User talk:Kautilya3

Archives

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

About Kuki-Chin and Kuki-Chin-Naga Classifications

The articles Kuki-Chin languages and Kuki-Chin–Naga languages (recently moved to Zohnahtlak languages) refer to the same linguistic group. The earlier classification is inaccurate and not culturally appropriate, which has led to confusion and some disagreement across related talk pages. I'm currently working to correct this by gathering reliable sources, some of which I've already linked in the Zohnahtlak languages article. I suggest keeping the deletion discussion for Kuki-Chin languages open, with the aim of redirecting it to Zohnahtlak languages once sourcing and consensus are clearer. Phxlm (talk) 20:00, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can't "correct" Wikipedia. Wikipedia represents the consensus of published scholarly works. If you continue to proceed in the fashion you have been doing, you are liable to get blocked. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:37, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your response exposes alot about you..no wonder why !!

1)Wikipedia is open source and it relies on contributins from users so saying , you can't "correct" Wikipedia is not only non factual it's nonsensical and stupid.

2)Wikipedia doesn't represent consensus of published scholarly works...it is an open source encyclopedia and what your talking about is a standard that's not universally applicable.

I suggest you get your facts right and educate yourself with Wikipedias guidelines...and lastly you don't have the authority to block me...If you do , try and block me and see if you can hold on to your privileges...show some respect , maintain civility or quit your role. You're not gonna threaten me because you have some flawed sense of authority in an open source platform...im free to do what I please. this isn't your personal property and you don't have power over me...!! this is a response to your threat not an unwarranted response...stop threatening people loser Phxlm (talk) 16:47, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to take your source issue to WP:RSN and ask whether they validate your claims. If you try to railroad your problematic content, I am afraid you will face sanctions. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:49, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can also for WP:3O since there are only two of us discussing on that page. Please refrain from personal attacks. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:52, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of dispute at WP:3O

I have listed the dispute regarding Talk:2025 India–Pakistan conflict#Newspaper-like statement at WP:3O. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:55, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:57, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nepal studies has been nominated for deletion

Category:Nepal studies has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ^SMason_Garrison 02:07, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nubra District

Hello Kautilya3,

I saw your latest update on the Nubra River, stating that it was part of the Nubra District. I've also been wondering about this for a long time. Here's my impression: - this new district was announced in August 2024, - since then, official field visits have taken place, I imagine to discuss the organization, - but I haven't seen anywhere that the creation of these districts had been formalized in a legal text or that it was already operational.

I probably haven't seen everything. But, in any case, in light of that, I thought we should wait a little longer to use "Nubra District" as the district name.

What do you think? You probably have better information than I do, and I'm interested.

Thank you very much, in any case, for raising this point, which I'm not sure how best to address. WikiDref (talk) 14:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It has been announced and appeared in newspapers. It doesn't matter much whether its administration has been set up or not. Even earlier it was a distinct subdivision called "Diskit Nubra". -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:36, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In 2011 census, it was listed as "Nubra sub-district" (or tehsil), along with Leh and Khalsi (Khalatse).

It is a historical region, which included the Nubra River valley as well as the lower portion of the Shyok River valley. (Nubra means "western valley" in Ladakhi. I suppose it was western to the upper Shyok river.)

The "Nubra Valley" originally used in the lead sentence is artificial. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:49, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your time and insights.

I share many of your points, but I'm not sure I'm 100% in agreement with everything.

My reactions to your comments:

- My understanding is that the Nubra district is currently at the announcement stage and not yet an official/legal reality. Personally, I thought it was better to indicate the realities rather than the announcements.

- I agree that, currently, it is both a subdivision and a tehsil, but that seems to me a less interesting hierarchical level for an infobox.

- In the census, personally, I understood "sub-district" as a subdivision and not at the same level as district.

- The toponym "Nubra" or "Nubra Valley" is terribly ambiguous. Literally, "Nubra Valley" is the valley of the Nubra River and therefore runs from the Siachen Glacier to Diskit, and that's it. But, I agree again, the regional name "Nubra" has long encompassed larger areas under this name (or even under the name "Nubra Valley").

- I haven't seen "Nubra Valley" originally used in the lead sentence.

Regardless of the starting point of this discussion, I wonder if it wouldn't be worth creating a disambiguation page. WikiDref (talk) 15:18, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the original lead sentence said Nubra River flows in the Nubra Valley [1]. Since the Nubra Valley was a link back to the same page, it carried zero information.

Since this is a geography article, I am not particularly concerned with whether the district administration exists yet or not. If you feel strongly, you can change it back to Leh. But Nubra should still be mentioned prominently. That is what counts here geographically speaking. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:59, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. WikiDref (talk) 16:11, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of dispute at WP:3O

I have listed the dispute regarding Talk:2025 India–Pakistan conflict#Despite Pakistan's official denial at WP:3O. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 14:37, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please maintain neutrality in your edits

Hello Kautilya3 Historygeof12345 (talk) 10:47, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Historygeof12345, I have no idea what you mean. I reverted your edit with the edit summary: That is a huge edit with lots of changes; please discuss them on the talk page, or split up individual edits of sections; do not remove any sourced content without explanation. None of those concerns were satisfied by your re-revert. You are now WP:Edit warring. If you persist, you are liable to be blocked. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:53, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the talk page of 2025 Pahalgam attack

Your message has been moved from the voting section to the discussion section of Talk:2025 Pahalgam attack#RFC on "Settler Colonialism" in Background Section. The specific message did not belong in the voting section and could impeded the vote process. Considering its matter, it has been moved to the discussion section. It would be advisable to not engage in edit warring over this simply matter. For more information, read Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. Cheers EarthDude (wanna talk?) 17:15, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance request regarding 1837 Poonch Revolt Page

Hello Kautilya. I see that you have edited and added before to the 1837 Poonch Revolt page and written about the dispute of Shams origin. I am currently having a dispute with an editor Sybercracker regarding the use of contemporary British sources which claim Shams was of the Sudhan tribe and the opinionated historians that claim Shams was of the Maldiyal tribe. The editor Sybercracker claims that the British sources are not reliable due to the British Raj essay by user Sitush. I am willing to file out a dispute report about this but before I do I am seeking your opinion and mediation if you are able to provide it. Thank you Kharstvol (talk) 21:17, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have offered a compromise on the talk page but there has been no response yet. I don't want to start an edit war or file a dispute unless necessary which is why i am seeking your mediation since you seem to be educated on that topic. Kharstvol (talk) 21:46, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]