You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Torpakh Kala requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Northern Escapee (talk) 10:25, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If any of above fits in your area of interest or if you come across suitable reference during your encyclopedic research journey, then please do give thought to support expansion of any of above topic areas.
A special thank you for your major contribution towards articles related to pre-Islamic Afghanistan, especially the Turko-Hephtalite era. Keep on doing what you are doing, we need more people like you! Xerxes931 (talk) 15:35, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I have moved the article about Nana from "Kushan goddess" to "Bactrian goddess"
"Kushan" is a sloppy categorization, I’ve never heard of another case of a royal family being the namesake of a whole pantheon.Hence Bactrian or Tokhari would be a better classification if our goal is to distinguish how people called and emphasized their gods in Tokharistan and its vassal states in contrast to say Sogdia or Parthia. Wiki isn’t about inventing new classifications though but simply used what’s commonly agreed upon in literature. Can you maybe look over the article and perhaps help improving it further? Thanks --Xerxes931 (talk) 20:52, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
G'day पाटलिपुत्र, just a heads-up that Corinthian War is on the list (WP:URFA/2020) of old FAs that need checking ahead of a possible FAR. I had a quick look, and there are a few issues, but it wouldn't take much to bring it back up to solid FA. Given you were the major contributor, would you mind having a crack at it? I'd be happy to c/e after everything was checked/cited etc. Let me know? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:16, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Peacemaker67:! I am afraid I don't quite have the endurance to deal with upgrading articles for FAs (all the technical formatting and all that...). I'm also a bit busy right now. Sorry for that! Best regards. पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)16:06, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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.
2900 BC: North-westward migrations carrying Corded Ware culture, transforming into Bell Beaker; according to Anthony, westward migration west of Carpatians into Hungary as Yamnaya, transforming into Bell Beaker, possibly ancestral to Indo-Celtic (disputed).
2700 BC: Second eastward migration starting east of Carpatian mountains as Corded Ware, transforming into Fatyanovo-Balanova (2800 BCE) -> Abashevo (2200 BCE)-> Sintashta (2100-1900 BCE)-> Andronovo (1900-1700 BCE) -> Indo-Aryans.
I love maps, but see this map. Your map has the westward-migration starting from too far north-east; the Dniepr-valley is essential. Also, a migration southward east of the Caspian Sea is probably not realistic; the migration went via the Inner Asia mountain corridor. And the Danube Valley as the (/a) place of origin for Yamnaya-related migrations is questionable, though it is what Anthony argues for. Spread of some Indo-European from there, with Bell Beaker, is also a possibility. Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk!05:26, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Joshua Jonathan: Hi Joshua. I've tweaked the map in order to match very precisely the arrows and colored shapes on the map in reference (their map is skewed, so I adjusted to my projection quite precisely). Hopefully, their map is geographically correct. What do you think? There is not much more I can do if I am to respect the source.... पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)06:52, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Much better. The original map itself is inaccurate, in the respects mentioned above. So, I would opt for inclusion of other sources. Coincidentally, I started to piece together an "Atlas of the Indo-Europeans" for private use, triggered by the map byNordqvist and Heyd; very usefull. The relation between Hungarian Yamnaya, Bell Beaker, and the roots of Italo-Celtic is disputed. Yamnaya into Hungary followed the Danube river; eventual further migrations followed the Danube further upstream (not over the Alpine mountain ramnge, of course!), and then possibly the Rhine. @Joe Roe: would you know more about the current ideas of Hungarian Yamnaya -> western European Bell Beakers? Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk!08:20, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Joshua Jonathan: It's OK, you can very well use your synthetic map in the articles, that's very good. My map is not "wrong" per se, it just reflects one (good) source, and I'd like to keep it for what it is, if only as a reference. Thanks! पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)09:12, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Joshua Jonathan: Sorry to be a pain, but since your map is derived from mine, you have to use the "extracted from" template with authorship attribution: {{extracted from|File:Yamnaya Steppe Pastoralists.jpg}}, that's standard procedure on Commons. By the way, thanks for the improvements! पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)09:22, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm the pain in the ass, I guess... (Narasimhan et al. surely hadn't their Hungarian Yamana's climb the Alps, but take the easy route over the rivers). Your effort is a good start to finally replace this infamous map, which still needs improvement, so thank you for your effort. But replacing that one that will be a hell of a job... Thanks for the template; I'll add it. NB: I noticed another problem with the Narasimhan map: Afanisievo is pre-Yamnaya. 15:26, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
I'm aleady doubting again. Anthony (2007) says Repin, but Narasimhan et al. (2019) says early Yamnaya; Anthony is co-author. And the dates as given in the Wiki-articles do match up (both 3300 BCE). Nice arrows, by the way ;) Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk!15:42, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to burst in without reading the full context, but I have to say that neither of these maps sit right with me. The "infamous" IE expansion spaghetti map mentioned above has indeed lingered on many pages for far too long, and while these are an improvement in terms of verifiability, I don't think replacing it with an updated version of the same format is the way to go. As I see it there are two major problems with this kind of map:
We have to be very careful with synthesis when it comes to these big maps. Both the arrow format and captions strongly imply a directed migration of people from the Yamnaya core. But if you look at the original caption in Nordqvist and Heyd, they are careful to label it as "interconnections of societies" rather than migration. In the map itself, only some links are specifically attributed to migration; others have more vague labels (including the hilarious Transformation of Yamnaya to Corded Wares – bringing to mind burial minds metamorphosing into decorated pots). This reflects the fact that, although aDNA studies have recently put prehistoric population movements back on the agenda, the idea of "mass migrations" remains extremely contentious amongst prehistorians, and the mechanisms by which genes and languages spread from the steppe is still unclear and hotly debated. This is discussed in the Nordqvist and Heyd paper and many of their references. As for Anthony 2007, it's been a while since I read the book—and of course it was also published before the aDNA revolution—but as far as I remember he is very reluctant to speculate about movements of people beyond the initial expansion of herding economies in the steppe post-Yamnaya. I also don't recall him including a synthetic map like this, probably for this very reason. And if scholars are cautious about drawing definitive lines on maps, we need to be doubly so.
