User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive 29

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Fowler&fowler. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 25

←

Archive 27

October 2022

Hello. I wanted to let you know that in your recent contributions to Muhammad of Ghor, you seemed to act as if you were the owner of the page. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. This means that editors do not own articles, including ones they create, and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 04:55, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Neither do Hindu majoritarian POV pushers. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 05:00, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

As expected from you another typical uncivil ranting. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 05:05, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm not ranting. I'm not going to put up with nonsense in a vital article that is linked to the FA India. If you want to promote Rajput grandiosity on lesser-known pages be my guest, but not in the vital articles. I am going to bed now but will clean the lead tomorrow, just as I will the Delhi sultanate page. You are unable to read Farsi; had broken prose in the first paragraph, and no coherence either, which I had to fix. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 05:08, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

You had suprisingly got several free passes despite of your uncivil tone, desregard for any source you don't settles with and as usual baseless accusations. Where did I promote so called Rajput grandiosity and villified Muslims ? You really need to behave in a better way, if not please keep on boasting about your FA India page.

The lead simply mentions about his well-known defeats (Tarain and Kayadhara) apart from some other which Persian chroniclers omitted cleverly (Nizami and Aulfi even omitted the Tarain-1191 debacle); the very next line say he routed the Rajputs on the same battlefield.
No, I do know Farsi; neither I touched upon the transliteration part either. I actually read the part (Minhaj and Nizami's original work about his gravesite) and then discovered this in the secondary source of Md. Habib.

Enough of your uncivil and owning behaviour, see you on WP:ANI. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 05:23, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I don't want to get into an extensive back-and-forth here, but may I respectfully remind both of you that a) the editor seeking inclusion of disputed content needs to establish consensus for it, and b) that consensus is best achieved via talk-page discussion of content specifics, not edit-warring? Save yourselves the trip to ANI, please. P&T, pointing an editor of 16 years tenure to Wikipedia's welcome page with a templated message is also quite rude. F&F, you could afford to be less brusque, if anyone is a Hindutva POV-pusher they need to be taken to AE, not have that tossed at them in talk-page discussions. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Well, that warning regarding ownership of the article was actually meant to be in a polite tone that's why I used level-1 for it which has welcome template as well in it.

I don't think any editor could get away with such behaviour as F&f had in the past, not only with me this is the case at several articles now - they brands everyone as Hindu Nationalists who don't concur with their pov, a recent example of there battleground mentality can be even seen at Akshay Kumar's article where veteran editors also pointed this out diff & diff.
I am open to discussion regarding religion bit, although even that was kind of WP:OWN behaviour, if the editor post something relevant to the subject. (blatant misuse of WP:Tertiary policy by bringing source which barely mentions the subject, even disregarding them where they doesn't suits his/her pov is anything but collaborative behaviour.
Could you also explain how I am a Hindutva pusher ?

I don't mind a trip at ANI and I am looking to post there as well ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 05:51, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

On branding me as someone who villifies Muslim and other accusations

Before posting this at ANI, let me answer a allegation against me by a friend and fellow editor Fowler&fowler, abusing me as a Hindu nationalist is bygone bit now, although it's still prevalent - (diff), now I am a castiest as well (for a caste which I don't even belongs to either) and also vilifies Muslims - (diff)

Leave everything aside, I never edited any article related to Muslims apart from historical articles (that too largely about Sansabanis and Md. Ghuri)

I am going to explain my part - from your own high class tertiary textbooks (those I have access to and are of really good quality) and from other left liberal scholars like Satish Chandra, IA Khan, Md. Habib and not from R.S.S. hitmans like late K. S. Lal.

→ Kulke, H.; Rothermund, D. (2004), A History of India, 4th, Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-32920-0

1175 Muhammad of Ghur conquered Multan,
and in 1186 he vanquished Mahmud of Ghazni’s last successor, who had withdrawn to Lahore. Using the Panjab as a base for further conquest Muhammad of Ghur pursued his aim of annexing as much of India as he could. Unlike Mahmud of Ghazni he was determined to rule India and not just to plunder it. In 1178 he was not very successful in an encounter with the Chalukya ruler of Gujarat, but in 1191 and 1192 he waged two decisive battles of Tarain, to the northwest of Delhi, the region in which other famous battles of Indian history had been and were yet to be fought. The first battle of Tarain was won by the Rajput confederacy led by Prithviraj Chauhan of Delhi. But when Muhammad of Ghur returned the following year with 10,000 archers on horseback he vanquished Prithviraj and his army. After winning this decisive battle, Muhammad conquered almost the whole of northern India within a few years. In 1193 he defeated the mighty Gahadavala dynasty and captured Kanauj and Varanasi. Soon he also captured Gwalior, Ajmer and Anhilwara, at that time the capital of Gujarat. In this way most Rajput strongholds were eliminated. Many of these victories were due to the slave-general Qutb-ud-din Aibak, whom Muhammad then installed as his viceroy in Delhi. Eastern India, however, was conquered by another lucky upstart, Muhammad Bakhtiyar Khalji, who had risen to the rank of a general within a very short time. He captured Bihar, destroyed the University of Nalanda and, in about 1202, defeated King Lakshmana Sena of Bengal. This latter attack was so swift that it is said
that Lakshmana Sena was taking his lunch when it came. Bengal became a sub-centre of Islamic rule in India

(Kulke&Rothermund; 2004 pp:-167)

→ Ludden, D. (2014), India and South Asia: A Short History (2nd, revised ed.), Oneworld Publications, ISBN 978-1-85168-936-1

In 1190, he occupied Bhatinda, in Rajasthan, which triggered battles with the Rajput Prithviraja Chauhan, whom he finally defeated in 1192. Having broken the Rajput hold on western routes to the Ganga basin, the Ghurid armies marched east...

→ Gilbert, Marc Jason (2017). South Asia in World History. New Oxford World History series. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-517653-7.

In 1192, one of Mahmud’s lieutenants and eventual successors, Muhammad of Ghur, defeated the chief opponent of the Muslim raiders, the Hindu Rajput Raja Prithvi Raj Chauhan, outside of his capital at Lolkat. By 1198, Turkic warriors had established their own capital there, which they named Delhi (“heart,” hence “capital”), and used it as a base to conquer most of the Indus Valley (which they called Hindustan) and the Gangetic Plain. From 1198 to 1240, conflict between Turkic clans over control of the sultanate commanded much of their attention

→ Robb, P. (2011), A History of India, Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 978-0-230-34549-2

The third factor, invasions, became significant again from around 1000, when Punjab, Sind and the north Indian plain were once more attacked from the west, this time by the mobile Afghan armies of the Turk, Mahmud of Ghazni. He and his immediate successors
(after his death in 1030) established a Ghaznavid principality in the Punjab. It survived between 1021 and the arrival of the Ghurids in 1186; Muhammad of Ghuri was another Afghan Turk invader. He established a much wider control in north India. The Rajputs were unable to resist him, following his defeat in 1192 of Prithviraja III, king of the Chauhans, a Rajput clan based south-east of Delhi. Before his assassination in 1206, Muhammad set up a state relying upon both Turkish and Afghan nobles, a division that continued to plague his successors, Qutb-ud-din Aibak, of the so-called Slave Dynasty, and Iltutmish, the first of the Delhi sultans (r. 1211–36). Thereafter
a series of struggles between Afghans and Turks (a new element in Indian politics) was interposed with conquests and further invasions

