User talk:Kautilya3: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 02:09, 29 March 2016

Archives

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

Would you read this story and tell me if it's eligible for getting published?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00MYY0DMA Read '7 Seconds: Typical Teenager, Atypical Life' on Kindle platform because the story revolves around one 'Akshant Kautilya'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aks23121990 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Was this a mistake?

[1] or have I missed something?

A cup of tea for you!

Have a cup of tea, and some peace of mind. All the best, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:19, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peace of mind? We are facing the `rising intolerance' right here! - Kautilya3 (talk) 10:23, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know... Recent events seem to have attracted a lot of WP:SPAs. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:25, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

'Rising intolerance'? Look who's talking! Someone that can't bear a change made to the great grandpa of the Nehru-Gandhi family.Atul Kaushal 11:04, 25 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aks23121990 (talk • contribs)

If you are looking a debating forum, I am afraid Wikipedia is not the place for you. - Kautilya3 (talk) 13:17, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only people like you and the INC are scapegoating what you term `rising intolerance' everywhere. Please introspect. Thank you for your `highly tolerant' comment that if I rise my voice then Wikipedia is not the place for me.Atul Kaushal 07:22, 26 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aks23121990 (talk • contribs)

India and lactose tolerance

You're going to love this one:

"“We thought they would have a different mutation, because they’ve had cattle for a long time and they’ve been drinking milk,” Gallego Romero said. “But it was all European, except for a couple mutations that we haven’t proven yet do anything. We were very shocked by that, it was interesting.” The finding suggests that the most common lactose tolerance mutation made a two-way migration out of the Middle East less than 10,000 years ago. While the mutation spread across Europe, another explorer must have brought the mutation eastward to India – likely traveling along the coast of the Persian Gulf where other pockets of the same mutation have been found, Gallego Romero said."

So far for 40,000 years old ANI. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:52, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great, if I were a geneticist, I would try and find out whether the ASI have lactose intolerance, and that would tell us a lot of information. In Dravidian languages there is only one word for milk, covering mother's milk and cattle milk. I recall that Sanskrit has several words. I might also say that there is a "cult of milk" among the Indo-Aryans, but not among Dravidians. - Kautilya3 (talk) 11:13, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But why did the 40,000 year old ANI stay separate from the ASI? The distribution of female ANI DNA seems to be the key. - Kautilya3 (talk) 11:16, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We have "Dugdha" only in our IA Language groups in India.see this :-) We do not use "Payaḥ" or "Kṣiram" as both of them have different meanings.Ghatus (talk) 11:54, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Joshua Jonathan: and Kautilya3:

Hymns of the Rigveda yield extensive evidence of the importance of cattle in the Early Vedic society. Many linguistic expressions in the Rigveda are associated with the cow (gau). Cattle was the chief measure of wealth and a wealthy man who owned many cattle was called 'gomat'. The terms used for conflicts and battles in this period were gavishti, gavesana, gavyat, etc. The former literally means 'to search for cows'. The terms themselves suggest that possession of cattle was the bone of contention betwee goups and led to occasional inter-tribal fights and conflicts. The Panis, who. were the enemies of the Vedic people, are stated in the Rigveda to have hidden their wealth, mostly cows, in the mountains and forests. The Vedic god Indra was invoked to release these cattle. This reference suggests that cattle raids were common. The raja or the chief is called the 'gopati' or one who protects cows. In the Rigveda, Godhuli is used as a term for a measure of time. Distance is called gavyuti. A daughter is called duhitr or one who milk the cows. Kinship units are labelled as gotra.

Ghatus (talk) 12:15, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think now you can understand the importance of the cows and milk to the north of the Vindhyas. It's an off the mark intervention, but I even did not know this few days ago. So the moment you talked about IA languages, Milk and Cows, these are the few historical thinks came to my mind first.Ghatus (talk) 12:19, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ghatus. Can you explain the difference between the different Sanskrit words for milk?