The arrows-on-a-map format itself is inherently misleading. I feel like I read a paper about this once, in the context of hominid dispersals, but I can't find it now. In any case, the discussion above already brings out some of the problems with it. It's not obvious to the reader if an arrow represents the precise route of a migration or a just the general direction from point A to be B. For that matter, there's no clear indication of what the arrows represent (archaeological cultures? languages? genes? ethnic groups?) and by extension what them splitting and merging signifies. The overall impression of a mass of people barrelling across empty continents with a destination in mind, but if we know anything for sure it's that that isn't what happened. The spread of Yamnaya genes was a slow diffusion through an existing human population. We don't know exactly how it happened, but it must have involved a mix of cultural interaction and demic diffusion, varying by region, and probably involving a lot of stops-and-starts, back-and-forth movements, etc. I don't think the arrows-on-a-map format can convey any of that to our readers.
I think it is possible to come up with an improved map that is rigorously sourced and doesn't over-simplify, perhaps based on this or this. In any case the most important thing is to be careful not to conflate information on cultural, genetic, and linguistic diffusions – either in the maps themselves or the way they're used in articles. They are separate processes and there is no scientific consensus on how they interacted in prehistory. – Joe (talk) 16:38, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Joe Roe: Thank you Joe for your cogent comments! I am afraid we need simplified (simplistic?) material and maps for the general public and non-specialists (me included), otherwise we have no clues what these cultures are, where they are located, and how they more or less relate to each other. The map above is indeed only intended as an improvement from the infamous "spaghetti map", although it is sourced from three very reliable and up-to-date sources. Then, I do agree we need specialist discussions about all the nuances and caveats of such maps. So I guess the question is: how can we make simplistic, yet informative, maps for the general public, which, at the same time are just acceptable (tolerable?) to the specialists.... Should it be in the caption, with some sort of disclaimer or "warning statement" which could be a one-line synthesis of your above statement? Should it be with fuzzy arrows? I am open to suggestions. पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)17:04, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think the goal of any map should be to simplify without misleading; and on Wikipedia maps without unduly synthesising. Sometimes, that might just be a case of recognising that you can't show something on a single map in an acceptable way. In this case, I would say that a combined map of "Indo-European migrations" incorporating the linguistic, genetic, and archaeological information, is impossible given the current state of knowledge. What we can do is help the reader with separate maps showing the extent of archaeological cultures in different periods, maps showing the continuous spread of "steppe herder" ancestry (i.e. like these), and maybe also languages (but that's probably the hardest). The captions should make it clear that that is what they show and probably avoid the controversial word "migration" all together. I have an idea for the second, which I'll try to work on today. – Joe (talk) 09:08, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The Bronze Age spread of Yamnaya Steppe pastoralist ancestry into two subcontinents—Europe and South Asia"@Joe Roe: Thank you Joe, I will be looking forward to your map. Please note that my initial map (to the right, the other map above being derived by Joshua from this one) is not a synthesis at all, and is directly and precisely referenced from the main map in Narasimhan, Vagheesh M.; Patterson, Nick; Moorjani, Priya; Rohland, Nadin; Bernardos, Rebecca (6 September 2019). "The formation of human populations in South and Central Asia". Science. 365 (6457). doi:10.1126/science.aat7487. ISSN0036-8075.. I trust that if Narasimha can show a global map such as this one, then there is no reason we can't. Narasimha's analysis is genetic of course, and he entitles the paragraph for the map: "The Bronze Age spread of Yamnaya Steppe pastoralist ancestry into two subcontinents—Europe and South Asia." To your point, he is rather cautious with his characterization of the arrows as "Flow of Yamnaya-derived ancestry". I am quite confortable with this exact wording, indeed avoiding simplifications such as "migrations", in order to reflect exactly Narasimhan's intent, with attribution. पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)09:46, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, I'd missed that source sorry. I agree there's no synth there, as long as we stick to describing it as Narasimhan et al. do; 'ancestry flow' might come across as a bit jargon-y, but it's really not the same thing as 'migration'. Also, I think the small pie charts are an important element of the original map that is missing from this version. They show, for example, that the proportion of Yamnaya ancestry quickly drops below less than 50% outside the immediate steppe zone, which is a major clue that the mechanism that spread their genes was not as simple as migration. It also gives some indication of what the end points of the arrows are supposed to be (i.e. regional ancient populations, rather than exact locations). Maybe those could be added? – Joe (talk) 12:09, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, पाटलिपुत्र. 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.
hello patliputra please reply actually I had few edits for your with authencitc sources if you could help in editing then i can share it here only or you can shsare me your email please bro बाबू साहेब (talk) 02:05, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hephthalites, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Later Han and Beishi.
Thanks for uploading File:Book ReOrienting the Sasanians by Khodadad Rezakhani.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Hey there man! Hope you are doing well. I wanna try and raise additional articles related to the wars between (Qajar) Iran and Russia in the Caucasus to GA level. I was wondering, would you be able to find me some additional pictures in relation to this topic? Miniatures, paintings, etc.? - LouisAragon (talk) 10:10, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnbod: Woahh, many thanks, thank you so much Johnbod! I was just trying to fill a gap, but I greatly appreciate, especially coming from such an art afficionado! Much remains to be done on this subject, it's just a start really, so do jump in if so inclined! पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)15:58, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I think what I've done is self-explanatory. I usually let them get to c 100 kb before I start a new one. I prefer a fully manual system, though you can automate it. Johnbod (talk) 17:47, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Firestar464. I noticed that you recently removed content from Maurya Empire without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Firestar464 (talk) 11:32, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there! I was very happy with our interaction today and I noticed you have a thing for Achaemenid Persia. There is some work to be done in WP:PHO. Achaemenid Phoenicia has been receiving more attention thanks to Elayi, a wonderful scholar. If you have the time and would like to contribute to our wikiproject I'll be very happy to have you contribute with us.
No issue with the revert. Happy to be wrong in this case if the use of Hindu is historically questionable. This article and several others are on my watchlist due to persistent unsourced changes from Hinduism to Jainism, which appears to be a contentious issue. Maybe I am missing it in the article but is there RS support for Jainism, otherwise it's likely to be reverted again by others. Slywriter (talk) 15:19, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Slywriter: Hi Slywriter. Sure, here are a few readable sources (there are many many more). You are right that there is some Jain propaganda around, but it is not one of these cases. And I have yet to see reputable sources saying Chandragupta Maurya was "a follower of Hinduism". Best regards पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)15:28, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wallech, Steven; Daryaee, Touraj; Hendricks, Craig; Negus, Anne Lynne; Wan, Peter P.; Bakken, Gordon Morris (2013-01-22). World History: A Concise Thematic Analysis, Volume One. John Wiley & Sons. p. 82. ISBN978-1-118-53266-9. Chandragupta Maurya personally retired into the religion of Jainism after twenty-eight years of rule.