(pp:-59)

→ Metcalf, Barbara D.; Metcalf, Thomas R. (2012), A Concise History of Modern India, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-1-107-02649-0

The Turks and Afghans, like invaders before them stretching back into millenia, originally entered the subcontinent through the mountain passage of the north-west. One immediate corrective to much scholarship is emphasize how much their kingdom had in common with other indic polities of the day. Like other states, including that of the celebrated Rajput Prithviraj Chauhan, the Turks and Afghans sought above all military successes in order to secure access to the agricultural surplus of the countryside

(pp:- 4)

Well, apparently your main attempt (which I guess) was to remove his shambolic defeat in Battle of Kayadhara (appology for the screed) from the lead as can be seen here and just jump on subsequent expeditions against the Ghaznawids - diff with edit summary - Please don't edit war; you have a unreliable POV page here

Just to let you know this (which you pushed for) was actually a unreliable addition apart from completely removing the rout of Mount Abu-1178 which even biased Persian accounts referred to Minhaj did (wrongly attributed it to Bhima II), so did Isami, Ferishta, Nizamuddin Ahmed (16th-17th century writers). No, he was not unsuccessful in dislodging Khusrau Malik in 1181 attempt - Khusrau Malik surrendered to him and send his son as a hostage before another raid (1184) where he sacked Lahore and the final blow was given in 1186. (See Siege part here) Md Ghuri being a third-rate general (and crooked dipolmat) is evident from the fact that to dislodge even a playful Khusrau Malik he still had accomplish it through through treachery.

→ Anyway; for Mount Abu-1178 rout:- Satish Chandra (2007). History of Medieval India:800–1700. Orient Longman. ISBN 978-81-250-3226-7. (a pre-eminent scholar of Meideval History of India; quite modern as well from 2007 for the basless Gomal and Kurram Pass argument which are barely different when approached to enter Rajasthan and the Gujarat belt anyway)

In 1173, Shahabuddin, Muhammad (1173–1206 (also known as Muizzuddin Muhammad bin Sam) ascended the throne at Ghazni, while his elder brother was ruling at Ghur. Proceeding by way of the Gomal pass, Muizzuddin Muhammad conquered Multan and Uchch. In 1178, he attempted to penetrate into Gujarat by marching across the Rajputana desert. But the Gujarat ruler completely routed him in a battle near Mount Abu, and Muizzuddin Muhammad was lucky in escaping alive. He now realised the necessity of creating a suitable base in the Punjab before venturing upon the conquest of India. Accordingly he launched a campaign against the Ghaznavid possessions in the Punjab. By 1190, Muizzuddin Muhammad had conquered Peshawar, Lahore and Sialkot,and was poised fora thrust towards Delhi and the Gangetic doab

(pp:-67)

→ Mohammad Habib (1981). K. A. Nizami (ed.). Politics and Society During the Early Medieval Period: Collected Works of Professor Mohammad Habib. People's Publishing House. (pp:- 111) (a specialised work on Md Ghuri's life)

Rai Bhim Deo of Gujarat collected his Rajput veterans and after a stiff battle, in which most of the invaders were slain drove Shihabuddun away from his kingdom

→ Here another one from David Thomas, a specialist on the Ghurids for Md Ghuri being a third-rate general and stiff native resistance David C. Thomas (2018). The Ebb and Flow of the Ghūrid Empire. Sydney University Press. ISBN 978-1-74332-542-1.

The frequency of Mu'izz al-Din dozen or more campaigns also indicates in part their lack of success in subduing the northern Indian Rajputs, untill victory in the second battle of Tara'in in 588 AH/1192 CE which opened the way to the conquest of northern India.

Note:-Habib possibly on basis of Minhaj writing attributed this victory to Bhima II (Mularaja's brother); though all epigraphic evidences strongly indicates that it was a stipling Mularaja II who give the invader such a defeat that atleast in his life again, he never turned towards Gujarat . (Aybeg sacked Anhilpura in 1197 not Md Ghuri)

Please don't make accusations that I defame the Muslim community, it's a request. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 10:17, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Please don't post this here. Thanks. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:38, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

You are using substandard sources, some of which are dated. You are also engaging in original research. A much bigger problem is that you are not able to write English clearly and articulately. I sincerely suggest that you cut your teeth on Start-class articles or stubs and take them to WP:DYK. The reviews and criticism there will surely help you to improve. Otherwise, you risk getting misunderstood and eventually penalized. I am attempting to give you friendly advice based on my experience on Wikipedia, not being paternalistic. Best regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:49, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind advice; take some of my mine as well, the sources/scholars which disagree with your pov can not be buzzed off with lame reasoning of dated/sub standard etc.

1. The sources (cited above) most were your own high class tertiary sources apart from the ones I cited - (Chandra 2007) (Habib; ed Nizami 1981) & (David Thomas 2018)

2. It's quite ignorant to dismiss them as sub standard sources, the former two - Chandra and Habib are among the most respected scholars of Medieval India are in the same league as R. M. Eaton, Andre Wink, Hermann Kulke etc. The last one (Thomas; 2018) - has written several quality monographs on the Ghurids and has given his life researching on the dynasty. Any good historian surely knows that Md Ghuri's success was not due to his military capablities but clever diplomacy, he suffered three catastrophic defeats which potentially wouls have ended his life - Kayadhara 1178, Tarain 1191 and Andhkhud 1204 leaving aside his failure to subdue the Oghuzz as well which took him nearly 10 years after becaming the governor of Istiyan.

3. No, they are not archaic; Chandra and Thomas sources are from the 21st century (2007 & 2018 respectively) and Habib journal is still under 50 years and is detailed work on Md Ghuri's life.

4. I am actually quite benevolent in conceding an argument to end a dispute as is apparent from removal of K. S. Lal's quotebox, even when you removed the whole religion bit, I still didn't reverted you until today where you clearly went too far by introducing factual errors in the article.

5. No, Md. Ghuri did not took over the Khyber Pass in 1176, it took him some 20 years (round off) to capture it after his coronation in 1173. The shameful defeat he faced in Mount Abu - 1178 foiled all his plans of sweeping down the Gangetic plain, outflank the Ghaznawids from there and further to penetrate into the Peninsular India via Gujarat route like later Alauddin Khalji's and his lieutenants did as deep as Mariudri. It was around in 1190 when he actually captured the Khyber Pass before moving eastwards for the Gangetic doab. Nope !! I won't let you get your pov lead (removing debacle of Kayadhara) as the current one summarizes the body perfectly per WP:LEAD.

6. Also, the maximum swathe of Ghurid expansion was not Herat to Gauda as you edited yesterday - they did expanded vastly (beyond Herat in west) after the death of Tekish and his son (Alauddin Khwarezm) and grandson (Hindu Khan) had a sucession struggle, the Ghurids did reached (briefly) till Gorgan (their maximum expansion) before Alauddin took over the throne around August 1200 (Ibn al-Athir states July and Minhaj states August) and regained his lost territories. (See Battle of Andkhud for more details created by me)

7. Frankly, before arguing you actually need to properly learn about Md. Ghuri's life from detailed works on him and not some teritary works (If you are genuinely intersted in contributing to that article; first investiage primary works like I do before editing about a event, battle etc) - you don't know much about him apart from obvious details which any enthusiasts does. I improved on the gruesome factual errors in the article and expanded on its different aspect and not by adding original researches.