It occurs to me that there is a way to square the Central Asian and West Asian connection of the ANI as follows. The Central Asians had constant communications with the people in Iran, but not with India because of Himalayas and the predominance of the Indus Valley Civilisation along the northwest border. The Indo-Iranian civilisation could have developed inside Iran (or Greater Iran). These mixed Central Asian-West Asian people expanded into Afghanistan and Punjab after the IVC declined. I am personally convinced that the Rigveda was composed in Afghanistan (Helmand), not Punjab. That would mean that the Rigveda and Avesta are much closer than currently imagined. This is my theory of the ANI. - Kautilya3 (talk) 12:46, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Scandinavians are the most lactose tolerant people on earth, from what I've read, so it might very well have spread south from there, across Europe. And since I've seen totally wild claims here on en-WP that Jats descend from the Jutes of Southern Scandinavia, maybe there's a connection? (Just joking, there's absolutely nothing that supports a connection between Jats and Jutes...) Thomas.W ^talk 12:51, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Language and genetics

I think trying to connect language to genetics etc is pretty dodgy territory and it reminds me of scientific racists. And genetic studies themselves are also dodgy territory from a Wikipedia perspective: far too many small-scale ones reliant on self-identification, far too new a science, far too many variables. That's why they've tended not to be used in caste articles. - Sitush (talk) 12:33, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush, I am afraid the Genie is out of the bottle. We can't put it back. - Kautilya3 (talk) 12:46, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, but we don't have to mention it until large-scale studies happen and there scientific consensus regarding them, rather than small-scale one-off papers etc. - Sitush (talk) 13:41, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reich and the follow-ups, which also relate to the recent research on west-European genetecs by Haak, can't be ignored. It's too massive. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush: Wikipedia is enough of an anarchy that we can't enforce such a policy. I have tried by formulating an RfC, but nobody participated and the opportunity was lost. You can try again if you wish.

The problem is not connecting language with genetics. All language shifts involve some population movements, though we don't know if they involved enough population movement to have left a genetic trail. Just as we connect linguistics with archaeology, we should also connect linguistics with archaeogenetics.
The problem is more that the geneticists by and large are ill-educated in the historical aspects and many of them are hostile to the linguistic evidence. One paper says the "purported Indo-Aryan migration" and says emphatically that their results don't support anything like that.
Most papers start off with an introduction reviewing the historical literature, thus giving the appearance that they are testing historical hypotheses. But the conclusions often don't say anything about the historical phenomena other than to vaguely hint that their results don't support what is known. Then the authors go and release press statements saying that they have disproved the historically accepted phenomena.
The authors don't collaborate with the historians (or linguists). So they don't formulate coherent historically valid hypotheses and test them. Rather, their work feel more like a random search. And,the Indian researchers seem quite intent on disproving the Indo-Aryan migration theory.
As for sampling, there seem to be two kinds of studies, which I will call "population genetics" and "full-genome studies." The population genetics people probably do statistical sampling, but their genetic research is typically limited to counting particular genetic markers (in the Y-chromosome or mtDNA, or the paternal and maternal heritage). The full-genome studies are typically based on smaller samples (without statistical sampling), but the authors say that, since each genome represents hundreds of generations and thousands of ancestors, the effective sample size is much larger than the mere number of genomes used. That seems to me to be a valid argument. So I am not going to quibble about the sample sizes.
Unfortunately, the full genome analysis seems to be available only for selected parts of the world. Europe, India and China, certainly. But it is not available for large parts of West Asia and pretty much none for Central Asia. The results reported are therefore limited by data. But the authors often don't tell us what data was unavailable and some times draw conclusions based on negative evidence that is not made explicit.
All I am trying to do is to clean up behind JJ's additions to Indo-Aryan migration theory, where he reported isolated statements from dozens of papers which, when taken together, represent a conflicting mess of conclusions with no light being thrown on the matter.
Socially, there are scary prospects. Pretty soon it will be possible to get tested for "pure Aryan" genes, and for each caste and tribe to calculate when the Aryans "intruded" into their community, and the Dravidians and other heritages to do likewise. There is enough known already to predict the picture is not going to be pretty. The communal conflicts that might arise from these results are unimaginable. This is also what I mean by the genie is out of the bottle. But, hopefully, I will be long gone before the technology gets there. - Kautilya3 (talk) 08:36, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Clean up behind JJ's additions"? Tss tss. I see another prospect, a change of narrative: a rainbow-flag with not just seven, but a ot more colours, and a banner "India, home of the world," where all streams of migration come together. No "pure Aryans" and whatever, but a proud specimen of the world's almost entire genetic history. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:47, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, of course. I am fully confident that the VHP will spearhead the Rainbow Movement!