Dalrymple, William (2009-10-07). Nine Lives: In Search of the Sacred in Modern India. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN978-1-4088-0341-7. It was here, in the third century BC, that the first Emperor of India, Chandragupta Maurya, embraced the Jain religion and died through a self-imposed fast to the death,......
Jarzombek, Mark M.; Prakash, Vikramaditya (2011-10-04). A Global History of Architecture. John Wiley & Sons. p. 144. ISBN978-0-470-90248-6. "At the end of his life, Chandragupta Maurya, founder of the Mauryan Dynasty abducted his throne and became a Jain ascetic".
I think the story that he became Jain is very old, but seen nearly exclusively in Jain sources, & treated with suspicion by most non-Jain historians. Johnbod (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Johnbod:! Thank you for your message. If suspicion there is (and I could understand that, given the antiquity), it would be nice indeed to mention it. Would you have a source, so that we can balance the claim? The main issue here is that some try to portray Chandragupta Maurya as a follower of Hinduism, which I haven't seen in any RS. Especially since Hinduism was not formed yet... Does our gatekeeper @Utcursch: have an opinion? पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)16:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Smith, Vincent. The Oxford History of India (rev 4th ed. 1981), is quite sympathetic to the Jain traditions: "the only direct evidence throwing light ....is that of Jain tradition. ...it may be that he embraced Jainism towards the end of his reign. ...after much consideration I am inclined to accept the main facts as affirmed by tradition .... no alternative account exists." Oldest inscriptions C7th. Page 99. Then Keay, John (2000), India: A History, s also sympathetic, though "Scholarly doubts, of course, remain ...." pp 85-86. He says inscriptions and reliefs at the "death-site" go back to the C5th. Neither mention a previous religion, though even according to the Buddhist account his minister Chanakya/Kautilya was a brahmin. Johnbod (talk) 18:33, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I talked the matter of fayyum portraits with Johnbod user and provided him with respected ancient sources with the original languages, he didn't respond back with any source supported his claims. I want to reach consensus to a version removing the 7-10 million natives figure because it's not supported by any historical text or logical viewpoint to states population with respect to different time periods and possible agriculture techniques, supplies, building structures, cities and towns areas and nature, health care that enable certain amount of population to exist with estimated population. I think you as registered editors should be the one with open mind and open to criticism, I'm new user to Wikipedia, what's the next steps? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.192.173.95 (talk) 18:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the source provided in the page, the writer just gives this number randomly, he doesn't give a logic behind it. There is no historical record supporting this as there were no population count at that time. However, a minute online search I found those who dispute such figures and give an estimate of 3-5 million and I am giving the source (I think now it should be edited). With respect to other incorrect info. listed at the page that the Romans saw them as Egyptians, it's based on misunderstanding of translations as Egyptiotes is the name of the Greek communities, while barbaros is the name of the natives. So such information listed on the page should be removed, too. (and here I am provided a clear source of other wikipedia pages and other external links of naming in Greco-Roman sources).
It should be also transparent that both of the sources stated population of Greco-Roman Egypt, provide those figures for the whole population including all ethnicities (Greeks, Romans, barbarians, etc.), not only the natives. The article states that only the natives have such population which is also totally incorrect.
WikiProject India's Collaborations of the month invites you
The collaboration will help promote many articles to the good and featured article status, but to do so, we need your help! For further information, see the main page of the collaboration.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Karkota Dynasty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jammu and Kashmir.
The India article has a big OWN problem- best try to bring your changes to the talk page...or simply find another article without the OWN problem. WIll be an endless debate just to change a word or two.....its why the article has a problem following our MOS all over.--Moxy-13:58, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I've edited your sandbox because userspace can't be included inside that category, as it's designated for article pages. Ahmetlii (talk) 16:53, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you requested some scans at WP:RX. A user scanned the material but you haven't responded in more than a month, so I've taken the liberty of moving the thread to the archive for now. You can find the archived thread here: Special:Permalink/1027734259#Identification of a coin from Kashmir. Feel free to repost it if you can't/couldn't obtain the material from Gazal world. Best wishes, — Pajz (talk) 17:59, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello पाटलिपुत्र. You moved Dilberjin to Dilberjin Tepe. Can you give any reference to Dilberjin Tepe? In all the literature, that i have found, it is only called Dilberjin. best wishes Udimu (talk) 12:18, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
guess Dilberjin Tepe is okay, i just came accoss more often Dilberjin. Perhaps I was reading more non-English literature and older stuff, but as this is the English wiki, Dilberjin Tepe is better.Udimu (talk) 14:26, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I hope you are doing well, just wanted to know how you have been doing and remind you that you are the absolutely best contribution on Pre-Islamic Afghanistan we ever had on Wikipedia ;)--Xerxes1985 (talk) 00:35, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I think it is important to inform you that there is POV pushing in Sayed dynasty's article. Despite the fact that i presented all sources and reasons, that why mention of Afghan is VERY necessary in origin section, the user keeps deleting it.Knowing that there is very little literature available about their origin (which makes Afghan source even more important). Can you please see through edit history and then talk page and try to fix it the way you think is necessary. thank you.
I have temporarily removed your images until I finish writing the article. Will be bringing them back within days. Hope it is okay with you. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:34, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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.
Seen that you deleted rizu's edit can you please eloborate how a realiable source look like? Or what is reliable? And please also give example of your work & it's sources. So that I can also learn. Abhisal2408 (talk) 06:18, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Explanation for "Chorasmian Tamga" image on Khwarazm page?
