccurate in its specifics for all I know, but could you please consider this? elvenscout742 22:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:IndianBuddha11.JPG

Hi, Image:IndianBuddha11.JPG (great pic, by the way) now has a obsolete copyright notice. would you consider moving it to { { PD-self } } or something appropriate?

Thanks--ppm 04:51, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Copyright

Hi PHG,

I like your photo, Image:JanJoostenMonument.JPG, which is in the Yaesu article. Unfortunately, it has an unknown-copyright tag and might be deleted as a result. What's the copyright status of the photo?

Thanks for uploading it

Fg2 11:21, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bopearachchi once again

Dear PHG!

Nice to see you keeping up the good work. For the last months I’ve been very busy on the Hellenistica group, discussing the Indo-Greeks. It is therefore I can now return to my old fad with hopefully more forceful arguments. Namely, the refutal of the chronology which Bopearachchi introduced in his Monnaies de Graeco-Bactriennes & Indo-Grecques. His tentative account is outdated on a number of points and on some issues it is quite misleading. There may indeed be a reason why the work was never translated into English.

Also, Bopearachchi edited the catalogues Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum 9 in 1997, and there parts of his attempted chronology is toned down.

I enclose a quote with six important hoards: please erase if you think they are weighing the page down. However, the following criticisms touches central points on his chronology:

1. The idea of “Western territories” after Menander’s death

This division is simply not true. As the following hoards show, kings like Zoilos, Lysias and Antialcidas ruled in Punjab. IIRC, Bopearachchi mentions that their coins are scarce in Taxila and uses this a proof that they ruled only in the west. Be that as it may, they are abundant many miles east of Gandhara. It seems that the succession of Indo-Greek kings looks like this:

Zoilos I (who according to SNG 9 is contemporary with Menander I; there is probably an overstrike.), Lysias, Antialkidas, Philoxenos. All these kings ruled a kingdom which stretched more or less from Kabul to Mathura, though some of them may have been contemporary.

Around the time of Philoxenos (c 100 BCE) begins a totally chaotic period with minor kings like Nicias and Theophilos, followed by Heliocles II, Amyntas, Diomedes and Hermaios.

2 Straton I

Bopearachchi places Straton’s reign way too early. Note that he is missing from all six of the hoards which feature the kings who succeeded Menander, even those hoards which were found east of Gandhara! In fact, his coins are always found with later kings, and he cannot possibly have been the son of Menander I, an idea which is an old remnant from Tarn. Straton’s rule probably starts well after 100 BCE; it is possible that Agathokleia was the widow of either Nicias or Menander II. Straton I fought against Heliocles II, Arkebios and other kings in several rounds; his base obviously was in eastern Punjab but occasionally he held Taxila. This was however at such a late stage that the striking of Attic coins had ceased.

The separation of the Menander coins into two kings, with Straton & Agathokleia sharing monograms only with the latter, goes to show that there is little connection between Menander I and Straton I. According to SNG9, the coins of Menander II and Artemidoros have been found together in the Sarai Saleh hoard and are very similar in style, so Menander II definitely is a separate and later king.

Agathokleia & Straton I also overstruck Diomedes. There is nothing to indicate that Diomedes was earlier than around 95 BCE. He is not found in the hoards mentioned below.

Awkard as this may seem, it looks like the dynasty of Menander I disappeared after his death (Thrason was probably Menander’s son, but he was killed almost instantly), only to reappear some thirty years later. With a late dating of Straton I, it seems only natural that he was the father of Apollodotos II, who as you know bears the epithet Philopator. Polyxenios is the Menander-like king hardest to date; he may have been a brother of Straton I, or possibly his father. On the contrary, Epander is fixed by a number of overstrikes (among them of Straton I), but his mintmarks are unique and he may have ruled some minor kingdom of his own.

3 The loss of Mathura

There is a hoard described by Tarn found in Mathura which included only the coinage of Straton I. Possibly this could be seen as evidence that the city was lost for the Indo-Greeks during his reign.But if Straton I was a later king, this means that the Greeks held Mathura at least until the 80s BCE. Kings like Amyntas have been found in hoards not far from New Delhi.