Coming back to the present, there is often far too much statistics lingo that is not explained, and inexcusable in papers that claim to make general observations for historians. I barely understand some of it due to my math background, and I can see that the claims are overblown. To give one example, Sahoo (2006), which has Estonians as coauthors, says that the Indians migrated to Central Asia because there is a gradient of decreasing genetic diversity. However Reich (2009) contradict them saying that the Indian diversity is due to Indian caste groups having small numbers of founders. The Estonians seem to have accepted it, but never said that what they wrote in Sahoo (2006) has been abandoned. In some of your edits, JJ, you make it appear as if Sahoo (2006) is the final word. - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:07, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ho! I don't have much confidence in Sahoo (2006) and his categorical statements on migrations. I also don't dig Indian migrations to central Asia (except for very minor movements). But it is what this source says, and what some want to be definitely included, so, I try to balance the various sources and editors. There are also authors who seem to be more balanced; Reich and Haak, for example, seem to be of another calibre, just like Allentoft (2015). And no, the VHP will not spearhead the Rainbow Movement, but we ~~will~~ do! proud to be impure! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Joshua Jonathan: My impression is that these scientific papers don't undergo rigorous reviewing of all statements like the Humanities papers do. The publication cycles are very rapid, lest the others might duplicate the same results, and the extraneous commentary that we hang on to is rarely considered important within the papers themselves. The kind of analysis that Sahoo (2006) were doing is now dead, full genome analysis being the current trend. My preference would to ignore this paper. It is a fringe view. - Kautilya3 (talk) 14:27, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed some of his statements as being undue, as you may have noticed :). Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:42, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Language and genetics 2

Hi Kautilya3: the more I think about it, the more obvious it is: The ANI-component in the Indian genepool were the Dravidian Harappans, who came from Iran/Levant, bringing with them farming, R1a and lactose-tolerance. Due to farming their population grew rapidly, and they started to colonialise southern India, over land (Deccan plateau) and over sea, just like the Greek started colonies in the Mediterranean. The Indo-Europeans were only a minor addition to this genepool, though a major cultural and linguistic influence. If the Harappans were not the ANI, then we're looking for a mysterious consituent of the Indian genepool who managed to hide themselves from the Indo-Europeans (where are the ANI-loans?), yet had a major impact on the Indian population. If they were not Dravidian, omposing their language on the ASI-population, then we're looking for an unknown language in Indian, spoken by a million people back then, which magically disappeared. And if they did not come from Iran/Levant, then where else? Not from the steppes either, and also not from east Asia. Think about it, please. I saw it, others saw it, and I'm pretty sure a lot of geneticists and linguists/anthropologists also see it. Anyway, in this light, Sahoo et al. (2006) is indeed nonsense.Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will keep it in mind. But note that, if the Harappans colonised any place, they would have left their bricks there, and even granaries and public baths etc. South India shows none of this. It had Deccan megalithic cultures, which seem entirely independent of of the Harappans. George L. Hart finds the Deccan cultural elements entering Sanskrit by the time of Kalidasa, via Maharashtra. Sanskrit didn't have them earlier. The Harappans and the South Indians could have spoken similar languages, but culturally, they seem quite dissimilar. Finally, there is no evidence of mixing between the "ANI Harappans" and the "ASI South Indians" before 2,200 BC. So I am afraid the evidence against this theory is quite overwhelming. - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:23, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bricks: maybe. But necessarily?
We're speaking here about Harappans, not Sanskrit
Different cultures: we're speaking here about a mixed culture, or Dravidian culture.
Indeed, after 2,200 BCE, when a huge drought set in. What do people do when their living conditions are shrinking drastically? To don't starve voluntarily; they start to move.

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You'll probably like this blog: Razib Khan (2015), Agriculture Came with Men to the Indian Subcontinent. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:08, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the blog is understandable. But, as usual, it ignores the admixture issues. The authors of the cited paper (Palanichamy et al. 2015) say, Overall, there is no consensus on the spread of west Eurasian lineages being linked to the spread of agriculture, the proto-Elamo-Dravidian language, and [or?] the Indo-Aryan migration. (p. 638) But this paper seems to have interesting information about the West Eurasian mtDNA. So I am going to read it at leisure. - Kautilya3 (talk) 19:34, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, this paper is disproving your ANI-Dravidian connection. The relevant quote is in the Razib Khan blog. The Iranian mtDNA is found among the Dravidians as HV14a1 and U1a1a4. There is also a correspondence in the Y-DNA in terms of the L1a lineage. But the Dravidians don't have the L1b and L1c lineages which are also found in the Iranian populations. If they told us how old the latter lineages are, we would be able to infer when the Dravidians migrated from Iran to India. But the authors seem to think the migration happened in 9100 BP, in neolithic times. In any case, L1a is not found among the North Indians. So this is clearly unrelated to the ANI. Both the males and females migrated, unlike the ANI who either didn't bring their females or, if they brought them, ignored them and mated with lots of local females.

