User talk:Sutyarashi: Difference between revisions

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Sutyarashi! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! — Masum Ibn Musa  ^Conversation 12:22, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added Barha Sayyids multiple times on the page because they were descendants of Punjabis who migrated to Muzaffarnagar from their ancestral villages in Patiala

Instead of removing edits without giving a valid reason, leave a message on my talk page and I will make amends

Regards Jat1321 (talk) 16:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Barhas are a well known royal house of subcontinent who claimed to be Sayyids.^[1] Add a reliable source on that they ever spoke Punjabi; and I will not undo your additions. Thanks Sutyarashi (talk) 16:18, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Sultan Muqarrab Khan, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:03, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you removed the FanPOV template I placed on the Lahore article. The article has several instances of Fan POV such as the Education part. I have placed the template again, please remove it only after fixing the afore mentioned problem. Flamealpha123 (talk) 15:20, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I must've removed it by mistake. It was not intentional. Regards.Sutyarashi (talk) 15:23, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Going through page history, I found out that it was done by User:Agent05032, not by my edits. Sutyarashi (talk) 15:26, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Cathedral of the Holy Redeemer Multan.jpeg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file licensed as "for non-commercial use only", "no derivative use", "for Wikipedia use only", or "used with permission"; and it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:

• state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
• add the relevant copyright tag and if necessary, a complete fair use rationale.

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. LucasKannou (talk) 03:17, 2 December 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 your contributions in the Punjab and Pakistan articles. Some days ago, you were sceptical to the changing of the article Taank Kingdom to a more common name in all sources I have found.^{[1][2][3][4][5]} I think it's the better etymology for the article since it's the WP:COMMONNAME and the name "Taank" is virtually nonexistent in literature and sources. Regards Jamal047 (talk) 18:23, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking. The variations regarding its name are due to transliteration from Chinese. This kingdom is so poorly documented that its probably the only source are travels of Xuanzeng. As creator of the page, I know that information about it is scarce and I had to depend on colonial era documents. To double check, I did visited Google ngram and although I couldn't find exactly "Taank kingdom" or "Takka kingdom" due to being so unknown, I did, surprisingly, found usage of another variant "Taki" (Taki-Desa) to be much more than either Taank or Takka.[1] Now, though these may have other meanings too apart from this kingdom, but it gives a fairly clear idea about which is more used. This name is also given in multiple already cited sources i.e ^[6] and ^[7] So, if you're so insisted on WP:COMMON then I guess the page should be moved to Taki kingdom. The alternative is keeping the title as it's, till more information about this particular state comes to view. Sutyarashi (talk) 15:29, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Vision Technologies, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. MarioGom (talk) 20:54, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sutyarashi,
Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours! Packer&Tracker (remark) 10:35, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

– Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

Packer&Tracker (remark) 10:35, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am thankful to you for appreciating my contributions and a very Happy Near Year to you too!Sutyarashi (talk) 10:40, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please be advised that an IP editor has opened a thread about you at WP:ANI. See WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#suppression of Baloch pages. —C.Fred (talk) 18:25, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...And that IP is now blocked for a month as a sockpuppet, so nothing to worry about. —C.Fred (talk) 18:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Mallian people, is not suitable as written to remain published. In the current sourcing, there is not enough information to pass WP:VERIFY, please see WP:CIT to see what information needs to be included in footnotes and references. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:57, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article History of Punjab you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:History of Punjab for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 01:01, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Persecution of Muhajirs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MQM.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sutyarashi, I hope you are doing well.

I reverted you're edits on Sindhis, i noticed that you removed a core piece of Information on Sindhi ethnic group.

You removed the following:

"Sindhi people have been native to Sindh throughout history, apart from that their historical region has always came from the South-eastern side of Balochistan, the Bahawalpur region of Punjab and the Kutch region of Gujarat, India."

This information was correct because if you look historical Sindh maps then the region really expanded to where till Kutch.
Incase you got a little confused, you can check the following articles and their maps:

• Balochistan
• Punjab
• Sindh
• Kutch

Thanks for cooperating.
~TheBushSush (talk) 10:40, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For reference see the maps below:

• 1.
  
• 2. Map of the Chachas circa 650 CE.png

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Bengal Subah into Muslim kingdoms in the Indian subcontinent. 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) 11:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the MOS:LEAD summarises the article body. If you do not have an interest in reading the body, I suggest that you do not edit the lead. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:05, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3, first of all, I have been editing that particular page for a year, so actually your claim of having no interest in reading the body is quite ridiculous. Next, that particular line actually went like this (which I restored) before it was changed [2] a month ago; after which you've been repeatedly resisting to change it to WP:NPOV. Also, that was the policy of a particular Sultan, and even that was reversed after his death. So, your insistence on adding into lead is actual "nonsense" (which you called such as in your edit summary). Sutyarashi (talk) 14:26, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you have edited before. That doesn't concern me. I have had to revert random IPs changing the wording numerous times in the last few months. Finally, when I see a registered editor doing the same edit, and calling it "neutral language", that is more than I can handle. There is no such thing as "neutral language" on Wikipedia. What we have is WP:NPOV, which means do what the the balance of RS do. Not our own idea of "neutral".