Mark Passehl has found an obscure Indian inscription which mentions an offensive from an Indo-Greek king who may have been Amyntas: this king campaigned east of Punjab but was defeated. This is however only a vague hypothesis.

4 Eucratides II

There is an overstrike of Eucratides II over Antialcidas (alas, I have no source now, but I can ask). Either this means that Eucratides II kept ruling after Heliocles I was killed around 130 BCE (presumably in western Arachosia, since he strikes no bilingual coins) or that Antialcidas was earlier than we thought.

In the light of this, I think it plausible to discuss the status of how the chronology of the latter kings should be presented, though I am not going to undertake any changes without your consent. Best regards --Sponsianus 12:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following quote is from Mark Passehl on the Hellenistica Yahoo Group:

"There is a substantial series of hoards which establishes the succession to Menandros (after the very brief interlude of Thrason attested by the Surana hoard);

Attock (just west of Indus): Zoilos I, Menandros, Lysias, Antialkidas (Senior ONS Newsletter 179 Supplement, no.9: nice size; 93 Tets, 600 drachms)

1994 Wesa Hoard (location unknown to me, but presumably west of Indus to include Eukratides bilinguals): Apollodotos I, Antimachos II, Eukratides bilingual, Menandros, Lysias, Antialkidas (Senior ibid. no.8; some 220 Tets., 1,000 drachms)

Swat Hoard Antimachos II, Zoilos I, Menandros, Lysias, Antialkidas, Nikias (Senior no.10; size not given, but said to have been published 2002 by Bopearachchi) This one pretty well fixes Nikias in succession to Antialkidas. It looks like Nikias was the king destroyed by the initial invasion of Moga Sakas ca.110. Therefore Lysias can be estimated ca.132-128, Antialkidas ca.128-112, Nikias ca.112-110.

Charsada Hoard Antimachos II, Zoilos I, Menandros, Lysias, Antialkidas, Nikias, Theophilos, Philoxenos (Senior no.11; after Bivar NC 1965, 71-79) This is the hoard which first led David Bivar to argue (contra the apparent consensum omnium) that Straton I dates to 1st century BC.

1992 Khauzikhelai Hoard some 800 pieces of Apollodotos I, Antimachos II, Lysias, Antialkidas, Nikias, Philoxenos (Senior ibid., no.12) Absence of Theophilos indicates that he was later than Philoxenos, or arose during the latter's reign. So Philoxenos ca.110-100, Theophilos perhaps ca.100-90.

1993 Siranwali II Hoard (apparently near Sangla Hill and Sialkot, one of which = Sagala; in any case, well SE of Straton's western "limit" of Taxila and the Indus) 300 pieces of Apollodotos I, Antimachos II, Menandros, Lysias, Philoxenos (Senior ibid. no.13) Note absence of Antialkidas, Theophilos, Nikias. Again, Theophilos probably later than Philoxenos; although the absence of Antialkidas and Nikias indicates that absences in this hoard perhaps due to location, as well as limited size."

Request

I am trying to contact a contributor whose user name is PHG. You have posted on Wikipedia and image of a Roman coin from the 3rd century A.D. (Probus, A.D. 276-282) that has on its reverse side the pagan sun god driving a chariot drawn by four horses (Sol in Quadriga), with an inscription reads SOLI INVICTO - The Invincible Sun. I am interested in reproducing this image and would like to know in which book you have found it. Could you pleasse e-mail me at n.nasasr@verizon.net. Thank you for your help and promt response. Nelida 16:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC) (posted by Joann e B per request via e-mail from someone who has difficulties posting here)

Thanks for your quick reply! I have been corresponding with this person, and I believe that she'd mainly like to know what source the image is from, so that she can contact that source to arrange a proper license for her publication. Do you remember where you found the image? --Joann e B 21:44, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:1851Wadokei.JPG

Thanks for your pictures of Japanese clocks. I have a question about this one in particular: is this the same device as the myriad year clock that we have an article for? Smerdis of Tlön 16:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Tanaka Shosuke, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 03:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On June 9, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Christopher and Cosmas, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 12:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please advise

Hello. In the article on Japan, There is a topic that cannot agree. Could you mediate the confrontation of our opinion?