Hey, I saw you add a "Chorasmian Tamga" image in one of your revisions to the page, and I could not find the reason you provided for it. The description on the file page also provides no explanation, and your caption wrote that it was the Chorasmian Tamga during the first to second century CE, a time when Turkic peoples had not even penetrated deep into Central Asia yet. At the time, Khwarazm was still a fully Iranic nation, culturally and religiously, and I see no reason why it would adopt a Turkic tradition seemingly out of the blue. If you could provide an explanation for the image I would appreciate it because when I removed it you readded it back and again provided no explanation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.14.187.118 (talk) 03:23, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Would it be better to call it the Chorasmian Monogram or Chorasmian Seal? That would prevent confusion from discerning between Iranian-origin seals from the newer Turkic-origin seals. I also would like to point out that Encyclopaedia Iranica has quite a several incorrect or archaic nomenclatures regarding the more obscure topics. As an example, one would not be using 'Khan' as a title for an Egyptian pharaoh. So a more generic term replacement for "Tamgha" would be seal in my opinion. 08:33, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
This particular Encyclopedia Iranica article is written by the main authority on Chorasmian coinage: B. I. Vainberg [7]. I would not mind using another term such as "symbol", but all the sources I have seen use "tamgha", so that's what we should use too (we follow what sources say). I am not sure "Tamgha"=Turkic as you seem to imply, as "They were common among the Eurasian nomads throughout Classical Antiquity and the Middle Ages" [8]. Probably, numismats and historians have come to use the term "Tamgha" (indeed a word of Turkic origin) generically for something like "a tribal symbol on a coin". If you find a majority of reliable sources using another expression than "tamgha" for this type of coinage, I would of course be ready to follow that. पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)14:47, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Re: I understand now, I was just quite confused when I saw "tamgha" being used for Indo-European symbols with inept Turkic exposure, and I immediately thought that it was vandalism of some kind, because all I had known was that this symbol style was of sole Turco-Mongolic origin since it was a Turkic term, and I thought that the article simply referred to Eurasian peoples after the Turkic migrations, and thus solely consisted of Turco-Mongolic populations. I am still a bit confused though, did the Kushans, Chorasmians, and Bosporan Greeks adopt this tradition via Turkic influence or did they simply develop independently from each other, and that it was of the most convenience to illustrate political symbols this way, or did all those symbols ultimately originate from Turkic influences? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.14.187.118 (talk) 23:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Many of the coin "symbols" predate the Turks by many centuries in areas far apart, so it must be independent origination, even though cross-influences became very important at one point, especially in Central Asia. पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)23:44, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated Corinthian War for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog FarmTalk05:16, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I’ve noted your recent contributions with regards to uploading images of coins and inscriptions and need some advice. Do you know the process with regards to how I would upload this inscription to Wikimedia commons or if it’s even possible?
Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors. As explained at WP:SIGFONT:
<font>...</font> tags were deprecated in HTML4 and are entirely obsolete in HTML5. This means that the popular browsers may drop support for them at some point. Wikipedia is already preparing for this by delinting code project-wide through Linter. When support finally is dropped, the tags will be ignored in all signatures; any properties such as color and font family will revert to their default values. For this reason, it is recommended that you use <span>...</span> tags and CSS properties instead.
I have prepared a replacement signature string for you. You are encouraged to change
Many thanks for the seasons greetings on pageǃ I hope you had a good year and wish you all best for the coming oneǃ Many thaks again Udimu (talk) 15:32, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please show me the proof or evidence about the naming of Trisharmi Caves is also called Nasik Caves. Even in 1980 Nasik Name changed to Nashik officialy. So Please revert your edits on article. If not, please give me a valid reason. Thenexttalk (talk) 17:46, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Glad to see, consistency in territorial maps of the indian dynasties from Schwartzberg's atlas. Although I think there are some problems in some of the maps but overall since the maps are all from same source, its better than what we earlier had. Some dynasties with no maps, some from obscure sources etc. Please add the Map for Paramara dynasty and Chaulukya dynasty as well because Schwartzberg atlas has those. Thanks. Sajaypal007 (talk) 14:07, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for making those great maps of Indian kingdoms. Can you please make some for the medieval kingdoms of Bihar like the Karnat dynasty when you have time? It would really help improve the article. Thanks!85.255.237.23 (talk) 17:15, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am afraid there's much you would have to do on your own in this regard. I couldn't find any proper map of the Sultanate; but its borders are well documented.
Hi, it is regarding this edit. I have a hunch this is POV push considering the latest edit summary they put in Srinagar article revision. Though it may be sourced. Please see. Regards. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:44, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello sir please see sadgop some editors are writing shudras with wrong sources whereas nothing like that is written in those sources they are writing shudras again and again with completely bad sources. 2409:4053:59E:3608:0:0:1F96:80A4 (talk) 01:05, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi पाटलिपुत्र, just saw you removed the "Gavli Kings" alias of Devagiri Yadavas (Seuna). They were known as Gavli Kings and Gauli Bouva locally in Maharashtra. R.C . Dhere has covered that in details, as well as others. A whole section of them is provided in Gavli page too. Do check it out. Thanks. HinduKshatrana (talk) 19:20, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@पाटलिपुत्र: For Sure. The etymology of the Seuna Yadava page already contains information from "Rise of a Folk God: Vitthal of Pandharpur" by R.C. Dhere. PAGE 246, LAST PARA - "The idea that the Seunas were a Gavli Dynasty survives to this day in folk traditions of the Nasik-Khandes area, where the Seuna Yadavas are traditionally called "Gavli Kings". Until Billama V (A.D. 1185-93), their capital was at Sinnar (from "Sindanagara", "Srinagara"), near Nasik. Bhillama moved the capital to Devgiri." PAGE 247, SECOND PARA - "At Sinnar today a deity named "Gaulibova" is still worshiped." DHERE ALSO QUOTES FROM Y.R. GUPTE (1948) - "There is a famous temple at Sinnar called 'Gaulibova' ...In Khandes and Nasik districts, the Yadavas are called 'Gauli Kings'. So 'Gaulibova' refers to an extremely famous Yadava King who was as powerful as a god in this town. Gaulibova's image is a huge boulder. Hundreds of coconuts are broken here. There has been no other king at Sinnar as famous as Bhillama V. He was a great emperor, and during his time the Yadavas' capital moved to Devgiri." SIMILAR TO THIS ONE IS CLAIMED BY MADHUKAR KESHAV DHAVALIKAR IN HIS "SOCIO-ECONOMIC ARCHAEOLOGY OF INDIA" IN PG 274 THAT THESE YADAVAS WERE GAVLIS.