If you are reverting to the original wording or some older wording, you can say so in the edit summary, and if possible, give the revision number. Then it becomes the responsibility of whoever wants a change to justify their wording. As far as I can see, the wording is amply justified by what is in the Shah Mir dynasty#Sikander section. Your claim that it was only "one particular Sultan" that did it doesn't cut any ice. Once they are converted, they are converted. Another Sultan doesn't have anything more to do. The net effect of the dynasty is that they forcibly converted the entire population of the Valley except for the die-hard Pandits. The Sultan Sikandar section makes it clear that it was largely a forced conversion. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:35, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3, yes, I actually meant WP:NPOV by neutral language, though bad wording, probably. Still, the present sentence gives impression on the readers that all Sultans of Kashmir actively tried to forcefully convert people; far from truth, to say. Mind if it's changed into something like:During the rule of the dynasty, Islam became dominant faith in the Kashmir valley,^[1] with references? Also, you're ignoring the role of Sufis in proselytizing the religion, especially that of Mir Sayyid Ali Hamadani. Sutyarashi (talk) 18:32, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Dominant" doesn't represent the fact that practically the entire population got converted. Sufis can't convert 97% of the population. It happened nowhere else in India. Why should it have happened in Kashmir? How do you explain the hard fact that the Pandits, who didn't want to convert, were forced to leave the Valley? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 18:55, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3, it did happen at many places; Sindh, Bengal, Gilgit, Hyderabad... Delhi too had Muslim majority for centuries. Your Pandit exodus mention seems laughable. I mean literally how's a 1990s event related to a dynasty that ended in 1586?? You overlooked millions of Kashmiris who left valley during Dogra rule and 1947 Jammu Muslim massacres, though. Don't know why but it gives a feeling that you're writing that with a specific agenda, sorry to say, 'cause you're a respectable and old Wikipidian. Repeating though, wouldn't it be much better if we just write that Islam became majority faith, and leave it on readers to how much delve in it? It's just lead sentences, after all. Sutyarashi (talk) 19:06, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3 seems like that I wasn't the only one who thought it, and @TrangaBellam has already restored it on the article. Sutyarashi (talk) 19:22, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The first stone sculpture of Kashmir—a four-armed Brahma, argued to be one of the finest in the history of the subcontinent—was sculpted by son of a Buddhist Sanghapati in 1409 and dedicated to Sikandar. How does this sculpture, crafted in the fag end of an allegedly iconoclastic reign, help challenge simplistic notions of religious persecution?

TrangaBellam (talk) 19:52, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sultan Sikandar didn't write an autobiography. But his contemporary, Timur, did. He writes:

The Raja of Jammu, who was wounded and prisoner ... agreed to pay certain sums of money and to become a Musulman if I would spare his life. I instantly ordered him to be taught the creed, and he repeated it and became a Muhammadan. Among these infidels there is no greater crime and abomination than eating the flesh of a cow or killing a cow, but he ate the flesh in the company of Musulmans. When he had thus been received into the fold of the faithful, I ordered my surgeons to attend to his wounds, and I honoured him with a robe and royal favours.

How did Timur know he had to do this? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:48, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In all probabilities, what we know as Timur's autobiography is a fabrication, drafted centuries after he had died. All serious (academic) historians of the era accept that it was a sixteenth century creation and ignore it. TrangaBellam (talk) 09:43, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3 because he was invading India?? And he knew how one became Muslim? Also, how can you say that it's related to Sultans of Kashmir? Your analogy is absurd. Sutyarashi (talk) 01:27, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is a specific technology of conversion that was apparently practised widely at the time. In Kashmir, we have tradition that says it was used on a mass scale to convert the entire population. I already said that Sikandar didn't write an autobiogaphy but Timur did. Sikandar paid tribute to Timur, sending Zain-ul-Abidin (reportedly) to Samarkhand.