Netherlands Version
~~Historically, Japan had cultural exchanges with Korea and China.~~
Historically, since the 5th and 6th centuries, Japan adopted many institutions from China by learning them both directly and through Korea. Japan sent the Imperial embassies to China to China until the 9th century. And a Chinese system and Chinese Buddhism were obtained. The Christianity and the culture of Europe were introduced by Society of Jesus in 16th century. Since Edo period, The Christianity was suppressed by sakoku. However, the culture of Europe (called Rangaku) kept being introduced by the Netherlands.　From the 12th century to the mid-1800s, Japan was a feudal country led by clans of warriors known as the samurai. After the Meiji Restoration of 1868, Japan adopted many European and American customs and institutions. Its culture today is a mixture of these influences along with traditional Japanese culture.

Korea Version　
Historically, Japan adopted many Chinese and Korean customs and institutions, beginning in the 5th and 6th centuries. From the 12th century to the mid-1800s, Japan was a feudal country led by clans of warriors known as the samurai. After the Meiji Restoration of 1868, Japan adopted many European and American customs and institutions. Its culture today is a mixture of these influences along with traditional Japanese culture.

The second is better. The first uses vague phrases that blur the reality. Japan did not really have "cultural exchanges" with Korea and China. It imported culture and institutions from these countries. Buddhism was not "obtained", it was exported. Japan is not a Christian nation and Christianity has not played a significant part in its history. Not many people have heard of rangaku.--Sir Edgar 23:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I support the first. The statement "Japan adopted many Chinese and Korean customs and institutions" is also vague; it blurs the fact that the institution Japan's court "adropted" was the Chinese version, which is a crucial fact in understanding many aspects of the institutions established in Japan, e.g., why the term Tenno (translated as "Emperor", as in China) was introduced in place of a word meaning a king (as in Korea). Moreover, the Buddhism that Korea sent Japan is the one that Chinese's Kumarajiva translated.　

If the Japanese Manga is sent to the United States by way of the Pusan airport, Do you insist, "Korea and Japan exported the cartoon to the United States. "?　I insist, "Japan exported the cartoon to the United States by way of South Korea".

About 50 years after the introduction of Christianity, many people in Japan became Christian even among daimyos, and its influece, both cultural and political, was quite strong especially in the western Japan. It is certainly true that Christianity was suppressed during the Edo period, and it is probably true that Christianity, as religion, has not played a major role in Japan's history thereafter (although it did before the suppression); but The impact of the Christianity made Japan select the system of Sakoku. (Sakoku is one of the most important events in the history of Japan. )and the culture introduced in the late 16th century by Western people was not limited to religion. The knowledge of the Western was called Rangaku, and played a significant part in the culture of the Edo period

trying to use your map of Yuezhi on nl:Yuezhi

Hello PHG!! I tried to use your great map of the Yuezhi migrations as an illustration for the dutch article on the Yuezhi. But unfortunately I did not get any result. Normally it is nothing more than cutting and pasting

[Image:Yueh-ChihMigrations.jpg|thumb|320px|The migrations of the Yuezhi through Central Asia, from around [[176 BCE] to 30 CE.]]

but now it doesn't seem to work. What am I doing wrong?? Guss2 21:34, 17 June 2006 (UTC) PS I left out on each side [ and ] so you could see the link instead of the map.[reply]

Hi PHG!! Now I read it, it seems logical. Thanks for your answer. Guss2 22:43, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Faxecura Rocuyemon

Hey, PGH, I've complete my translation of the Haskura Roman Citizenship Document. Check it out. As I mentioned on Talk:Hasekura Tsunenaga, it will probably need some more proofreading still, but I'm pleased to have gotten through. Hope you enjoy it. (BTW, I love Image:PalmyreneDeities.jpg. Isn't Palmyrene art beautiful?) --Iustinus 07:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:BigBuddha.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:BigBuddha.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 16:00, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sherool (talk) 16:00, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Late_Tokugawa_shogunate&diff=next&oldid=13810720