- Last but not the least - Be Civil !!! this is not tolerable now, you might get away this time as well but every day is not Sunday. (not me every editor that engages with you had the same issue not all are Hindu nationalists) Best regards.

PS:- Frankly, I am competent enough to edit more then start class article considering two of the articles I created about the subject were rated as B-Class immediately. I am tend to be quite busy in my real life and editing here is my secondary motive like all competent individuals and that's why sometime I post (only at t/p's in sketchy English); I had written academic journals in history to say the least and studied Indo-Persian chronicles for some 20 years now and can safely say that I am well-versed in them now. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 15:18, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

You are unable to write English with any competence. That is obvious. It is

"flown," not "flyied," as in your ANI report. That is not a mistake a competent speaker or writer ever makes even under the greatest duress, not in their sleep, not when inebriated. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:31, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again for specifying, I genuinely feels that I need to fix that part alongwith other prose on some of recent talk page posts. One more friendly suggestion would be to not ping minded users at ANI who will likely bail you out from there like it had been the case during the last ANI. Cheers. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 16:07, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Please do not post on my talk page again. I think I have a right to ask you that per user talk page guidelines. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 18:59, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes F&f - you quite obviously have a right to decide that but by the same token, I also have the right to ask you politely to removed your forged and uncivil notice from your user & talk page of moving away from S. Asian articles and that too by targeting other with your ususal brusqueness, (indirectly acussing that the editors wrongly disguised them as females) - its also relevant when your notice was just a ploy to get a soft corner from other editors (whom you pinged to bail you out) at ANI as it didn't even lasted for good 24 hours. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 13:08, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Please DO NOT post on my talk page. Final warning. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:11, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Please propose your lead version on talk page first to get a consensus and not edit as per your own pov, it's all but soft WP:OWN behaviour. Please don't give bad faith warnings as well, it's norm to post about relevant concerns on your talk page. Thanks. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 13:17, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Please stop pushing your pov lead and don't compare apple with oranges - I was discussing every small issue on talk page in line with my previous edits. Don't edit war, it's a request. Lead is summary of content cited in the body. Please brought your proposed lead on talk page and let other editors weigh in. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 14:21, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Again, please do not post here and waste my time. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 14:36, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

I am not wasting your time, I can list a number of factual errors in Eaton 2019 work which even oriental scholar like Col. Tod didnt use to make (I can list few even here) - What I am saying is it's not the last word on Md. Ghuri which you apparently thinking it to be - again revert yourself and learn about the subject in some detail from varied sources before branding other version as NPOV. That's all. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 14:42, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

P&T, if someone asks you not to post to their talk page, you need to respect that. I would personally prefer F&F continue to engage, but he's entirely entitled not to. And please don't reply here to me either. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:16, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

The problem here is (similar to the ones I have had with Patliputra, another inveterate POV-pusher) is that they don't allow their opponents to breathe, so persistent are their interruptions. I am happy to engage them but I need to show the WP community what an NPOV lead without OR looks like. They don't allow that. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:40, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm fully in agreement about not letting others breathe, hence my post here. It's particularly problematic when they're not posting just once, but leave five notifications in the process of writing a single message. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:26, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello dear admin

I can see there is lot of Hindi nationalist pov pusher admins and editors whom abusing their editing powers on Afghanistan history articles and removing lot of sections with reliable sources, please report them to the administration dashboard 203.171.112.23 (talk) 18:32, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

@203.171.112.23: Although I am not an admin, can you list some Afghanistan history articles where this has occurred? Fowler&fowler «Talk» 18:37, 18 October 2022 (UTC) Updated Fowler&fowler «Talk» 18:37, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Dear fowler,

they put their pov pushes on Alauddin Khalji, Muhammad of Ghor and some more that I can’t remember 203.171.112.23 (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

And also a another one power user from Iran which his name is historyofiran, he do always abuse his editing power on Afghanistan’s persian history, he do every persian related history articles for the name of Iran and Iranian nationality which is not really fair, Afghanistan have 70% persian speaker people and 12 million Tajik ethnic people and everyone of them were a part of persian history and it’s not meant to nbe every persian speaker is iranian nationality 203.171.112.23 (talk) 19:02, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 19:03, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Citing previous editing history

Hi Fowler, regarding the ongoing ANI, I thought I might advise you to drop bringing up edits to FA India, as well as barnstars and similar at noticeboards. Such comments almost never help, as they move focus from the main topic at hand, and they can even be detrimental. There is a very recent case of someone being topic banned in part due to repeatedly bringing up similar sorts of figures as their answer to repeated inquiries. The nature of the en.wiki system is that shorter and on-topic is better, even if it does not provide full context. (I struggle too, here for example is me halving a post after being told it was too long.) If trying to provide context to your edits, it's likely better to leave a simple statement noting that you have extensive editing history in the South Asia topic area, a topic area that inevitably generates myriad disputes.

If you do continue with your topic break, I wish you the best with it. I have found they bring newfound appreciation for other areas. I credit some articles I've developed such as Elections in Jordan and Wildlife of North Macedonia to that freer headspace. CMD (talk) 04:59, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

OK. Thank you CMD. That was very helpful. I will reduce drastically. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 09:41, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Those are both very informative and very readable articles CMD! I especially liked the wildlife one. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 09:52, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind feedback. The wildlife one has the advantage of being more recent, and I feel my work has improved over time. Perhaps one day it too will feel dated. CMD (talk) 15:45, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Maurya Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Samrat.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Delhi

Hi again,

The problem with finding one pronunciation in a Hindi dictionary and another in an Urdu dictionary, and concluding that represents a difference between Hindi and Urdu, is similar to finding one pronunciation of an English word in an American dictionary and another in a British dictionary and concluding that it's a US/UK distinction. Very often dictionaries choose different representative pronunciations that have nothing to do with nationality. Unless a dictionary lists one pronunciation as American and another as British, it's OR to conclude that's what the difference is. Same for Hindi/Urdu. I'd be very surprised if both "Hindi"-speaking and "Urdu"-speaking residents of Delhi and New Delhi don't use the same colloquial pronunciation. It's possible, of course, but we'd want to find an explicit statement to that effect.

McGregor & Stuart's Oxford Hindi-English dictionary has both dillī and dehlī (and also dilhā).

Platt's Urdu, Classical Hindi and English dictionary has both dillī and dihlī/děhlī for Hindustani/Hindi, in both nagari and persian script. (They also have dahlī in nagari script only.)

Ram Narain Lal Beni Mandho's Student's Practical Dictionary, which recommends itself for the High Standard Examination in Urdu, has دلي dillī. They only have the 'threshold' meaning for the other form.

The Rough Guide Hindi & Urdu Phrasebook has only dillī for Delhi, in both the English → Hindi/Urdu side and the Hindi/Urdu → English side. They don't note a Hindi/Urdu distinction in either, and they have only nayī dillī for New Delhi in the appendices for street signs in Hindi and Urdu script (Hindi → English and Urdu → English). Interestingly, they write it نئ دہلى on the Urdu side, but transliterate it nayī dillī; that is, they retain the Persian spelling but use the modern colloquial pronunciation. [I'm spelling that out for others who may be reading this thread, or in case we end up moving it to the Delhi talk page.]