Not satisfied with these measures, the king [Sikandar] is said to have eventually proclaimed all over his kingdom that his Hindu subjects should choose between Islam, exile or the sword. Large scale conversions to Islam followed and many people escaped out of Kashmir. ‘By the end of his reign all Hindu inhabitants of the Valley, except the Brahmans, had probably adopted Islam’ (Lawrence 1909, p. 24). Tradition has it that only eleven Brahman families survived in Kashmir when Sikandar died in A.D. 1413–14 (see Lawrence 1895, p. 191).^[1]

Zain-ul-Abidin invited these Brahmans (later called "Pandits") back to Kashmir and employed them in the state. He has been praised by "bud shah" by the Pandits. But scholars say that it was just a necessity because the Brahmans knew how to run the state machinery, the others didn't. Zain-ul-Abidin raided all the way to Lo Manthang, north of Khatmandu. During his reign, the Kargil rulers at Kartse were convered, and Islam was consolidated in Baltistan. About a hundred years of history is missing in all the chronicles of all the Buddhist regions.^[2] -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:32, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I am saying is that Timur did not write any autobiography; the text that is attributed to as Timur's autobiography in pop-history books — Tuzūkāt-i Taymūrī — is accepted by almost all historians as a sixteenth century fabrication which was explicitly intended for circulation in the Mughal cosmopolis.

The rest is, err, irrelevant? TrangaBellam (talk) 11:28, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Malfuzat-i Timuri is the name I am familiar with. And I was quoting from Andre Wink. I know you don't give him much due, but certainly not a "pop historian".

All indications are that the Shah Miris exerted an extremely strong Islamisation drive, well beyond anything witnessed anywhere else in the subcontinent. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:30, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of wars involving the Mughal Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mughal war of succession.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I wanted to get your opinion on a discussion I started regarding adding artwork depicting Zorawar Singh's army in Ladakh as an infobox image, please see: Talk:Dogra–Tibetan War#Adding a depiction of Zorawar Singh's army in Ladakh (not sure if I am doing this correctly, I haven't started a consensus building query on Wikipedia before) ThethPunjabi (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed you've questioned the factual validity of the Vardhana empire, Eastern Punjab republics and the Tomara/Katoch dynasties section. What is the reason for this? Trigarta (talk) 17:23, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TONE and WP:Synthesis has been corrected for in all 3 topics, So warning should be removed now. Thanks Trigarta (talk) 23:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Trigarta: your edits, specifically on the lead, have created a mess. For example you added this line: It contained many heavily Punjab influenced dynasties such as the reign of Razia Sultana, the Sayyid dynasty and the Tughlaq dynasty.

This is not only unverified and ethnic POV pushing, but infact a WP:HOAX. Please refrain from doing original research and adding such claims in the lead. Sutyarashi (talk) 08:34, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not WP:HOAX, if you asked me to provide all the sources I would have, rather than deleting them. The Tughlaqs hail from Multan and Eastern Punjab and the Sayyids have theirs roots as Punjabi Kokhars with their home town in South Punjab. Razia sultana gained most of her support from Punjab aswell. Trigarta (talk) 14:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		A plate of Samosa for you
		Hello, I've noticed you've been working hard on improving the Jat Muslim page. I have been reading what you've been adding and found your additions very fascinating and informative. To show appreciation, I'm leaving a plate of samosa for you. Enjoy! Thank you. ThethPunjabi (talk) 17:09, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply] For more Indian dishes, visit the Kitchen of WikiProject India.

ThethPunjabi (talk) 17:09, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sutyarashi. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sultan Muqarrab Khan, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shah Mir Page Wikipedia :There are two theories regarding Shah Mir's origin. Some Persian chronicles of Kashmir describe Shah Mir as a descendant of the Gabri Swati rulers of Swat  Historian A. Q. Rafiqi thinks it more likely that he was a descendant of Persian or Turkic immigrants to Swat. It has also been suggested that he belonged to a Sufi or Qadiri family. Some scholars state that the Panj-gabbar valley, the location described by Jonaraja, was actually peopled by Khasas and so ascribe a Khasa ethnicity to Shah Mir. Most modern historians accept the Swati origins of Shah Mir. Kashmiri scholar N. K. Zutshi, having critically examined the sources, reconciles the two versions by noting that the Persian chronicles mentions Swadgir rather than Swat, which he interprets as Swadgabar, meaning "suburbs of Gabar", which coincides with Jonaraja's description of Panchagahvara-Simani (on the borders of Panchagagvara).

My comments : When three families Gabaris, Mumayalis and Mitravis came to Hazara from Swat then they were combinely called Swatis. Brother Look at this if there is something to argue on it then tell me so I stop editing that page again n again. As Gabaris are Persians and it is proved in recent DNA that you can find on google. Shah Mir was Gabari as accepted my many historians. Thank You Gibari Sultan (talk) 13:21, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gibari Sultan I have reported you for explicitly showing sockpuppet behaviour. You're free to defend yourself there. Sutyarashi (talk) 13:28, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

why you are not replying to my questions instead of reporting, Means you want to impose your knowledge on others Gibari Sultan (talk) 13:34, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ustad Ahmad Lahori, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lahori Gate.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I saw you changed some numbers. I have provided page numbers here and links at the bottom of the article in question. On page 211 Max Arthur provides casualties. The number is 50,000 for that battle. On page 96 he provides 7,000 for one battle. On page 149 the author of The Sikh Gurus he provides a number for another battle which is 15,000. So what we can do is not combine all the casualties but just list them out for each battle.