You seem to have copy and pasted this from

http://web.archive.org/web/20041120033635/http://www.jref.com/culture/edo_period_era.shtml

Do you have the copyright? Ashibaka tock 16:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never done a copy/ paste. Isn't it the other way around? Regards PHG 21:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I thought, too, when I saw the page, but their version seems to date back to November 2004, whereas your edit was made in May 2005. Ashibaka tock 22:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the text from their site is actually derived from Wikipedia. The Jomon page, which I almost entirely wrote is reproduced as well (although they have an older version, about 6 months old). PHG 23:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Must be a slip-up in someone's database. Thanks for clearing this up. Ashibaka tock 00:37, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I cann't believe you have been to somemany places,it is amazing!how do you did that？Ksyrie 10:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Been travelling around for a while now :) Regards PHG 10:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HasekuraRomanCitizenship.jpg

The actual page itself was deleted (by a sysop), not just the text removed, so it can't just be reverted. [6] To get it back one would need to get another sysop (or the same one, maybe) to undelete it. —Muke Tever talk 23:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, I did not save an extra copy; the idea that someone would come along and delete it did not even occur to me. I put a lot of work into this, and have no idea why anyone would so arbitrarily destroy it. --Iustinus 23:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Voice of All provided the text on his userpage. I have now uploaded it to commons, as you suggested, and mailed a copy to myself and to Muke, just in case it gets deleted there too. Maybe the text would stay safer if we created a separate article about the document itself? Such articles are not unheard of on Wikipedia. --Iustinus 20:19, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Hakodate Did You Know

On July 8, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Hakodate, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

A nice thorough article, with lots of pictures. Great work for just a few days. Very few of my articles are this good. --LordAmeth 20:28, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yokosuka

Hi. Do you have the name of the photographer and/or the source of the Yokosuka Shipyards photo in this article? I'd like to compare with a similar panorama that I have access to. Thanks for any help. Pinkville 18:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chimalpain Quauhtlehuanitzin

Hello P, I'm very curious to learn more about this historian, his life and times, and what became of him. Did he have any descendants, for example? I'm a historian myself, from Ireland, and am always curious to hear more about my colleges, past and present. Cheers, Fergananim 14:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for a photo

Hi, PHG. I was wondering if you have ever seen a photo of Joseph Henry Longford or know where I might look for one. Thanks! --Historian 06:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

Thank you for the tremendous effort you put into bringing Hasekura Tsunenaga up to featured status, and congratulations on achieving it! Fg2 03:55, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sho/Sigma

They are the unicode characters for lunate sigma and sho (letter), you need a font that covers the Greek (U+380-3FF) range. Maybe you see them with the {{unicode}} template: Ϲ, Ϸ ? dab (ᛏ) 14:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An Shih Kao

Hi PHG --- can you provide a source for your assertion that An was the translator of Amitabha Sutra into Chinese? That page itself claims that the translation was done by Kumarajiva, and not until four centuries after An died. The Chinese and Japanese versions of An's page have a partial list of his translations, which does not include the Amitabha Sutra. And a cursory Google search agrees that Kumarajiva was the translator. Thanks. cab 13:43, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rangaku

My compliments on you work on this topic. I made a modest beginning to bring it 'home' to the Dutch wiki. nl:Gebruiker:Sokpopje

Removing Exansion tag

Hi, you have removed the expansion tag from Varanasi. Kindly explain why? For now, I am reverting it back. Please reply to the Discussion page of Varanasi. Also, please give more 'detailed' summary while removing tags.--Anupamsr 15:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Sejong.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sejong.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —LactoseTI^T 15:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taxila

Hi,

Would you mind providing a citation for your "Peithon" edit[7] to the Taxila page? John Marshall doesn't mention Peithon in his chronology in Taxila, which the previous version of that sentence was taken from.

Thank you,
CiteCop 04:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, much appreciated.

Do you mind if I ask you what the source is for the dates of the Mauryan empire and its rulers' reigns in Wikipedia articles?