Unfortunately, most recent Urdu dictionaries are intended for native speakers and don't include Indian place names. E.g. Ferozsons' has Newgate, but not New Delhi.

Do you have any sources that this is a Hindi/Urdu distinction, rather than a conservative/colloquial one? — kwami (talk) 19:13, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm guessing newspapers, the Urdu mostly or uniformly dahli and the Hindi uniformly dilli. the nayi ---- is a little different as it is not a conventional Urdu word hundreds of years old, only 90 (going back to 1931). Hold on. I'll rummage. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:50, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Here's sahafat

The Hindi shows दिल्ली (dilli) the Urdu دہلی (dahli); in other words, it is a little more than the English pronunciations, it is the spellings in Hindi and Urdu respectively.Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:58, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

I know you know this Kwami, but for page watchers the Hindi is on the top right, the English top left, and the Urdu just below the English to the left of the two dots. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:01, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Here's another, Hindustan Express published in New Delhi. The Urdu below the blue banner, on the right, says naii dahli.

Elsewhere, say on road signs or railway station signs you might find naee dilli. But that is official, especially in Hindi nationalist India which it has been for nearly 70 years, and latterly even anti-Urdu nationalist, you are likely to find more such versions.

An Urdu speaker in Delhi told me that the road/rail signs are not rigorously monitored. Painters, usually not literate in Urdu, are given hurriedly made stencils to do the job Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:30, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

e.g. from our own WP Urdu page: File:New_Delhi_railway_station_board.jpg, it says naee dilli on the New Delhi railway station. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:34, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Here is another Urdu newspapers published in New Delhi, Roznama Mera Watan (My Nation Daily). The Urdu is just below the orange and green lines on the right, it says naee dahlee. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:42, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

But no Hindi newspaper will be caught dead writing dahli, so associated it is with Urdu and by implication with Muslim. See Hindustan a

Hindi version of the Hindustan Times (I think, but I could be wrong). It says both naee dilli below the logo on the left and dilli above Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:48, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

It is not just the Urdu newspapers published in Delhi that use dehli or dahli. Those published elsewhere, e.g. the Aag 29 October 2022 published in Lucknow do the same. Just below the head of Rishi Sunak, the new British PM, it says, "nai dahli (yoo en aaii) UNI = United News of India a news agency. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:47, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Finally, one last example. The Navbharat Times the Hindi version of India's oldest English language newspaper the Times of India founded 1838: in the story of October 29, 2022, with the picture of a man in shirtsleeves talking to the driver of a green and yellow auto-rickshaw, it used दिल्ली (dilli) several times. In other words, दिल्ली or dilli in Hindi is both formal and colloquial, just as dahli or dehli is in Urdu. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 14:01, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it clearly seems to be dated in MSH. But what I find interesting is that, per Rough Guide, دہلى is now pronounced dillī, so it's only an orthographic difference, rather like English gaol vs jail. Since we unfortunately no longer include the script for Indian place names, it's only the pronunciation that's relevant.

Can you confirm with your Urdu-speaking friends, or did RG make a mistake? — kwami (talk) 18:29, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't know anything about the Rough Guide, but I don't think they would pronounce دہلى as "dilli." But I'll send a message to one of the experts. In Urdu poetry dilli is not uncommon, in part because it is the colloquial version, or rather the vernacular version that the Persian speaking Muslims found in Delhi in 1206, and in part because the meter might demand it, but then it is spelled دلي But دہلى in Urdu is pronounced dehli.

Here is Google translate Hindi dilli >>> Urdu dehli Click on the sound, both in Hindi on the left and Urdu on the right. I think using Hindustani in this instance as a common rubric is problematic, as there is a clear distinction between Hindi speakers (who will not use dehli under any circumstances) and Urdu speakers (who will use both dilli informally or sometimes in poetry and dehli formally or in prose) Fowler&fowler «Talk» 23:21, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

This doesn't answer your question but here is one of the great poets of the language Iftikhar Arif, born and raised in Lucknow, India, but having emigrated to Pakistan in his 20s, reciting his poems in a festival in Delhi in 1988. Hear him use "dehli" at the 18 to 20 second mark Fowler&fowler «Talk» 23:27, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Here is the reverse, Saif Mahmood an Indian Urdu comedic writer and historian, seated on the right at a literature festival in Karachi, Pakistan use "dehli" several times between 5:00 and 5:20. In response, Zehra Nigah, on the left, another great poet of the language uses "dilli" and later "dehli" in her reply. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 23:42, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Sherwani

https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Talk:Sherwani#Reason_for_reverting_edit This was my own ip :) back then i had no Wikipedia account. I edited many articles related to Indian subcontinent and removed many misleading infos. Thanks god that highpeaks got banned but there is another user now who is making disruptive edit and committing vandalism on Wikipedia article Sherwani. Remember hammy? It seems Fayninja is his/her new account https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Special:Contributions/Fayninja Hu741f4 (talk) 08:20, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

OK, thanks, I'll take a look. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 08:25, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Lmao I got partially blocked for 1 week on sherwani…someone needs to get Elon musk n his sink in to free this bird too lol 😝 Fayninja (talk) 23:15, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Erections

I'm not nearly so sure as you that removing all references not "clothed in the decent obscurity of a dead language" is "a good faith edit" . This obfuscatory note has appeared a number of times before. I hestitate to turn the Eye of Sauron onto a new Indian art article, but Gudimallam lingam has had endless trouble on the same issue, despite the erection being pretty undeniable. How are you enjoying your watchful semi-retirement? Johnbod (talk) 19:17, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Oh, the good faith bit was just the lowest common denominator, or should I say, the least risky choice of revert, no one could accuse me of rude or arbitrary behavior which everyone these days is. Will look into this tomorrow. I have to go to bed now. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 05:53, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cousances, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fireback.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

A point

Do you realise you just changed my message without asking for my permission? Shahid • ^Talk2me 14:52, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

I haven't changed your message, I have followed Wikipedia policy about POV titles in talk page headings. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:03, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

@Fowler&fowler: You edited my heading. Ask me to change it and I will the way I think it should be, do not edit it without asking first. Shahid • ^Talk2me 15:04, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

"The proportion and importance of Kumar's citizenship in lead" it will be. Shahid • ^Talk2me 15:09, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

You can't have another's editor's name in the section heading. You flagrantly violated Wikipedia policy before I changed it to an NPOV title. Yours is still POV. Please don't post on my talk page again.

Pinging some admins @Abecedare, RegentsPark, Vanamonde93, and Bishonen: Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:03, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Fowler, please stop including me in mass pings. You're giving me ping fatigue. Bishonen | tålk 16:33, 7 November 2022 (UTC).

Apologies, won't happen again. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Shahid, if you begin a section on an article talk page about an editor, you can't complain if your header is changed. Can y'all please dial it back and focus on the content? Vanamonde (Talk) 16:34, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

If you need extra eyes, feel free to ping me from time to time. BusterD (talk) 00:13, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the offer. I will take it up, but sparingly, so as to not importune you unnecessarily. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 00:27, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

I am happy to help you. Perhaps you can be of assistance when I'm confused by a particular South Asian idiom or detail. Helping each other is the ONLY way this project will ever work. There's only so many eyes one can bring to bear, and I sense and see your earnestness. It may be a pleasure to assist... BusterD (talk) 00:48, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll look forward then when I need the extra pair of eyes. Likewise, I'm happy to help in any South Asia-related clarification, at least to the extent I am able to.