@HinduKshatrana: If it is all there is, then the claim is quite weak. I could not find anything about this on Google Books. At most, we should limit ourselves to a sentence such as "folk traditions of the Nasik-Khandes area suggest the Seuna Yadavas were a Gavli dynasty", and not for the introduction but for the "Origins" paragraph. पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)17:25, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I see on your user page that you use JSTOR and I'd like to know more about your experience. By my calculations, a good 70 % of the main JSTOR content is now available for everyone at Internet Archive Scholar, with full text search provided e.g. at https://scholar.archive.org/ . The service is still in beta, but I've used it for some source-finding and it seems quite usable to me; I wonder whether that's just my experience. If you have a chance, the next time you'd be looking for a source on Google Scholar or JSTOR or similar, to perform the same search on IA scholar instead, I'd be curious to hear how it ends up. Thanks, Nemo19:04, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Now you can't just bring another author's journal and say that he's not a Hindu. It's proved even in Jacob N. Kinnard's book that he was a Hindu. Usoejw9 (talk) 14:07, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Usoejw9: First, there was no Hinduism at that time, only Brahmanism as Kinnard also explains. You visibly do not wish to understand and read all sources on the subject. Please build consensus on the Gautama Buddha Talk Page page if you must. पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)14:10, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As it's written in Levman's journal that Gautama said he was a Shakya by birth. So, should I give "Shakya by birth" or "Birth religion-Unknown"? Usoejw9 (talk) 14:19, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Usoejw9:Shakya is the name of his tribe, not a religion. We do not usually mention something like "Birth religion" in an infobox. His religious background is discussed in detail in "Historical context" already. पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)14:24, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I know but he was indeed in another religion before becoming Buddha. There's also no proofs about Gautama Buddha saying by himself that his teachings will become religion after his death. So, it's illogical to give a religion in Buddha, Gotami, Rahula, Yashodhara & Devdutta's info box. Usoejw9 (talk) 14:28, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@पाटलिपुत्र: so should I give "Birth religion- Unknown"? Cause Levman was unable to find a birth religion of Gautama Buddha. But according to Kinnard, Buddha was a Hindu/Sanātani by birth. Although I would insist you to revert their religion section from info box. Cause there's no proof that Buddha made his teachings as a new religion. Usoejw9 (talk) 15:00, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Usoejw9: It's not just me: I don't think you will convince anybody with your approach. Kinnard is not doing a thorough specialist study of the original religion of the Siddharta Gautama at all: rather, his point is just that the Buddha was born into a Brahmanic cultural World. If you want to try, you will have to establish a consensus on the Gautama Buddha Talk Page. पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)15:34, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Usoejw9: Sorry, but we usually don't have such mentions in infoboxes, people will keep reverting it. His religious status before enlightenment is explained in "Historical context" and "Biography". पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)15:44, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@पाटलिपुत्र: as I said either it's better to give "Birth religion- Unknown" or revert the religion section from the info box as you couldn't give me any proof that Gautama Buddha said by himself that his teachings will become a religion.
And talking about Shakyas being non religious. Why it's given in Biography?👇
Suddhodana held a naming ceremony on the fifth day and invited eight Brahmin scholars to read the future. All gave similar predictions.[133] Kondañña, the youngest, and later to be the first arhat other than the Buddha, was reputed to be the only one who unequivocally predicted that Siddhartha would become a Buddha.[135]
Early texts suggest that Gautama was not familiar with the dominant religious teachings of his time until he left on his religious quest, which is said to have been motivated by existential concern for the human condition.
@पाटलिपुत्र: please let people learn a history properly. Either let me give "Birth religion-Unknown" or "Birth religion- Non Vedic". But I'll still suggest you to revert the religion section from the info box. Usoejw9 (talk) 16:06, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@पाटलिपुत्र:so you've guts to undid or did the revision & you don't have any guts proving that Gautama Buddha said by himself that his teachings will become a religion??!! Usoejw9 (talk) 16:58, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello पाटलिपुत्र I want to say that as a Sindhi I hate it that you are replacing the native Sindhi pages with Urdu/Arabic ones which is an act I condmen and please once again I ask you to stop this, Since you are a senior member I respect you but i will have an increased respect if you stop changing the linguistic of native pages of Sindh as you see what happens if i change your pages and replace them with mine?
They are probably referring to Sind (caliphal province) and Brahmin dynasty of Sindh. I've reverted their edits on those pages since they keep replacing the countries listed in the "Today part of" field of the infoboxes with the Pakistani province of Sindh (not a country), even for larger polities that stretched outside of the borders of modern-day Sindh, and jamming in Sindhi-language text wherever they can. ➤ Zᴇᴇx.ʀɪᴄᴇ ✪ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 12:36, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The location is wrong, the Dimasa kingdom was located in eastern Assam in 1400 CE, also Ahoms were not located near Bhutan border but near present-day Myanmar border. Further in 1400 CE, Dimasa Kingdom was much more related to South east Asia than South Asia, the Dimasa only started to tilt towards Indic culture during 16th and 17th century when they absorbed Hindu values Homogenie (talk) 14:14, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@पाटलिपुत्र: The Map of Dimasa must be removed, few problems related to it:
Dimasa Kingdom in was to east of present Assam and Ahom Kingdom were near Patkai hills near Sibsagar, it is only during early 1500s when they were pushed to the west and south by the Ahoms.
Furhter the Ahom were not know as Ahoms till 1400 but as Mong Dun Shun Kham.
Wasn't Abu Bakra (Ubayd Allah's father) a member of the Banu Thaqif?
Why in Ubayd Allah ibn Abi Bakra's article, Abu Bakra is a member of Abyssinian?? This, of course, contradicts the history of Islamic historians who say that Abu Bakra was a member of the Banu Thaqif .
and is it true that Ubayd Allah's mother is a dark person? whether Islamic historians mention it. you should be responsible for this problem. Thank you Iylaq (talk) 08:27, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I saw you edited sayed dynasty. Can you please check the talk page too, i have tried my best with nearly five primary and secondary source- that Afghan should also be mentioned in origins. But the "group" their is refusing.Their logic is very weak to the point that they themselves don't know why it cant be mentioned. I saw your edit history ,you seem to be genuine. I hope you the the right and moral thing. Thank you.84.211.45.132 (talk) 16:47, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi.
You didn't reply me. I hope you have gone through the articles talk page. I provided five sources, one major primary source from aurangzeebs period and 4 secondary sources -all in the form of books-, but somehow he refuses to write afghan as one theory. In-fact to be honest Afghan was the most written about theory off all others. I am saying this will severely undermine wikipedias already shaken image. I really hope you do something this time. Thank you 84.214.111.237 (talk) 20:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Came across one of your most recent and a very good read article Indo-Scythian art.
There is likely to be sourcing & copyvio issues got imported from other articles which you borrowed content from and there seems to be a need to check article with Earwig and rewrite some portions in your own language on top priority.
I have liked the concept of the article. I will also try to join in in addressing the issue may be you will need to correct my grammar a bit.