Because recent scholarship I've seen (i.e. Kulke & Rothermund 1998, Boesche 2002/2003) push the dates for the reigns of Bindusara and Asoka forward by about four or five years, i.e. Bindusara ruled from 293 to 268 BCE, when Asoka took over. Wikipedia gives Bindusara's reign as 297 to 273 BCE. I see dates closer to those figures in older work, e.g. Kosambi.

Has there been a development in the scholarship of Mauryan history in the last couple of decades (i.e. since Kosambi) that would have pushed the dates for the reigns of Bindusara and Asoka forward by four or five years?

CiteCop 05:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, both for your reply and for the Peithon citation. CiteCop 05:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Letter from Japanese Embassy

No problem. It's "fresh from the camera". I took it this afternoon. If you know a better way to reformat the pictures layout, that would be great as currently it looks kind of messy. I would have a try myself if I had the chance but I need to catch a flight in a few hours. Regards, E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 00:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Baluchistan (region)

Presume you're bringing along the discussion page for Baluchistan (region)? Cheers - Williamborg (Bill) 05:13, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help

Hi PHG, thank you for moving my info to the correct place. Des Desk1 15:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maurya Empire

Hi Devanampriya. I appreciate your contributions and editing, but please do not delete referenced material by well-known scholarly sources. Should you wish to balance their view with other scolarly material, you are very welcome. But please do not delete them just because you have different opinions. At Wikipedia, we are not supposed to decide what the truth is, rather we should report what various studies have been done on a given subject, and then let the reader decide for himself. Regards PHG 06:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello PHG,

I appreciate your contributions and your interest in discussing this, but please refrain from injecting this far-fetched fiction into the article. You and I very well know that neither of the authors you referenced offered real proof for such theories. As you'll note in our point-by-point discussion on the editing summaries in the history section, there is no support that exists for such a theory. If the heirs of Sandrocottos were part-greek, would not classical sources have proudly crowed that? Would not geographers have mentioned that in justifying why greeks went further than alexander? I understand your love of the classical world and the indo-greeks in particular, and I know we have had lengthy discussions before, but please, let's stick to the facts. While I would be happy to work with you on this and in other areas, my concern is that when we attempt to incorporate the dreamy musings of two authors in the name of NPOV, we are skewing the focus of the article, and of greater consequence, injuring the historicity of the article. This is not Fox news where opinion is cited and viewers decide. This is an history article that should stick to the facts, report the facts, and make sure that these facts are verifiable. You seem reasonable and I would like for us to operate constructively as fellow contributors, but I believe the continued posting of such theories harms the readability of the article, and ergo, the aims of wikipedia.

Regards,

Devanampriya

Hi Devanampriya. Very simply: it is not for us to decide which theory is right or wrong. A published analysis by a major writer has the right to be mentionned in a Wikipedia article, whether we like it or not, or whether we doubt its historical factuality. There is a great way for you to react to something you think is biased: do not erase the quote, or the reference (because it will still exist to the end of time), but do describe alternative theories and references. Most of the time, history is about a debate of opinions and interpretations, based on slim facts and clues fading into the past. Regards PHG 07:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello PHG,

    Exactly, it is also not for us to decide which theories are alternative and which are not. You present these musings of Tarn as the accepted theory here when there is no basis whatsoever. You state that history is about a debate of opinions and interpretations. That may be so in works of fiction, but at the university-level where it must be rooted in fact, Tarn's opinions or not. 
    This is not a question of whether we like it or not, but a matter of what you like. Tarn, and his followers, are self-proclaimed hellenophiles. These side notes don't actually account for anything, but are one man's fictitious explanation for why he thinks Demetrius invaded India. These views are not held by the mainstream academic community (See Shastri's comment). This is like discussing works by eugenics supporters in sociology articles whicle claiming that sociology is a debate of opinions and interpretations. Please do not add the quote again (as it will be deleted till the end of time). You're "alternative theories" insinuate realities that are outside the pale of reason. I would hope that you are a contributor concerned with historicity rather than opinion.