I guess you need to look at Pagel et al., 2013 to find out about the development of the proto-Dravidian language 15,000 BP. - Kautilya3 (talk) 01:06, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The blog refers to Palanichamy (2015), who states explicitly that the Dravidians may have come from Iran: ""the Dravidian language originated outside India and may have been introduced by pastoralists coming from western Asia (Iran)." Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:57, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NB: I already did take a look at Pagel (2013); funny, that we both picked out this one. You may also be interested in this blog by Razib Khan: The Last 10,000 Years and the Rise of Patriarchy. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:45, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

David Reich leans to the Indo-Aryan correlation for the Big Admixture Event. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:54, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I hope you will give up the vain search for connections between the ANI and the Dravidians now. - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:08, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If I were interviewer, I would have asked Reich, "how do you know that the ANI were in India before 2,200 BC?" That is the crux of the issue, isn't it? - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:14, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also ask: who were the ANI? We'll have to wait for the answer... Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:26, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think that question should be put to historians, not geneticists! - Kautilya3 (talk) 16:09, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, here's Michael Witzel speaking! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 21:04, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the link to Witzel himself. Some more homework to do, I guess. He's filleting Singh, of course. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 21:07, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! As more and more Indians get into science, we can count on science becoming more and more corrupt and less and less scientific. You were speaking of the rainbow, sir? - Kautilya3 (talk) 22:52, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Lindsay himself is quite clearly anti-Hindu; in this case, this accusation really makes sense. Even the more reason to believe in the rainbow, and to practice it. Never give up: Teaching Diversity. The Science You Need to Know to Explain Why Race Is Not Biological. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:03, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not giving up. Just forming a realistic assessment of the situation. The Michael Witzel response is good, but it is a pity that it didn't appear more publicly. I think a lot of youngsters in India have been influenced by the CCMB statements, which weren't countered by sane scientists. In the battle for the `mind space' this was a big set back. (By the way, the comment on the corruption of science is not from Lindsay, but "N. Ganesan," an acquaintance of Witzel.) - Kautilya3 (talk) 08:45, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia page of Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant

Dear Sir, Thank you for your comments, I belong to Uttarakhand and have studied in Kumaon University and have my Friends who have contributed photographs and content to pay tribute to a legendary freedom fighter Bharat Ratna Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant. Please Include the relevant historic photographs connected to Pandit Pant namely

Pandit Pant with Sardar Patel – It has a lot of historical relevance .
Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru & Home Minister Pandit Pant .
President Radhakrishna & Home Minister Pandit Pant .
Gandhi ji , Jawaharlal Nehru and Pandit Pant.
Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru & Home Minister Pandit Pant.

For The tribute section – we are adding content with the relevant photographs – Kindly Include in the Wikipedia page of Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant. I am editing the Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant page basis the interaction with you as on March 12, 2016.

Tribute to Pandit Pant

Tribute to Pandit Pant

After the passing away of Bharat Ratna Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant- To Pay Rich tribute to Pandit Pant , his Birth Anniversary celebrations are held annually in 60 Centers in Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Delhi and other parts of India. Thousands of people gather to pay rich tribute to the legendary freedom fighter every year on the 10th of September.

Until 2015 -Pandit Pant’s 128th birth anniversary almost 1 million people have gathered over the centers to pay respects to Pandit Pant over the last 54 years after his passing away.

During Centenary year 1987 – 1988 – Functions and public meetings were organized all over India and the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi was the Chairman of the centenary celebrations committee.

The Government of India has brought out two commemorative stamps one in 1965 and the second in 1988 as a mark of respect to Pandit Pant.

As a mark of tribute to Pandit Pant the Government of India(National Doordarshan) produced a 13 hour documentary on his life and times of Pandit Pant – titled “Moments”.

The Films division produced a documentary titled – “ Son of the Mountains“, with a duration of 91 minutes to encapsulate Pandit Pant’s life.

The Bharat Ratna Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant best Parliamentarian Awards were awarded to Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee & Home Minister Indarjit Gupta in the Central hall of the Indian Parliament.

As a mark of tribute to Pandit Pant 26 books – both in English and Hindi have been published including 18 volumes of the “Selected Works on Pandit Pant” by the Oxford Press.

As a mark of tribute to Pandit Pant – his Statues have been installed in prominent cities all over India such as New Delhi , Lucknow , Pantnagar , Almora , Allahabad , Pondicherry, Agartala, Haldwani , Pithoragarh, Roorkee, at the Parliament house New delhi etc.