As for this project, I know some old professors who were a part of the last great rewrite of the Britannica in the late 1970s. Now in their 80s and faltering in step, they've fine honed a kind of laconic precision that I hope to achieve some day. Helping each other is the only way forward to that. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 01:35, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Discuss content, not users

In this edit at Talk:The Buddha, you raised a discussion entitled § Hijacked, which started off like this:

I believe this talk page discussion has been hijacked by Mathglot.

As I mentioned there, I am unable to respond to this insinuation, or accusation, or whatever it is at Talk:The Buddha, because article Talk pages are for discussion of how best to improve the article. If you have any issues with my editing behavior, you are welcome to start a discussion about it at my user Talk page. Per WP:TALK, please confine your comments at Talk:The Buddha to discussion about how to improve the article, and refrain from discussing other users there. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 18:48, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

All good points. Apologies. I have removed personal references to you. If any remain, please let me know Fowler&fowler «Talk» 19:09, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Mathglot (talk) 21:40, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Mass-reverts

You've been warned in the past about mass-reverts; now you're doing it again diff. Don't. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:13, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Why were you changing the lead when there was a consensus not to change it on the talk page? Why are you editing links that are to be part of the RfC? Indeed why are you changing the article relentlessly where there is a major dispute about the lead? Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:21, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Let's have a cup of tea and a break; we've already invested so much time and effort in the talkpages. I'm trying to respond to your content-concerns; it seems to me that you're doing the same. All the best, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:15, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm a coffee drinker, but in your honor I will make a real cup of tea and drink it before I grind the coffee. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 14:18, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Grind it well; you make real coffee? So do I. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:37, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm a tea drinker. I'll share your cuppa. I like builders' brands. Lived in NYC for a number of years so I got spoiled being able to try many varieties I would never have had without the opportunity. BusterD (talk) 14:47, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Hang in there, folks. Your efforts are enduring. BusterD (talk) 14:49, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

JJ. Yeah, addicted. Mine began years ago, longer than I care to remember, Peet's French Roast beans, in the days when Peet's was still a small Berkeley shop, and the sent the coffee by mail.

BusterD: Thank you. I thought Builder's was a brand, but just discovered what it is: Builder's tea. user:Dwaipayanc and I recently refurbished Darjeeling at FAR. It has some nice tea garden pictures in the Economy section. The loose-leaf Darjeeling is "two leaves and a bud" picked once a week from the bush (or it is month?) by the women. Then there is the CTC (Crush, tear, curl) in which the leaves are turned into tiny balls which go into tea bags. The British in Assam invented CTC in the late 1930s (or rather one Briton did, forgetting his name though). CTC, but not in tea bags, is what is mostly drunk in India. And worldwide. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:14, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

I had friend turn me on to white tea but I didn't get it. It's a delicate mouth and I'm not looking for that. I was a Lipton 100 bags man for my first 35 years; always a Tupperware pitcher of sweet iced tea in the fridge. Like a prisoner trapped in Plato's allegory. These days I like a black tea with a strong flavor; Nambarrie is one which rings my bell, but hard to find in the Midwest. I order online. In stores here I can find P&G, Thompson's and Barry. There are some more modern American brands which produce a satisfying hearty flavor, but I prefer the isles stuff. BusterD (talk) 18:34, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm going shopping now, a quick one for our fussy cat, but will look. :)

Factoid: The American Civil War was fought by two side who chewed coffee beans between firing. The highest death toll of history, half a million. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 00:39, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Eh? WWI killed an estimated 9 million soldiers. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:36, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

I need a trip to the wood shed for my insulated response. I forgot to add the highest American death toll in history. Yes, of course, WW1 and WW2 as well. Thanks for catching. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:17, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

No problem, at least it proves you're human. :-) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:35, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

>>>Like a prisoner trapped in Plato's allegory.

Btw, @BusterD: Are you thinking of Sisyphus?

Do you read Attic Greek? I've had the impossible dream of learning it for years. I can mouth the words, as I expect many people can from the appearance of the Greek script everywhere, but where does that get you?

If you do, how difficult is it? Any books you can recommend? Fowler&fowler «Talk» 18:38, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Satyajit Ray FAR

Hello! Are you interested in Satyajit Ray by any chance? The article has been nominated at FAR. Thanks! Dwaipayan (talk) 03:34, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello Dwaipayan, I love Ray. I've seen most of his movies in various retrospective here in the US. I still have the NY Times obituary beautifully written by Vincent Canby (I think, or was it Janet Maslin). And needless to say, we already have a history of a great writing collaboration on Darjeeling under our belt, which gives us a leg up on his first color movie, :). Unfortunately, I am flat out of time. I don't know who to recommend. You could ask @RegentsPark and Abecedare: They are excellent writers. Or you could ask @Shshshsh: who too is an excellent writer Fowler&fowler «Talk» 10:33, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I understand time is the limiting factor. Anyway, this will take 6-8 months, perhaps more.--Dwaipayan (talk) 23:17, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

@Dwaipayanc: Yes, 6-8 sounds right if Darjeeling was an indicator. I don't have any time now, but will check again in a couple of months. See how much time I have to spare then and how much progress has been made. Good luck. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:02, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Sure! Thanks a lot :)--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:19, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Rajput

Dear Fowler&fowler, Please can you look at the pattern of edits made by the editor you are supporting on the Rajput page? This is very demotivating to hardworking editors as we are preventing disruption by caste warriors. The text is supported by a tertiary text making the inclusion WP:DUE and it has already been discussed on the talk page. Using this logic, 90% of wikipedia edits can be deleted.LukeEmily (talk) 16:01, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

I don't know anything about the editor, nor is my edit meant to be supporting theirs, but citing a book chapter by Vajpayee for the material in the subsection is WP:UNDUE. That is why I removed it. If you would like to reinstate it, please seek consensus for it, as the WP:ONUS is on you. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:21, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Assassination of Mahatma Gandhi

Hi Fowler&fowler. "Markovitz" or "Markovits"? You've added a reference for "Markovitz 2004, p. 58", but what appears to the only relevant cite is "Markovits 2004" - The UnGandhian Gandhi: The Life and Afterlife of the Mahatma. I would have thought this a typo, but you've used Markovitz with the z in the article text as well. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 11:45, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Careless mistake on my part. I don't really know the correct spelling of his name. Will fix now. Thanks. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 11:56, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Non-neutral Rfc notification

(edit conflict) I noticed your notification at WikiProject Korea linking the newly created Rfc about the Buddha. The wording in the notice is non-neutral, and appears to be contrary to the behavioral guideline about appropriate notification, and may constitute WP:CANVASSING. Please change the wording of the notification so that it is neutrally worded. (If no one can guess your preference about the Rfc by reading the notice, then it is neutral). Thanks. Mathglot (talk) 04:48, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

There is nothing in my wording that constitutes a hint of my preference. It gives the history; the first page move, the second, and the third to which they are invited. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 04:51, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