Regards,

Devanampriya

No problem, after editing so much on controversial Balkan topics there's nothing I disagree with more than nationalistic pov-pushing. I don't envy you: judging from the quality of his last post to User:Ragib, dealing with him must be highly problematic ;-) For now, I'll add the article to the watchlist, to avoid mischief. Ciao,--Aldux 20:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thank you for the Barnstar *^_^* -Ash_Crow 16:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indo-Greek Map

Though I've restored the correct map I think it still needs alterations the line around Gujrat should be clamped to the land, the line shoud be somewhat thinner and as for Patna, I think the Eastern boundary would be just a bit to the East at the Ganga as it makes sense for it would have easier to defend for the time they were there (they did leave of their own accord due to a coup) though this should be verified.

Maurya Empire

Hi PHG, I was thinking of calling in dab; as an admin with a great knowledge in Greek topics, he could help resolve the present empasse. What would you propose?--Aldux 22:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mauryan Empire

Your repeated deletions of referenced historical theories from published historical sources (Tarn, Marshall...) just because you dislike them is quite a shame. Why don't you balance the argument with other referenced historical theories which would enrich the discussion? The point is that the facts on this period are only few and uncertain, and historical interpretations vary accordingly. You cannot delete those you dislike, and only keep the ones that accomodate your opinions PHG 19:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Mauryan Empire Slander=

PHG,

Your repeated efforts to bias historical articles to satisfy your philhellenism are disgusting and a travesty to the historical efforts on wikipedia. Even worse, are your attempts to slander those who justifiably oppose your efforts to construct false histories as ultra-nationalists (don't think I haven't seen your comments on other articles). Also, don't accuse me of deleting something because you think I dislike it. That passage must be deleted because it is sneaky vandalism. You took an off-discussion, baseless hypothesis, extrapolated it, and sought to have the Greeks appropriate Ashoka's legacy. You're guilty of sneaky vandalism.
First and foremost, do not mingle Tarn with Marshall. Tarn follows the tradition of the East India Company in masquerading western triumphalism as history. Second, you took Marshall's comments out of context. He clearly notes that it was just "a hypothesis with no facts or basis to support it". And around a fantasy in the case of one, and baseless hypothesis in the case of the other, you construct an entire history, making insinuation after insinuation. Moreover, you ignore indigenous sources that clearly account for the matter, in spite of the fact that those sources are accepted as mainsteam scholarly opinion. Accordingly, you use those very same sources as a means to launch a diatribe against the Sunga dynasty to boost the savior credentials of your indo-greeks. Make up your mind, PHG. Don't flip-flop...
You talk about balance, but in article after article, you find any excuse to boost Greek references without studying the full matter (i.e. Indian astronomy, drama, Sungas, Satavahanas etc. displayed on the discussion pages). Even worse, if you think something might have greek influence, you don't rely on references, you rely on your own authority to brand it as a product of greek thought. Frankly, I have a tremendous respect for the Greeks, and one of my favorite empires is the Byzantine empire, so don't bother accusing me of being averse to them. I am concerned about historicity. Apparently, you're more concerned about conveying a certain biased viewpoint in history rather than stating the facts.
Why are you so passionate about this specific out-of-context comment? Because it helps portray your latter day Indo-Greeks as saviors and heirs rather than glory-hounds and usurpers? No one's denying Greek influence in Ancient India, but let's stick to the facts. You posit these as mainstream established facts, when even the most philhellenic and neo-colonial historical commentators recognized they're far-fetched and baseless.
It is precisely because facts are few and uncertain that one must be extremely careful as to how an historical article is constructed, and thus, must avoid interpretation and stick to the facts. You want to discuss theories, do what was done with the Chandragupta origin debate: create an article discussing theories. Don't put it on the main page that introduces people to these figures. We had this discussion before about the Indo-Greek map, and the net result was that you recognized that you were wrong and that other contributors, such as Vastu, are more concerned about the facts rather than opinion. So you accepted the change. Your aggrandized map was inaccurate and had to be corrected. Accordingly, your unfortunate fiction was improperly sourced and inaccurate, and so, had to be deleted.
My concern is that these efforts of yours taint the perspective and understanding of readers about this period of history, something you seem to be keen on accomplishing. I am, as always, open to continued discussion so that we can work through the matter. I still believe we can move forward to establish this as a featured article, but only if you're willing to consider the realities of a valid argument instead of just your own conceits.