The President , Vice President and the Prime Ministers’s leaders cutting across ideologies and Political Parties & people from different walks of life – educationists , students, diplomats , trade union leaders , agriculturists, farmers , writers , media personalities have paid tribute to Pandit Pant over the years.

Thank you for your continued Support and encouragement to research more.

Warm Regards,

Suresh Pandey

@Sureshpandey: It is not the purpose of Wikipedia to pay tribute to anybody. Please see WP:SOAPBOX. Wikipedia is neutral source of information for interested readers. To do the kind of thing you describe, you need to create a web page or blog page somewhere. Wikipedia is not appropriate for your needs. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 10:13, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir, Thank you for your comments, I belong to Uttarakhand and have studied in Kumaon University and have my Friends who have contributed photographs and content to pay tribute to a legendary freedom fighter Bharat Ratna Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant. Please Include the relevant historic photographs connected to Pandit Pant namely

Pandit Pant with Sardar Patel – It has a lot of historical relevance . Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru & Home Minister Pandit Pant . President Radhakrishna & Home Minister Pandit Pant . Gandhi ji , Jawaharlal Nehru and Pandit Pant. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru & Home Minister Pandit Pant.

The above five photographs are of historical relevance and my view should be part of the wikki page of Pt Pant. Political Science and history students researching in the freedom struggle will be able to relate to the five photographs which have been selected and uploaded in the wikki page of Pt Pant.

Kindly do not remove the photograph from the content since it has historical value.

Regards

Suresh Pandey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sureshpandey (talk • contribs) 13:03, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Sureshpandey: You are simply repeating yourself. You say that these images of historical relevance. But you haven't explained what this relevance is. You need to do so, and do it on the article's talk page so that all the involved editors can assess your input. @RegentsPark and Sitush: can you provide some advice to this user? - Kautilya3 (talk) 13:19, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:16, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Kautilya3:!

Hi, I'm MBlaze Lightning. I noticed that you are a very well experienced editor and you are contributing to India and Pakistan related articles from a long time, i guess! I want to inform you about continuous POV pushing and TAG-TEAMING and off-wiki communications between few editors mostly belonging to pakistan. You may like to have a look to these edits First, Second, Third, Fourth, and several more wiki articles mainly related to India-Pakisan, and those must be on your watchlist i guess! So you see, these guys are adding blatant controversial contents/POV/WP:FALSEBALANCE, WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. There edits gives WP:UNDUE weight in the article, and ultimately they are violating several wiki policies like WP:BALASPS and to some extent WP:RS.

I was about to take this matter to an administrator but i found you more helpful in this case! I expect, that you will have your attention towards this. Thank You! MBlaze Lightning (talk) 11:09, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, MBlaze, nobody is perfect. And, you have to recognize that the Indian and Pakistani editors will have different perspectives which they bring to Wikipedia. The way to address them is to do a lot of discussion on the talk pages, focus on the reliable sources, and adhere to Wikipedia policies. I made some suggestions on the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War talk page. Please try to follow them. It doesn't do any good to just blame each other of POV-pushing. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 11:25, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep that in mind, thanks! MBlaze Lightning (talk) 17:38, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Asaduddin Article

Hi कुटिल, It seems somebody has put entire stuff(including 'bharat mata' slogan thing under the "Political career" section of the article.. I think you were right and the article looks more balanced now ..thanks Adamstraw99 (talk) 15:57, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, The Masked Man of Mega Might did a great job. The article is hardly "balanced" however. A long list of scandals can hardly be called "balance." To bring balance, we need to find quality material about Owaisi and his politics. (Any reason why you are addressing me as kutil? You have seen my User page I hope?) - Kautilya3 (talk) 16:19, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Azad Article

Hi Kautilya3, i have noticed that just like Asaduddin article you are reverting my edits on this article too(tactfully ignoring those who start the revert of my text). anyway, As suggested by you, i have decided to talk more and edit less. in the process i have put a new section on Azad talk page. I Hope you will respond there..