And the WikiProjects at which I have posted are mostly Buddhist lands or former Buddhist lands. Not like the previous RMs in which people on sniping trips walled them out by making no announcements except perhaps one on Korea. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 05:02, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Non-neutral is what non-neutral does. Inclusivity is not non-neutral. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 05:05, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I disagree. There is no need to give the page history, and in particular, no need to say, "which had been Gautama Buddha for 16 years", nor to list the other name changes, both successful and unsuccessful. Your frustration and your preference shine through, even if you think they do not. As far as the name changes you listed, all of them, and several others besides are clearly visible already in the large, bordered, box in the Talk header at the top of the Talk page. But more to the point, they are irrelevant in an Rfc feedback request notice, and there is no reason to mention any of them at all. This note is not neutral; please change the wording of it so it is. Mathglot (talk) 05:06, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

There is no frustration, only a straightforward history. History is essential for full information. Good night. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 05:14, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Most people don't pay any attention to large bordered boxes. If I haven't until your disclosure just now, pretty much no one does. So good night again. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 05:15, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Tone it down

I would politely request that you desist from the completely needless and entirely off-topic personal attacks on talk pages: aside from being policy violations, they assist no one. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:39, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

They are not personal attacks, only adumbrations of your edit history. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 04:42, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Not to mention your repeated abuse of commonplace etiquette on talk pages before page moves. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 04:44, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Since you have already openly stalked my editing history, you also know full well that your tedious aspersions are based on cherrypicked information. My top edited page is Whaling in the Faroe Islands, which I raised to GA, and my third most edited page is Genghis Khan (alongside other Mongol-themed pages) - a thoroughly Asian subject area that intersects significantly with Buddhism. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:52, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Genghis Khan's preparation for Buddhism, is memorialized in Britannica thusly (a word I use only in satire):

Massacres of defeated populations, with the resultant terror, were weapons he regularly used. His practice of summoning cities to surrender and of organizing the methodical slaughter of those who did not submit has been described as psychological warfare; but, although it was undoubtedly policy to sap resistance by fostering terror, massacre was used for its own sake. Mongol practice, especially in the war against Khwārezm, was to send agents to demoralize and divide the garrison and populace of an enemy city, mixing threats with promises. The Mongols’ reputation for frightfulness often paralyzed their captives, who allowed themselves to be killed when resistance or flight was not impossible. Indeed, the Mongols were unaccountable. Resistance brought certain destruction, but at Balkh, now in Afghanistan, the population was slaughtered in spite of a prompt surrender, for tactical reasons.

Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:15, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

It's unclear how this relates to Buddhism. For those that appreciate the nuanced as opposed to polemic approach to history, Mongol rule was characterised by a highly elevated degree of religious tolerance for the era. Buddhism rose in prominence under the Mongol Empire and the Buddhist kingdom of Qocho defected to Mongol rule. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:38, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

I am someone who goes out of my way to explain things to new editors who are looking to understand infobox data. See for example Talk:British_Raj#What_is_a_preceding_state? from yesterday. Nothing in my depressing interaction with you has ever risen to that level of communication. Nothing. And your last response above takes the cake.

So better yet, @Iskandar323: please do not post on my user talk page again. I have a limited amount of patience for arguments with people who have given no evidence for knowledge of the mode of historical argumentation.

I am in earnest about this request. Best regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 11:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you

... for displaying those Buddhism images on your talk page, otherwise I never would have come across the incredibly moving File:Nagasaki temple destroyed.jpg. Alas, I must avoid the recent move request, as I find it too depressing to read so many distortions of such a profound tradition. Aza24 (talk) 21:06, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, those pictures are moving. And yes it is a profound tradition. I had once visited Sarnath, India, where the Buddha is thought to have preached his first sermon and where the first Indian emperor who converted to Buddhism had erected a pillar with a capital, Lion capital of Ashoka, in 250 BCE. The pillar and the capital eventually fell, were buried, and excavated by the British in 1905. Historians have debated whether Turkic Muslims destroyed it or whether Hindus had opposed Buddhism enough in India for the pillar to have been neglected, and to have fallen.

I was standing around the pillar fragments. There were some tourists who had stopped by for a minute or two. But then there were some Buddhist novice priests who were silently circling the site, holding hands. Some were children. They did it for several minutes. File:Sarnath_pillar_stump_and_the_parts.jpg Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:55, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

A very nice story... I hope the tourists didn't continue their trip in such haste. Aza24 (talk) 02:34, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Beautiful image(s). Thank you for sharing! JungleEntity (talk) 00:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 01:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Comment

The discussion was getting off-topic so I hope you do not mind if I reply here instead. Someone (even Jimbo) making a statement about Wikipedia off of Wikipedia does not negate policy in any way, and never has. Even if Jimbo had the sway you think he does, saying "the core community appreciates when someone is knowledgeable" does not give license to discount comments simply because you personally don't feel they have earned the right to make the comment. There are subjects about which I have immense knowledge that I have never once edited on Wikipedia, and by your personal interpretation of "the core community appreciates when someone is knowledgeable" I would have no right to comment on a talk page on which I am an expert, simply because I have not edited the "right" articles beforehand. Being knowledgeable about a subject and editing articles on that subject are, for better or worse, not the same thing. With the right sources I can edit articles about which I know nothing beforehand, but by your metric that would give me more weight in a discussion than someone who actually knows the subject, and that's not the right metric to use. - Aoidh (talk) 05:21, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

:@Aoidh: I told you not to post on my talk page. That means *do not* post on my talk page. And from now on, it means do not ever post on my talk page. I have not read whatever it is you have chosen to unburden yourself of above. I have no interest in wikilawyering. My only interest on that page was in the Buddha and Buddhism and you have shown no evidence there of the humility required to learn. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:20, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

I think it should be said Aoidh posted on your talkpage before you asked him not to, according to the timestamps here and on Talk:The Buddha. JungleEntity (talk) 21:07, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

You are correct. My error and my apologies to @Aoidh:. I have unscratched their comments and scratched mine. Aoidh may post on my talk page. Thank you, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:58, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

I am concerned about the wording I used in this edit. Does it look ok to you? Since I appeared to be responding to User:Aoidh and in fact I was expanding on my assertion (and in keeping with your bold invitation immediately above), I'm pinging them for explanation if needed or desired. There's a needle I'm trying to thread and since the two of you seem generally opposed on the merits, offending both of you is entirely possible (but never my intention). BusterD (talk) 03:36, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

It is very well written. We need more writing of that sort and less recitation of Wiki chapter and verse. Will read again and respond there. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 03:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm going to take a liberty, Fowler&fowler, and suggest you stop characterizing editors unduly on the basis they are not content experts, have few edits in this field, or live somewhere other than you do. Please give up any expectation others should edit like you choose to do. Wikipedians assert for varied reasons, so it's rarely a yes/no thing--it's often a 1 to 10 thing, or even a black&white to color thing. An editor might choose to ask someone about their position, as opposed to not assuming good faith. Your comments on talk pages do not have to be kind, but you do yourself no credit by such ill predispositions (and repeating the offense is worse). Please rethink this behavior. BusterD (talk) 10:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

I read your post earlier and was thinking about it while making coffee which is brewing now. So musing randomly:

Progress on that page has ground to a halt. I don't need to tell you this, but there are institutionalized forms of unkindness not to mention grandiosity, the coldly polite, but still, the devil may care disregard for the spirit of the law, that can underpin content creation. And I don't need to tell you either that Wikipedia has not been made by editors boning up on its laws, abiding by them to a t, and then looking for crevices in which to write blogs or change page names.