Regard,

Devanampriya

Hi P,

What's apparent is that you have a passion for exaggeration and not historical accuracy, as proven by many poorly submitted edits on your part. Also, it is not general knowledge to people, because you use extreme colonial sources such as Tarn that first constructed opinions and searched for theories to base them on. That does not make them mainstream. As for Marshall, kudos on owning 3 volumes, perhaps you should have taken care when actually referencing him since your quote on the Ashoka page clearly mentions that it was a hypothesis. Good job.
Regarding the map, you don't need to make empty threats as you only betray your own biases. I have no problem starting that whole debate all over again. Also, stop exaggerating. All the indian and greek sources do not point to an occupation of pataliputra, in fact none of them do (so, perhaps you should actually read what you post). You took puranic prophecies (how is that history?) that only make reference to a siege and european quotes that mention that they went to Pataliputra--no mention there. So where my fantasizing friend is such a multi-year occupation mentioned?
Wikipedia is indeed a great tool, which sadly can be abused by individuals with an agenda, such as yourself. You can go to an extreme level of detail to take liberties on such issues as you see fit. Unfortunately, that does not make it history.
Lastly, stop taking primary and secondary source quotes out of context and interpreting them falsely as this does not reflect favorably upon you. If your concern is historicity, then consider my solution to this issue mentioned previously: create a separate page for origin theories along the lines of Chandragupta Maurya and include opinion to your heart's content; otherwise, your own biases remain apparent, much to wikipedia's misfortune.

Regards,

Devanampriya

Devanampriya, So you are inventing references now. You wrote "You took Marshall's comments out of context. He clearly notes that it was just "a hypothesis with no facts or basis to support it"." Marshall never ever wrote that, you are unable to provide a source, and you actually made a paraphrase of something I wrote: "This remains an hypothesis as there are no known more detailed descriptions of the exact nature of the marital alliance" to balance the argument. I am afraid you are being dishonest: it is clear that you are inventing quotes, falsifying them, and vandalizing other's contributions.PHG 05:32, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PHG,

To respond to your typical myriad of accusations, first and foremost, the "slander" was referring to your typical habit of slandering other points of view, either directly, or through your thug aldux. And given your quest to appropriate anything and everything Indian and credit them to the Greeks, you are the one who is racist.
Second of all, irrespective of the statement, you present Marshall's hypothesis as the the predominant perspective. If anything, the lead argument should be the mainstream perspective, not a colonial theory. Most importantly, I'm not misapplying quotes on wikipedia articles, you are,which is why you continue to take out-of-context quotes from primary sources, and interpret them not as mainstream scholars have, but in a way you see fit. Considering the liberties you've taken by appointing yourself the authority on coinage, art, and architecture without considering actual mainstream scholarship, I don't believe you're in a position to accuse me of such things. Your work on the astronomy section is yet another classic example of your blanket insinuations, i.e. sneak vandalism.
Lastly, where are these exact statements about Ashoka's parentage? To say that the Mauryas who had descendants that were part greek either on account of minor wives and concubines is one thing, but to posit your self-sourced theory about Ashoka is another. You took the most out-of-the-way and far fetched theory and foisted it as the accepted account. The mainstream, not fringe perpective, is that his mother was a brahmin woman, and at the very list should be the first and dominant account, since these are so passionately applied by you to discredit the Sungas. As such, it appears that you are the one who is guilty of falsifying references and committing vandalism on articles.
To conclude, you've displayed your ignorance of indian history and your predilection for greek aggrandizement repeatedly. Frankly, it doesn't matter to me. It seems you are not interested in the wikipedia aims of accuracy and community harmony, but in your own sad apotheosis in wikipedia through misapplying quotes and reinterpreting primary sources. Again, I will clearly restate a more than fair compromise along the lines of the Chandragupta Maurya ancestry debate: creation of a separate page for your laundry list of colonial theories so that users can get the most accurate account of Ashoka's life on the main page. Indian history has already been twisted and adulterated by many pseudo-historians, you don't need to make things worse.