And about previous comment, my hindi typing tool couldn't write kautilya properly in hindi hence it was कुटिल .. this is nothing more than ONLY a co-incidence that कुटिल is also referred to this guy -->> Jeevan (actor).. sorry about that..thanx Adamstraw99 (talk) 01:55, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, more game-playing! My user page already explains why Hindu nationalists regard me as कुटिल. - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:55, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 18 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Asaduddin Owaisi page, your edit caused a redundant parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Corporal punishment

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Corporal punishment. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hyderabad

Hi Kautilya, it does seem fair that such historical matters require scholarly sources, but I've noticed that other pages, allow for such new articles. Plus this topic has affected me and my family personally. But now that I think about it, I feel as if what I wrote should be on the Hyderabadi Muslims Wikipedia page and not on this one, though they relate. Do you think this would be a good Idea? Thanks anyways for keeping Wikipedia a trustworthy website. Hammad.511234 (talk) 22:46, 19 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hammad.511234 (talk • contribs)

Hello, Kautilya3. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

The changed discourse

Up to a few months ago, the discourse was about Modi, the RSS, VHP, Ayodhya, Gujarat, forced conversions, attacks on churches, rising intolerance etc. Hindutva has now taken charge, changing the discourse to nationalism, Kashmir, Bharat Mata, Sanskrit, and what have you. The Nazis are here finally. Dear friends, where are you? - Kautilya3 (talk) 17:36, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rabrindranath Tagore once said that “people who need to be hypnotised with shrieking invocations to a mother or a deity, do not love their country so much as they love passion. The attempt to maintain a stronger infatuation with something over and above the truth is a symptom of our instilled sense of slavery.”[2]. - Kautilya3 (talk) 21:33, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As a history student, I can not use the word "Nazis" so carelessly. It's a highly loaded word of grate magnitude.Ghatus (talk) 12:36, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What Happened When A Man Confronted A Random Muslim Woman About Brussels. Good laughs and a great comment at the end. - Kautilya3 (talk) 18:54, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ghatus: Perhaps I do use the term "Nazi" lightly, because it is the ideology that I care about. Here is the record, documented by Ghulam Nabi Azad in the Rajya Sabbha: [3]. Sorry folks, it is in Hindi. If I can find a written coverage of the speech, I will post it here. - Kautilya3 (talk) 18:34, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The chidiya at 24:55 are especially brilliant! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:54, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi. How are you Kautilya? I am extremely busy in my real life duties. I hope you are taking care of all controversial matters on Wikipedia. You are one of editor who inspired me very much in my initial days on Wikipedia. I really miss my Wikipedia days. Wikipedia is one of best thing happened in my life. When I look back in my life I really feel proud that I have contributed to some extend to Wikipedia. Now a days I don't edit Wikipedia. But I remember and miss many Wikipedia editors, I miss all my wikifriends and also my "opponents" badly. It was so nice time. I hope one day I will come back actively, till then I leave it on you. I wish you best luck for editing and for your happy life. Cheers. --Human3015^TALK 18:24, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Humanist, don't worry. We can't take time off work all the time. Many neutral editors that understand Wikipolicies are also away, and, as I said above, Hindutva is forcing more and more workload on us. - Kautilya3 (talk) 18:36, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kivisild

Looks like Kivisild has interesting things to say. I'm reallu curious about the discussions between Reich, Tangaraj, Kivisild, Metspalu and Manjoori. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:34, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Images removal?

Hi Kautilya, Whats up with the images for articles on ethnic groups being removed? Wasiq 9320 (talk) 15:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You mean the collages of people? There was a site-wide decision to remove them because the ethnic identities are often unsourced and hard to verify, and there is often fighting about whom to include and exclude. I think it was a good idea. A lot of time will be saved from fighting useless disputes. - Kautilya3 (talk) 15:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ohh, alright. Thanks. Wasiq 9320 (talk) 15:45, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Jeb Bush

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jeb Bush. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A good read

I, to a large extent, agree with this- The Historiography of Medieval India Needs a Middle Way Ghatus (talk) 12:25, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed. I am getting more and more impressed with The Wire. We need to do a wikipage on them. - Kautilya3 (talk) 13:39, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Shehla Rashid Shora for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shehla Rashid Shora 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/Shehla Rashid Shora until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Lemongirl942 (talk) 01:35, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested

In this draft, which I've finally gotten around to completing (at least at a very basic level). Planning to move it to mainspace soon, but any input you have will be appreciated. Vanamonde93 (talk) 03:56, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Should I put my comments on the talk page? I presume that you will want to make this a GA eventually? I will give it a thorough read during the (thankfully long) weekend. An offhand coment at the moment is that the VP Singh reference in the lead jumps out a bit abruptly. It would be better to start with a reference to the Ayodhya dispute that dates back to centuries. And, I think we need to mention in the Background section the fact that the 1949 capture of the mosque was also a political move, by the Hindu Mahasabha to recover from the aftermath of the Mahatma Gandhi assassination. - Kautilya3 (talk) 08:23, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page works fine, if you want to add a paragraph, that's fine too. Ignore the lead for now, I write that at the very end, usually. This is still a work in progress, but the first round of work on etymology, background and aftermath are done, so perhaps you could start with those? Vanamonde93 (talk) 15:03, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maqbool Bhat, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kashmiri (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:36, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Nationalism is the new communalism"