@Bookku: Thanks. All the attributions were properly made on creation [17], so there are no issues in terms of "copyvio" (except if the original articles had copyvio issues by themselves, but I doubt that: a lot of that content was originally written by me). No need to change the prose specifically, but you are welcome to improve content! पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)10:44, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you seem to be right my first check of hmn.wiki/uk/Art_of_Mathura seems to be mirroring of Wikipedia article itself. I will check another one in short while that one also may be mirroring issue. Actually I reached article while searching for DYK material, since few articles are older ones I would not know if any of that material had been to DYK. Why don't you yourself nominate a DYK for such a nice read article. Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 11:00, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dear editor
Hi, recently I saw that you have removed the image that I added. Where should we move that image ? It was added on a page which had little connection to it. Can we move this image to Yadava page ( the ancient Yadava)). RS6784 (talk) 16:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@RS6784: Hi, Yadava is about an ancient historical tribe, so it's probably better not to add images that were made thousands of years later... Maybe that image should just remain on Commons if there are no specific needs... Best पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)17:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, there are a number of reasons why I disagree with some of your changes to the Li Xian and Li Jingxun. I will list them here instead of going through edit summaries, in an effort to achieve consensus.
For Li Xian, the last paragraph cites Weschler (1979) with the implication that, because of the discovery of Li Xian's tomb and his probable Xianbei ancestry, Weschler "therefore" made suggestions about the Tang royal house. This cannot be true because Weschler's work is from 1979, while Li Xian's tomb was not discovered until 1983. We should not assume we know what Weschler thought about the tomb discovery by grouping him in "some historians." Nor should we assume anything Weschler wrote is in reference to Li Xian. If Weschler is only being quoted to "support" Chen's more general thesis about the Tang, that should be worded and positioned differently in the article (and I'd argue it belongs in a different article).
For Li Jingxun, Li Xian is Li Jingxun's great grandfather, and while relevant details about Li Xian's life (including his possible Xianbei ancestry) are fair game for Li Jingxun's article where it relates, I don't think this applies to Chen's argument about how Li Xian's ancestry might impact interpretations of the Tang royal house. Indeed, none of the sources cited have anything to do with Li Jingxun, and consequently the insert distracts from the rest of the article because it is not about the subject at all. It feels forced, as though someone inserted an extra piece of information just because they wanted to bring attention to it. If that was not your intention, I suggest leaving it out or finding a better way to relate it back to Li Jingxun. Lathdrinor (talk) 23:03, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. For Li Xian, you were removing the whole statement and both references [18], which was rather indiscriminate. I'm fine with removing Weschler, as he does not mention Li Xian, although he is very relevant to the subject of Tang identity in general and helps better undersand the subject. I'll try to phrase it differently. As for Li Jingxun, Chen may not mention her, but her analysis about her ancestor's background is still valuable to better understand the context of Li Jingxun's tomb. As long as the information is one click away at Li Xian, no big deal. पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)04:51, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for creating the inscription file used in the David Vases article. Just a note that the lines written on the left is different from the inscription of the vase shown on the right. To match them, the image of the inscription should be the one on the right in the British Museum website - [19]. As far as I can tell, the words 良辰謹記 have been replaced by 吉日捨 on the fourth line. 良辰 means the same as 吉日, 捨 may be an error since it doesn't quite mean 謹記, or it may not if it was intended that way. Note also that the lines have been expanded to 6 - two characters moved to the fourth line, but the words are clearer since they aren't squashed so close together to fit into 4 lines. The book says that there are missing words, but I can't quite see it, but then it's hard to tell when the words are smudged. Hzh (talk) 19:54, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Hzh: You're right! Thanks, I corrected, and I replaced with a better version in the article. It seems to me that the calligraphy is actually fairly proper for a porcelain piece, contrary to what some scholars say... Best! पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)20:32, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, thank you! I think what the scholars are saying is that the writings would have been properly spaced if they were written correctly, and also that the wrong characters were used for that period (which is the Yuan dynasty), for example, it should have been 閤 instead of 合, while 付 should have a different radical. They are the ones who study such things, we aren't in a position to question them. Hzh (talk) 21:40, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Battle of Lechaeum has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog FarmTalk18:26, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding maps in the info-box of Maukhari, Aulikara and Pushyabhuti dynasties..
Hi Sir, I had added the name of Gurjara-Pratihara dynasty in the maps of above mentioned dynasties' pages and you've reverted my edits. The linked article doesn't mention any dynasty but a territory "Gurjaradesha". So, can you please specify which Gurjaras dynasty you're talking about if it's not Gurjara-Pratihara. Regards Iamritwikaryan (talk) 03:04, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So, won't it be right to mention the term Gurjaradesa, (or the Gurjara Kingdom) rather than Gurjaras, as the article bears this name too and Gurjara dynasty and it's rulers are not mentioned in the article except the Pratihara ones. Iamritwikaryan (talk) 04:22, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is the people you're talking about in the map are all ruling dynasties (e.g. Aulikara, Pushyabhuti, Maukhari), and there's no any separate Gurjara dynasty mentioned in the article apart from Pratiharas, it mentions Chapa or Chavda dynasty too but not the one we're looking for, I've read thoroughly :) Iamritwikaryan (talk) 04:33, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I mean when did Yoshavarman conquer Pragjyotisa of Northeast? Shahi kings of Gilgits also took the lineage of Bhagatta. Legendary Bhagadatta is known as ruler of mythical Pragjyotisa. So i doubt if the map of Yoshavarman regime is correct. Northeast heritage (talk) 05:41, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't know, but this is a reliable source: this is the only reference we should use. For more details, you could also have a look at the first pages of the book: [20]. Best पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)06:05, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:New parliament Sarnath lions, New Delhi, India.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
You are very good @ ancient Indian history. I am looking for some help in expanding a recent development of the article Religious education in Kerala where I am finding getting sources for history of religious education in Kerala specially for Indic religions Hinduism/ Buddhism/ Jainism and also Christian education bit difficult.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from another page into the article on Sarnath. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. -- Toddy1(talk)10:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Toddy1: Thanks, but this was my own content, a sentence created a few minutes before on another page [21], a case under which Wikipedia rules do not require crediting I believe: "If the re-user is the sole contributor of the text at the other page, attribution is not necessary."[22]. पाटलिपुत्र Pat(talk)10:32, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, hope you are doing well, all I can say is that I loved your contributions on articles about South Asia, specially the well-researched overhaul of the Hindu Shahis article and your mapping contributions, chiefly the Sindh based dynasties. Could you also make more maps of the northwestern Indian Subcontinent, specially the several dynasties of the Delhi Sultanate, as they are not very well covered.