It is the single biggest change from when I appeared on WP in October 2006. The POV pushers were idiots then and could be put away in an asylum on the outskirts of the town. Admins then probably had more powers to commit. Metaphorically speaking. Today, even the red-linked newbies of the previous day, know more rules and regulations than I do. More worryingly they know how to hide behind them.

I agree I shouldn't disparage the lack of a history of content creation in editors. It is really the lack of respect for the content that exists, the pre-existing content and its conventions and methodologies, that I am astounded by.

You know the rules. So, please tell me, how does one deal with the astounding lack of respect both for a page's history and even more for a field's?

At FAR in December 2021, I was able largely to rewrite Darjeeling. It took six months. I've been editing the FA India for upward of 16 years. It would be impossible for someone to plant an RM on that page though names there are aplenty, and it may be that it is because it is an FA as was Darjeeling.

I arrived on this page perhaps too late in its history to be able to do anything. I could if I wanted, or had the time, read up, and then in six months, replace the article with an FA-level encyclopedic article (in one fell swoop because if I tried to edit normally, I'd be stopped cold by editors who know the rules.)

I'm frustrated. I might be lashing out. Looking for wisdom from you. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:37, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

If Gautama Buddha were an FA what are the chances editors could have slapped an RM on it, or in the last five years turned the content into a personal blog? Sadly for GB, it has never managed to get to that level. Like Sisyphus, it is stuck in an all too well-known routine. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:52, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm thinking of an exchange I've had with a new-ish editor on Talk:British_Raj#What_is_a_preceding_state? Why is it that exchanges like that are few and far between on the GB talk page? The arguments on GB are seldom about content. Most often they are about rules. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Or they involve quotes. I think you should make a rule on that talk page: you can quote in the quote argument of the citation, but in your main post please paraphrase as best you can. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:21, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

You're doing it again. Please avoid discussing participants and their various qualifications. I am an administrator on English Wikipedia, and that was a warning. I did it before nicely. You know I'm not your opponent. Plus, you can make a better argument. BusterD (talk) 00:05, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

@BusterD: Yes. I do know that you are not my opponent. But I don't see that you are (or will be) able to do anything about the constant yo-yoing of content on Wikipedia. Removing content, apparently, is not objectionable behavior.

What is there in it for me? Even high-school students who have interned with me over the summer, let along Ph.D. students whom I have taught and advised, would never in their wildest dreams have an interaction with me such as the one I've just had on that page.

As for telling me you are an administrator, I am aware, of course, but do you seriously think I care? Go ahead and ban me for past misdeeds. Warnings work for people who see Wikipedia as a privilege.

I might keep working on Mandell Creighton or History of English grammars, but I'm done with controversial South Asian topics. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 04:45, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

The option I am seriously considering is to work only in FAR, where the highly structured working environment and monitoring by both SandyG and the coords ensures that garbage doesn't come my way. I had less heartache over six months on Darjeeling than I have had in a few weeks on Gautama Buddha or one day on Varanasi. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 04:52, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Since I pulled you over and showed you my badge, I owe you this: I'm trusted with the toolset. I don't get to turn my mop off. I'm empowered, I'm expected, I'm required to call out people for poor behavior when I see it. People with whom I generally agree don't get a pass. This is why folks came to consensus I could be trusted to act fairly in a place where disputes are an inevitable part of the process.

You and I believe in this project; I also suspect we share much more in common than one might suppose, in age and approach. Here's the nugget to take from my "showing my badge" boldness: I hope you might choose to utilize a more collegial, a more detached approach, as I and others attempt to do (and sometimes fail). What kind of colleague would I be if I didn't gently help another peer see what might not be apparent from their view? I would expect that boldness from another wikipedian.

When in talkpage discussion we start characterizing an editor, we're sidetracking the reason we're having the discussion, IMHO. It's a cheap easy shot, and doesn't move the discussion forward. Assuming good faith is not a suicide pact, however. Some editors press advantage or game the rules. The entire "civility" thing on Wikipedia, the reason it's unexpectedly sustainable, is that acting from willingness and assuming good faith seems to be a superior platform from which to civilly argue a position.

I'm weary and so waxing long. I don't want to see you sanctioned. I'm asking you to walk the walk. BusterD (talk) 11:26, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

OK. I'll give civility another try. But I have to say my resolve to stay on in Wikipedia is hanging by a thread, the very merest. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:13, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

You and me both, brother. BusterD (talk) 15:20, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Please keep it in mind that Mandell needs you!! Best wishes DBaK (talk) 15:39, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate the ping (and I hope it's okay with F&F that I comment here), but I have no objection or issue with the comment. I think we disagree on the details and therefore the conclusion, but the comment certainly isn't something that's problematic in any way (or at least not in any way I see). - Aoidh (talk) 04:56, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

In appreciation

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		I regret some of the words that were written the other day, and perhaps I hope you do too. If you wish, please accept this as respect and admiration for your long service to the project.~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:48, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Very much appreciated. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 14:12, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Ousting of Besant from BHU

Hi! I was wondering if it is appropriate to include the "ousting" (I have not yet read your refs) of Annie Besant in the lede of BHU. It could be great if you can move it to History section at an appropriate place, so WP:LEDE is implemented. Thanks, User4edits (talk) 13:35, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for the reminder about revising the history of the Benares Hindu University. I will do this sometime later today. Let me unload what I remember and I can then supplement it with Leah Renold's BHU: Early History, OUP, for more details.

The sequence is something like this: Annie Besant was the prime mover (with a secondary role played by Bhagwan Das) for the founding of the private Central Hindu College in Benares in 1898. Its instruction was based in the Sanatana Dharma (a more expansive and liberal form of Hinduism; e.g without caste being defined to be fixed at birth&mdah;instead being plastic, and changeable by good actions). Her gripe was that Indians were being deracinated by a new curriculum based in ideas rooted in the West. She wrote some textbooks on the SD in English which were used not just in the college but later in the BHU and read widely in many parts of India, especially by the burgeoning English-speaking Indian elite, especially in Bengal which had a leg up on the instruction contrasted with some other parts of India. Bhagwan Das was an expert in the Sanskrit texts.

This form of instruction had contrasted with Company- and Raj-founded, or -supported, institutions in which religion was not a part of instruction. She wanted this private college to be the nucleus of a new university in Benares, affiliated with Allahabad University, which had been founded in 1887, and to be under the general oversight of the University of Calcutta (founded in 1857 at the end of East India Company rule in India. But she found it hard to raise funds as Muslim political groups were opposed to a single such University (they wanted the Mohammedan Anglo-Oriental College in Aligarh which had been founded earlier in 1875–1877 to become the nucleus of a separate Muslim University). Madan Mohan Malaviya, who had strong ties to Allahabad, meanwhile, had been touring different regions of India to find backers for a Hindu university based in a more conservative version of Hinduism. By 1911, he and his supporters were added to the board of trustees of the CHC as they were thought to bring in much needed money. Thereafter, as often happens, Besant began to have progressively less say in the governance. The Viceroys of India for their part wanted to ensure that such a Hindu university would not become a hotbed of sedition. This was around the time of the Ghadar-movement which had raised official hackles. They were keen to have princely rulers on board (the reliable "breakwaters in the storm" of half a century earlier). Eventually the package that received Government of India recognition had Malaviya in a leading role, Besant in a secondary role, and others as well, such as Sundar Lal (whose role I'm blanking on this minute) and a couple the princely types (including the zamindar-types) thrown in for stability as well as funding. At the time of its founding (or rather recognition by the British), the BHU was not much more than the CHC.