... says Shehla Rashid Shora. Nice slogan, but not exactly true. It is in fact the "old" communalism. See Hindutva#Hedgewar and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and also Hindutva#Bharatiya Jana Sangh. How do we get Indian students to read Wikipedia? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:16, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Finding a book

Hi, is there any way through which I can have full access to a book source? Like this book isn't available in full view, so is there any way through at least a full page can be seen online? MBlaze Lightning -talk! 17:03, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, three options: find a library that has the book, buy a copy yourself (try abebooks.com), or risk downloading a pirated e-book from somewhere.

What do you want to find in this book? Note that this version has limited preview. - Kautilya3 (talk) 17:16, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, i wanted to verify the claims on one article and page no. 87 has a very limited view. Anyway, Thanks for your help! MBlaze Lightning -talk! 17:23, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External Links

Hi, I understand you pasted a link to a video in 3 articles. [4],[5], [6]. I would once again recommend that external links need to be neutral and should not be biased and show one particular point of view. Another problem with external links (particularly videos) is that editors often link to videos which have been uploaded by a particular Youtube account (where the increased views can translate into possible advertisement revenue). The best way to avoid such situations is to either not link at all, or provide a single external link to a website controlled by the article subject. In case of the 2 BLPs, you can provide links to their official websites. You can have a look other articles like Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2008 and Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 to see the external links. They usually do not include external links to one particular debate/opinion article/interview. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 14:56, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Lemongirl942: I am aware of your objections and I am also aware that they don't apply to the links I have posted. You are welcome to raise the objections again on the article talk pages if you wish. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 15:43, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Query about Hussain Haqqani

Dear Kautilya, thank you for your warm welcome and for the update on the wiki pedia guidelines as well . I hope I will learn and contribute constructively. Being a relatively inexperienced editor I wanted to ask you something. There is a portion on Hussain Haqqani article which I believe violate Wikipedia rules and guidelines, the following section is quoted as follows:

"The Wall Street Journal described Haqqani as "a hostage" while he was in Pakistan and published an interview with him from the Prime Minister's house in which he outlined why he was hated by Pakistan's intelligence services and Jihadi groups.[47] Michel Hirsh, writing in The Atlantic, described Haqqani as "The Last Friendly Pakistani" towards the US[48] Jeffrey Goldberg, writing for The Atlantic and Bloomberg News, has been a consistent supporter of Haqqani, calling him "The Hardest Working Man in Washington" and criticising Pakistan's military and security services[49][50] Simon Tisdall of The Guardian called Haqqani "an instinctive ally of the west" and attributed Memogate to the ambassador's difficult relationship with Pakistan intelligence service.[51]"

Isn`t this portion based on the OPEDs which I believe goes against the wikipedia policies. Can you elaborate on this because I want to remove this section DelusionMBT (talk) 18:41, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DelusionMBT, thanks for checking. I personally don't like newspaper op-eds, because there is no editorial control over them. We, Indians, however extensively use news magazines like the Outlook and Frontline, which are often cited in academic articles. These magazines are known for taking an independent line, often opposed to the Government point of view. Pakistan doesn't seem to have such magazines.

If the author of a newspaper op-ed is a recognized scholar or a notable writer of some kind, Wikipedia policies allow it with in-line attribution. That seems to have been satisfied in the instances you mention. The writers are career journalists who have built up a reputation for themselves. The commentators in the Tribune often seem like just instruments of the Pakistan military. If I take it to WP:RSN, they will say no to most of them.

Pakistan cannot be, and should not be, reduced to its military. That would be an insult to Pakistan. I hope you get the point. No matter what the Pakistani media says, Husain Haqqani is a highly respected scholar worldwide, and that will not change based on Wikipedia rants. So this vendetta is entirely pointless. Read the talk page discussions to see what I mean. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 19:18, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kautilya,