On a personal note, I'd like to tell you that I was hoping to get a close without direct action being suggested against you or Fowler@fowler, but the closure request itself was necessary in the circumstances and the rest will have to be up the community. I'll hope you'll accept my best wishes, not withstanding. SnowRise let's rap23:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for understanding my position Pat, and for your efforts as well: I hope you know that I regard them to have been taken in good faith. Best regards to you as well. SnowRise let's rap05:30, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lakshmi Ammani Devi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Hickey.
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.
Packer&Tracker (talk) is wishing you a MerryChristmas! 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.
as you did at History of Writing. The source [26] clearly does not say or back that. The amateur archaeologist is the one making that claim and he is clearly not an expert, nor should his quote be sourced by the peer reviewed journal. Doug Wellertalk14:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. But I don't see the quote in the abstract, I see " We do not want to press the controversial (and in many senses, semantic) question of whether writing was a Palaeolithic invention; perhaps it is best described as a proto-writing system, an intermediary step between a simpler notation/convention and full-blown writing."
@Doug Weller: Fine with me anyway, but the Abstract does have what I quoted (final sentence): "It gives us our first specific reading of European Upper Palaeolithic communication, the first known writing in the history of Homo sapiens." [28][29] (see first page of the article, ... the abstract). पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra)(talk)15:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Doug Weller: Well, yes, it's in the abstract though, and I suspect they are the authors of the abstract. I'm OK with your edit though, as the matter of proto-writing/writing remains inconclusive. I guess saying "the first known writing" is their way to sum up their research in simple terms (and is quite legitimate as such), but "proto-writing" is surely more precise and exact (and safe). Would you mind striking your initial title and comment if that's OK (since my quote was indeed sourced)? Thanks! पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra)(talk)15:20, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! I see you're wanting to restore this article that was deleted under G5. While I do agree that if you think Liz was wrong you should take it to DELREV, I figured I should provide a bit more of an explanation as to why I nominated it for G5. After the most recent sock block I went to find a version to revert to per WP:BLOCKREVERT, however as I kept going further, I discovered that the article had basically been solely edited by socks. So I checked the article creator and sure enough they were a sock as well. So my reasoning is based on G5 as well as WP:TNT due to their being no good version to go back to as it had been dirtied by socks. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654516:44, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Blaze Wolf: Hi Blaze! Thanks for the context. To me, the bottom line is that the article seems fairly legit, whoever authored it. My impression is that the best way forward is to protect the article, so that other editors can continue to improve it (I had just started to make contributions to it, and was starting to be interested...) Hopefully DELREV with rescue the material already there, for further improvement. Best! पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra)(talk)16:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that was what I was told on Discord as well after discussing it a little there. The only thing that was off about the article was that the years were over 1000 years off, other than that I bet the topic is actually notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia. I have no objections to its recreation so long as the extensive socking on it isn't restored. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654517:01, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would say page protection is the best way to go if the article is restored or recreated since it's clear it'll just keep being socked. It's not really a subject I'm interested in regardless. Just figured I'd give you my rationale for the G5 (also I was not aware that the creator had not been evading a block prior to the creation, I find the situation confusing since the master was only locked recently despite the SPI going back to last year) ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654517:08, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your IP address says you're from Kyrgyzstan, so, yes, I can guess. But I'd rather not communicate outside of Wikipedia. Just post here if needed, but there's probably not much I can do to help, since anything would have to be within the strict confine of Wikipedia rules and reliable sourcing. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra)(talk)14:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'll write here. First of all, I would like to thank you for requesting the restoration of an article that I have been working on for a very long time, it really touched me. I'm afraid that I won't be able to add to it further, unless, of course, it is returned. But still, thanks to you, I have hope, maybe even get unbanned, inshallah. I would like to clarify some points, if you are going to radically change the article, then please consider the sources in Russian and Kyrgyz, as there is more information there. Sources in English, to put it mildly, are too scarce, I just noticed that you believe that the Kyrgyz Khanate existed from 1510 to 1680, so I decided to warn you in advance. (sorry ofr bad english, i using translate) 193.34.225.46 (talk) 14:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not much I can do. If I work on the article, I will probably have to reduce its size very significantly, since I will mainly rely on English-language sources. If you are interested in contributing from now-on, you will have to think "long-term": do not contribute to Wikipedia for 6 months at least, then try to get unbanned by explaining your rationale and potential for contributions, and promise never ever to use sockpuppets again. Then, you may be able to restart as a proper user who can contribute valuable content, and indeed use Russian or Kyrgyz reliable sources when appropriate. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra)(talk)15:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, six months is a very long time. It is unfortunate that the article will have to be significantly reduced, since the chronological order will be violated, but I am glad that at least in this way it will be possible to restore the article. I hope that you will seriously take up this matter, and I, in turn, will try to rehabilitate myself in Wikipedia, thank you.  193.34.225.46 (talk) 15:14, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, sorry to bother you, but I have a question. I don't know much about the wikipedia system and would like to ask a more experienced user. To try to get an unban you need to contact the META stewards, right? I sent them 2 messages on March 26 and 30, do you happen to know how long they usually answer. I would also like to clarify how many requests to restore pages are usually considered? It's just that I check the request you created every day and it seems that no one cares about it. 193.34.225.25 (talk) 17:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but what about restoring the page? I just thought it was a fairly quick process and besides, there was not a single vote against restoring. 193.34.225.25 (talk) 17:19, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's the contrary, the deleter is being supported by other admins, so the deletion will be upheld. Still, after this is completed, she may agree to restore the content to my Sandbox, so that I can start working on it. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra)(talk)17:52, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I thought they were on the contrary for the restoration, thank you for enlightening me. That is, you wait until the article is finally deleted, then all its content is transferred to you in the sandbox, you edit it and post it already?  193.34.225.25 (talk) 18:03, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, sorry for the persistence, but did you by any chance abandon this? It's just that the process was completed over the weekend, I understand that you have other projects, but when I won't be able to edit for at least the next six months, you become the only hope for me,sorry for persistence again. By the way, I noticed that you edited the list of leaders in the Oirat Confederation, if you are interested in the topic of the Kyrgyz with the Oirats, then keep the sources. 123494.143.197.158 (talk) 01:21, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please kindly understand I cannot be seen as acting in response to your sollicitations (WP:PROXYING). You are banned, so you have to stay away until you manage to be un-banned, and please do not post here either anymore. I will address the article later, on my own, when I have time, and when I feel it is legitimate and I have enough reliable sources to back it up. It might take months. Good luck. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra)(talk)05:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
hey can you revert back the edit you just made there .both the 2 sources I provided there claimed him doing Vedic sacrifices and Brahamanical rituals.both of the sources are taken from the chandragupta main wiki page only. It's better to mention his first religion as the title of the paragraph.