So, I don't know that she was "ousted" per se, ... maybe forced by the circumstances to fade away. But she had other things on her plate. In 1917 or 18 she had become the president of the Indian National Congress and in September 1921 when Gandhi adopted the loin cloth, she was the benign hovering presence. See File:Gandhi besant madras1921.jpg Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:32, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Apologies for the run-ons Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:33, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I don't have access to the OUP book. However, this book is available online. You may also want to refer this. Thanks again, User4edits (talk) 04:15, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

That for your efforts in finding that source. Unfortunately, the book of your link is not a very good source.

First, it is a straightforward reprint of a 1960s book, so the "2007" date is not that meaningful.

Second, it is biased. A common accusation against Malaviya is that the institution that came into being under his aegis (as opposed to the one Besant had built before him) was caste-ridden. This seems to be the case with this book for it takes caste seriously, in violation even of India's own constitution, which was already nearly 20 years old at the time, i.e. the late 1960s.

See for example, "As numerical strength is not in itself sufficient to make a community powerful, marriage laws and rules were formed as to secure purity of race, and, thus produce men of superior physical, intellectual and moral qualities." written with a straight face.

See, also, While Kshattriyas and Vaisyas were trained for the special functions of their respective classes, they were required to receive the same sanskaras and the same high standard of education in the Vedas and other branches of learning as Brahmans. Labour and service were the lot, as in all countries and ages, of the mass of people of humble birth and inconspicuous mental powers.

It should probably be examined more rigorously at WP:RS/N. Best, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 10:10, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Edits on India page regarding traditional sports

Can I get some kind of explanation for what I need to do in order to get my edits to the India article approved? GreekApple123 (talk) 00:07, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Please make a post on the talk page, i.e. Talk:India and ask if these "super leagues" are notable for the India page, or only for the kho kho etc. page, or some regional pages, where these sports are popular. The absence of a response to your query typically means that there is no interest in that particular detail and therefore no enthusiasm for its addition. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:21, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

@Fowler&fowler Okay, is there a certain number of editors I need positively responding to my edit request? GreekApple123 (talk) 08:59, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

It is more an art than a science. If a couple of regulars of Talk:India support your request, it has more weight than a couple of more drive-bys or IPs, in my reckoning that is. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:43, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! Adoration of the Magi by Luca Signorelli is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 18:34, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Another year gone

		Best wishes for the holidays
		Wishing you and yours the best over the holiday season, and here's hoping 2023 won't bring as much global trauma as 2020, the worse 2021[1] & fecking 2022! Ceoil (talk) 04:15, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Festival Greetings

		Best wishes for Christmas Eve and Upcoming New Year 2023
		Dear Sir, Hope you enjoy the Christmas eve with your loved ones and step into the New Year 2023 with lots of happiness and good health. Wishing you and your loved ones a Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year 2023! Akalanka820 (talk) 09:50, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

MBlaze Lightning (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

MBlaze Lightning (talk) 09:16, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Happy Kalends of January

		Happy New Year!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free and may Janus light your way. Ealdgyth (talk) 13:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Happy New Year!

Hello Fowler&fowler: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a great New Year! Cheers, LukeEmily (talk) 19:17, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

LukeEmily (talk) 19:17, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Sherwani

Some ip user has vandalised Wikipedia article about Sherwani. I am unable to undo Hu741f4 (talk) 14:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Scythians merger propsal

Hello. You provided some input in the discussion regarding the proposal to merge Iškuza and Scythia into Scythians, but the issues you had pointed out have since been corrected by other users. Despite this, you have refused to respond to these developments, which is blocking the consensus generation process. Could you please clarify your position regarding the issue in the merger proposal discussion? Antiquistik (talk) 15:37, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

India

The consensus for the edit which you are reverting[2] was already achieved at Talk:India/Archive_56#Independence_and_partition and I had pinged you and others. If you still object then I am ready to unarchive the discussion. Capitals00 (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

That's not consensus. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 20:19, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't have time to waste over your drive-by edits. You have made no contributions to the article. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 20:21, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Now you know why I have been staying away from Wikipedia. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 20:22, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

I have been editing this article for 10 years now. You seem to have forgotten our last dicussion on the talk page which was some years ago regarding a much bigger edit (see Talk:India/Archive_42#Challenges) which later took place. If you don't really want to discuss then I hope you will have no problem with me restoring the edit (with which RegentsPark had agreed). Capitals00 (talk) 20:27, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Please don't talk through your hat. Have you made any contribution to the history section or the lead? It is that you are proposing to dicker with in a cavalier fashion. I'm sick and tired of bogus editors such as you. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 00:23, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

I have made a post on the article's talk page. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 00:59, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

First you asked if I have made any contributions to the article at all, and when you got the right answer you changed your goalposts. Yes we can continue on talk page but remember WP:NPA is a policy which you seem to be forgetting. Capitals00 (talk) 02:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

The article's talk page. Not here. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 04:15, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Delhi

I believe you need to see these changes to the lead sentence and infobox pictures. - 117.201.112.80 (talk) 11:46, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 19:54, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Most welcome. I'm Fyl by the way. - 117.201.116.192 (talk) 11:24, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Mughal Empire flag/emblem?

Hi Fowler, hope all is well. I was wondering, was there any sort of consensus that opted for the inclusion of that flag and emblem in the infobox of the Mughal Empire article? I remember it being reverted on sight, yet it can currently be seen inside the article. Thanks, - LouisAragon (talk) 18:05, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't believe there is, and I just noticed user:RegentsPark has come to the article's timely rescue and removed the flag. Thanks. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 20:43, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks LouisAragon, I saw this note and removed it. Definitely Whack-a-mole!--RegentsPark (comment) 20:59, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Devon Avenue

According to the WP article, Devon Avenue has portions named after Gold Meir, Gandhi, Jinnah, and Mujibur Rahman! Nice partition.-Dwaipayan (talk) 05:41, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

) Yes. Chicago was the city of ethnic neighborhoods. It is changing now with gentrification and whatnot.

Fowler&fowler «Talk» 10:55, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Exodus of Kashmiri Pandits

is under WP:1RR, which you just violated. Please self-revert and join the discussion on the talk page. (The discussion got archived quickly, but I reinstated it.) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

How was 1RR violated by one edit of 10 March and a second of the 12th? Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:39, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

March 2023

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Nobody is going to doubt that this is a blatant violation of WP:NPA. Be warned and read WP:FOC. Capitals00 (talk) 04:49, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) On an incidental note, Fowler&fowler, I see you have been addressing Capitals00 by appending an asterisk to their username (Capital*) in the exchanges referenced above. Surely, multiple times is not redolent of inadvertence? So why are you doing that? MBlaze Lightning (talk) 05:41, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Both, yer complaints are nonsense and weaken the credibility of yer positions on the famine talk page. Ceoil (talk) 18:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)