Thank you for your response. I agree with you, Hussain Haqqani is indeed a respectable scholar. But please lets not make this about India-Pakistan we are neighbours and should remain as such saying that Pakistan doesn`t have newspapers which are critical of its government or the establishment is totally false. I am a regular reader of dawn an independent newspaper but as for the case of tribune I agree it still needs time to mature up a bit. Being critical of a government policies doesn`t make you an anti-national rather its a good thing to introspect. In my opinion you are a neutral editor but Wikipedia instead of being a battle ground between the people of the two countries should be a platform where we can work together considerate of one another to make our region a better and prosperous one. I don`t doubt your intentions. But the section which I have pointed out is a highly biased POV that too based on OPeds. Have a great its been great talking to you. Thank you long live India & Pakistan :) DelusionMBT (talk) 08:27, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad that you don't want to make this an India-Pakistan issue, but note that that is exactly what your edit did. There is no evidence that Haqqani is working with any Indian lobby. It is just that he holds an anti-military, pro-democracy view, amply documented in his books. It is wrong to make him look like an Indian agent. The source cited is a highly opinionated op-ed. To maintain WP:NPOV, you need to find also other points of view expressed in the news media and decide how much WP:WEIGHT to assign to each of them. At the moment, I find the coverage to be biased. All the neutral, third party editors that have visited the page also find it biased, as you can see from the talk page.

The passage you quoted above was there from before I started paying attention to this page. If you would like, I can review the sources and see if they reflect an accurate summary. However, the way the op-eds are summarised in this passage is the correct one according WP:NEWSORG.

I agree that Dawn is a respectable newspaper. But your colleagues seem to have carefully avoided all opinions published there. They have also deleted vast quantities of text sourced to Ayesha Jalal, and claimed that she was biased too. - Kautilya3 (talk) 10:29, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kautilya,

Going through the talk page I believe the reason Ayesha Jalal work was objected to/against was because of the conflict of interest. It also seemed to compromise the integrity of Mr. Mansoor Ijaz claims due to her rather personal association with Hussain Haqqani. As for Haqqani working with the Indian lobby it sure is a bone of contention between the Pakistani and Indian editors, mainly the reason for this is the nexus which is being operated by Tarek Fatah, Hussain Haqqani and Christine Fair. Tarek Fatah and Christine Fair unlike Hussain Haqqani have been pretty unreasonable and unscholarly not to mention at times bigoted, I have personally myself seen Hussain Haqqani sharing the same platform with the duo . As for the mention of the Indian lobby, the reason given by Hussain Haqqani for preventing anti-terrorist aid/machinery to pakistan was that it would be used against india which obviously resulted into a reaction from Pakistan saying that he is working for the Indian lobby same is true for his opposition to the sale of Military hardware to Pakistan which includes Viper Helicopters and 8 F-16s. These are the reasons which I believe are the source of the contentions, also by Indian lobby it is meant the Indian caucas at the Capitol Hill. The section I pointed out to contain things like "Last friendly Pakistani towards the west" like what is this? Of course such things will lead towards more misunderstandings. Wishing you the best for the future. Take cares

DelusionMBT (talk) 11:33, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any two academics working in the same academic area often get together at conferences, invite each other for seminars, go to dinner together and compare notes etc. These kinds of interactions are not considered `conflict of interest'. Note also that the Wikipedia policies do not allow any editor to decide whether reliable sources are biased and discount them for that reason. Newspaper op-eds in contrast are never considered reliable sources just because they got published in a newspaper. As long as you understand and follow these policies, you will be fine. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:55, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I totally agree with you.DelusionMBT (talk) 12:50, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the message about "edit summary" which I will keep in mind in future. Normally I think some edit summary gets auto-generated but that did not happen here. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.128.6 (talk) 11:54, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. There is no autogeneration of edit summaries. You would need to explain the rationale for your edit, especially if you are changing any sourced content. All the best! - Kautilya3 (talk) 12:00, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MBlaze Lighting

He was alone against a bunch of POV pushers in that SPI. --Greek Legend (talk) 02:09, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 328: / Line 328: @@
 Thanks for the message about "edit summary" which I will keep in mind in future. Normally I think some edit summary gets auto-generated but that did not happen here. Thanks.  <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/59.182.128.6|59.182.128.6]] ([[User talk:59.182.128.6|talk]]) 11:54, 28 March 2016 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 : You are welcome. There is no autogeneration of edit summaries. You would need to explain the rationale for your edit, especially if you are changing any [[WP:RS|sourced]] content. All the best! - [[User:Kautilya3|Kautilya3]] ([[User talk:Kautilya3#top|talk]]) 12:00, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
+== MBlaze Lighting ==
+He was alone against a bunch of POV pushers in that SPI. --[[User:Greek Legend|Greek Legend]] ([[User talk:Greek Legend|talk]]) 02:09, 29 March 2016 (UTC)