You are just making sure joshua Johnson edits remains because he is a old user. Daayush (talk) 05:51, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The edit you just reverted back was made by a user without any proper source. The o thing you edited out is written in the given source. You yourself is doing vandalism at this point Daayush (talk) 05:55, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good day पाटलिपुत्र ! I hope you are doing fine, since you have uploaded a great deal of numismatics of different dynasties, do you have any of Bahauddin Tughril's mints from Bayana - He was a senior ghulam of Muhammad Ghuri.
→ Finbarr Barry Flood; 2009 ( Objects of Translation: Material Culture and Medieval "Hindu-Muslim" Encounter; p. 115) did have depiction of his gold coin from Bayana. (fig. 60, p. 115) Re Packer&Tracker (talk) 15:02, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Pat! I can literally sense your enthusiasm for the latest research about the Tarim mummies. It's really a charming twist in the plot that surrounded the ideology-laden and identity-seeking discourse around them before, isn't it?
Hi पाटलिपुत्र, I wrote the article Ancient text corpora recently, which quantifies all known writing prior to 300 AD. It was built mostly using the estimates of German scholar Carsten Peust. Peust stated that he didn’t know enough about South Asian or East Asian corpora, so left them out. Might you know of any sources which could help to fill these gaps? I have been cross-checking against List of languages by first written account. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:57, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey पाटलिपुत्र , there is a lot of problems in Mughal Empire article which contains a quite a lot of outdated information and mispresentation of facts especially in the demographics part which itself has been updated by Maddison himself. I hope you can remove the semi protected area and get me to fix the data with the updated information 103.81.215.217 (talk) 06:16, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have partially worked on a draft in user space User:Bookku/Indian sceptre but I worked mainly on Tamil Nadu related RS. The draft needs expansion support about 1) history of sceptre (danda) in rest of India 2) sceptre in Indian coinage.
You have extensively worked Indian history related articles. IMHO your contributions to expand the draft may help the topic area, hence this request.
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Frank Sinatra. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:31, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
per Template:Very long "Note that simply exceeding the recommended limits is insufficient reason to place this template; it must pertain to an ongoing discussion on the talk page." पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra)(talk)19:32, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria:Please read the above: you can only add this tag if you start a discussion on the Talk Page. Also, rather than tagging a multiplicity of articles, it would be more productive if you actually started to resolve the issue yourself. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra)(talk)19:46, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I read the above, and my point stands: simply removing the tag without addressing the issue is not helpful and not something you should continue. I have indeed resolved this issue across multiple pages already, and it is easier to do so when they are flagged for follow-up. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:49, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
With my previous message you may be aware I am working on the article draft Indian sceptre. I would like to know about what is held in right hand of this image. Whether that is a flag, torch, some weapon or a sceptre?
Recently while cleaning up/reorganising Commons:Category:Nasik Caves category, I came across images of some other caves called Panch Pandav Caves in Mohadi which were not Nasik Caves. Upon some search I found that it is Kunghada caves so I created new category Commons:Category:Kunghada Caves. I think there is no article on the subject on English Wikipedia. I found that they are from Satvahana period. If you like, please create an article on the subject.
I have found some new info on other caves in this paper. The index in paper also point to other papers as well.
Thats OK. I will try to create one if I can. There are lot of other things in to-do list already so. I love your detailed articles on ancient historical places and people. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 07:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I just corrected the coordinates that you inserted into the article Battle of the Indus. It's no big deal, but I'm always curious about the genesis of such errors. Where did you obtain the incorrect coordinates, which pointed 35 kilometers away from the nearest bend of the Indus, and 89 km away from the likely battle site? Abductive (reasoning)09:30, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why someone should do this anyway. we are just improving the template, just like the other templates. we are taking arguments to talk page to argue about the lists. But you just keep moving with out any discussion @पाटलिपुत्र. really what was your reason to protect the template, vandalism? there Wasnt any vandalism in what we did, actually you restored anything that we improve. you protect the page against of yourself? please be respectful and restore to your own last change, the one that you deleted only the image. 95.2.9.125 (talk) 15:15, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@पाटलिपुत्र Be respectfull to history, return the template to version that we improved. İt is a free Encyclopedia, you can not protect some pages for your own want. There is a talk page. you should used that for argue to remove or add (to improve) the page. Bring back the early Turkic khaganates . 5.176.117.160 (talk) 15:54, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@पाटलिपुत्र i just checked the past history of early Turkic khaganates you created this template by your own hand, but you don't want to improve it? What was the problem of the new lists. We argued for 2 and 3 times and we finally achieved the good range in improving the template. We used the talk page but you didn't. We argued any new things that we added but you didn't. We improved the page but you protect the page from improving. Be respectful, bring it back. 95.2.8.212 (talk) 16:05, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@पाटलिपुत्र you opened the page by your own hand and you don't want to improve it. Bring back the last version that you argued about the image. We are respectful you should be too. 5.176.92.4 (talk) 16:19, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@पाटलिपुत्र if it is your own encyclopedia, it is fine, but it's not. It is a free Encyclopedia and you are the admin of here, you are suppose to stop the vandalism, not do it. Bring back the last improved version that we argued about image. 5.176.92.4 (talk) 16:24, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am left shocked. Every single admin called and that which commented were in favor of Fowler. Seeing your long history on Wikipedia, do you not have any friendmins you can call to take your side. Whatupis (talk) 10:13, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Muqan Qaghan in a Chinese television reenactment.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Ирука1312:40, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution (third request)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Göktürks into First Turkic Khaganate. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 13:23, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for uploading File:Ashina and Emperor Wu in a Chinese television reenactment.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Kashmir kingdom. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 2#Kashmir kingdom until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 (he) talk contribs subpages 08:27, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
_(variant).svg)
13:58, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
_Dhauladhar_Ranges_in_Kangra_velley.jpg)
Template:Brahmi scripts has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
_(14573454469).jpg)
.jpg)
_(14752756965).jpg)
.jpg)
Done. Thanks for the suggestion and references. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 14:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Yamnaya_Steppe_Pastoralists.jpg&diff=515554026&oldid=515552097){kind=link}
![[9]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gardez_Ganesha,_Maharajadhiraja_Shri_Shahi_Kimgalau.jpg){kind=link}
![[14]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pratihara_bhoja.JPG){kind=link}
![[15]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gurjara-Pratihara_coinage.jpg){kind=link}
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. SnowRise let's rap 23:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