Devanampriya

PS1: The Yuga Purana, like the other Puranas (including the Kali Yuga Puranas of which it is a part of), have not all been properly dated. Much like the Natyashastra of Bharata and the Arthashastra of Kautilya (which vary by several hundred years, if not more), dates for ancient texts such as the Mahabharata, Puranas, and Vedas have run the gamut. As such, do not assert yourself as the authority on this account when discrepancies are far too great, and that it's "classic puranic style" as if you have translated all of these yourself. Also, way to interpret things in your own fashion again "instituting a new order". State the quote and leave at that, or quote the author's statement. This is exactly what I've been talking about. It's called sneaky vandalism--something of which you've been repeatedly guilty.

Response to PS2: Already responded to your ridiculous statement above. Perhaps you should sign on with David Duke and other pseudo-historians bent on appropriating other cultures to suit your own conceits.

Devanampriya,

I am through with this. You are dishonest (your fabrication of the Marshall quote above), and biased (your refusal of referenced historical theories you dislike). Both are simply against the Wikipedia code of conduct. PHG 19:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

PHG,

Fine by me. Ironically, it is you who is dishonest (interpreting quotes as you like and making false statements on ARTICLES i.e. Indian Astronomy) and biased (noting your own desire to discuss Greeks everywhere, as noted by your own philhellenism. See Devanampriya Talk Page--don't worry, it's properly sourced). I may have misread your citation on Marshall and noted it during our debate on a DISCUSSION PAGE, but I definitely did not post it on an ARTICLE, that is something that you did, repeatedly, on many, many articles. Unlike you, I prize accuracy in the actual work. Your sneaky vandalism and inability to present history factually make you a detriment to Wikipedia's aims of accuracy and community harmony.

You keep citing my bias, where is it? Demonstrate it? I have always sought accuracy in article statements and representation. You by your own words "simply have a passion for giving the Greeks in India their fair share of history", not accuracy. So can the attitude and correct yourself first.

Many times a solution was suggested(in spite of your extreme accusations), and many times you ignored it. The wikipedia community will be the judge.

Devanampriya

Cabinet des Médailles

User:Ghirlandajo noted they were giving you trouble about getting this listed in DYK. My tweaks are intended to help. --Wetman 03:59, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 13 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cabinet des Médailles, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Battle of Grand Port

Thanks for all of your kind attention. The battle seems important enough not only to have been included, but that is shocking to me not to have been included. Thanks especially for the graphic, I am not the best at graphics work. Cheers: V. Joe 12:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 19 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article French Military Mission to Japan (1867), which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

May I Use Your Photo on a Book Cover?

Random House Inc. would like to use your photo on an upcoming book cover - usage that I believe will violate previously stated limits. Can you contact me at jyoung@randomhouse.com?Nycjudy 19:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which photograph are you considering? Regards PHG 20:55, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boshin War

Hi. You seem to be the one who's done the most work on the Boshin War article, so I'm hoping you can help me out with this.

I have converted this template into a campaignbox, so as to be consistent with other work of WP:MILHIST. However, this late period is not my expertise, and I am not entirely clear on what the Northern Coalition and Battle of the North refer to. If you do, I'd love it if you could either change the links to something more specific - battle of Ezo, or whatever the right term might be - or to start a stub article for both, indicating even just a bit what these refer to; that way other editors (incl. myself) will be able to work off of that. You're one of the more common names I see, and I thank you for your continuing efforts. LordAmeth 12:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a million for your upload of the image to the Ouetsu Reppan Domei article...I've been dying to see more images pertaining to it. -Tadakuni 22:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Parthian armor image

File:PathianArmor.JPG

Hello; I had a question, are you telling us that Image:PathianArmor.JPG is taken from the book Osprey/ Rome's enemies 3? And are you sure about that? I'm waiting for your response and will be glad to hear from you. Arad 01:40, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the image is taken from the Osprey book (I have the book with me here). I am afraid this image should be deleted due to Copyright issues. Regards. PHG 04:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]