Ex. Battle of Amritsar 7,000

Battle of Rohilla 15,000

Battle of Lahira 35,000

Battle of Kartarpur 50,000

Is the above fine with you? I will provide adequate citation from reliable sources

P.S Gurbilas is about Guru Hargobind not Guru Gobind Singh. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 18:55, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also @Sutyarashi maybe we can use Gurbilas as reference for the numbers but say according to Sikh sources. So for example According to Sikh Sources: 75,000 CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 19:06, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CanadianSingh1469 you cannot merge all sources to give a combine no., this is original research. Also, Gurbilas does not seems to be a historical account. You should find a reliable reference (see WP:HISTRS). Even the macauliffe source which is frequently used in the article is outdated by more than a century. Sutyarashi (talk) 09:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just because a source is old does not make it unreliable. What I an suggesting is listing out each individual casualty for the battles per Max Arthur and not combining them. Is that ok with you?

To quote from the Encyclopaedia of Sikhism, “ GURBILAS CHHEVIN PATSHAHl, lit. the (life)play of the Sixth Guru, is a versified biography of Guru Hargobind…” CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 09:48, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It really depends on how much reliable Macauliffe is; but it is better if individual numbers are separately listed. Sutyarashi (talk) 09:55, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I will go ahead with it. So is it a firm no on using Gurbilas because I think it can be used by saying per Sikh sources beside it. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 09:56, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because it is more of an epic than a historical account. If you wish, you can have a separate section on what Sikh biographies say but not in the info box. Sutyarashi (talk) 09:59, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thanks for agreeing and being so helpful. I wish there were more editors like you instead of people who just revert and don’t elaborate. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 10:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sutyarashi By the way you seem to know a lot of history about the Mughals. Could you point me to some sources talking about Zabardast Khan who was a governor of Lahore during Guru Gobind Singh’s time. Thanks in advance. CanadianSingh1469 (talk) 10:28, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed you left a second-level warning notice on my talk page meanwhile when I left a general caution message you removed and deleted it, Isn't it a biased thing to do? ⭐️ Starkex ⭐️ 📧 ✍️ 17:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Starkex Because you accused me of mass deleting content, which never happened. On the other hand, you are adding material about which there is no reliable source, that's why I left a message at you talk page. Sutyarashi (talk) 17:38, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless, I understood all that and pardon if I committed an mistake but on the other hand removing Talk page comments is not a polite way of solving editorial disputes. ⭐️ Starkex ⭐️ 📧 ✍️ 17:42, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's only if that those messages have merit. Sutyarashi (talk) 17:44, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ustad Ahmad Lahori, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dooms.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:47, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dome, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shah Jahan Mosque.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sutyarashi. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Vision Technologies, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:03, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• There are 3 paragraphs which talk about atrocities. Why do you want more? You are not helping yourself by merely restoring sock edits here. Source does not say "400,000 Hindu people" were killed, nor there is any relevance of "Maharashtra Purana". Since the page is not about atrocities, any deeply cherrypicked focus on atrocities is WP:UNDUE. If you want to restore any content then write it on your own by carefully verifying the source and avoiding any kind of repetition. I would also add that a number of the sources you are restoring are outdated. Editorkamran (talk) 00:55, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Editorkamran which sock you're talking about? The IP with which you were edit warring earlier has no block history. Please avoid accusing others of Sockpuppetry without any evidence, as it may lead you being indeffed.

  As for content, I cannot understand what are your exact objections over it. The section clearly discusses the Burgi war crimes, and it should cover all aspects of it. Nothing is WP:UNDUE as the sources are same over which whole article stands., neither I'm aware of any WP guidelines which requires me writing the content from scratch. Sutyarashi (talk) 01:31, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That IP is a sock puppet. See here.

There are already 3 paragraphs which talk about atrocities. There is no need to add more. What you restored was almost 80% repetition of what already exists in the article. Editorkamran (talk) 01:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Editorkamran your link only shows a user requesting increased page protection, and no evidence that IP was identified as a sock. Anyways, I think there should be no problem with additional content (excluding repetition) in the section. There is no policy that a section can not be of more than 3 paragraphs. Sutyarashi (talk) 03:19, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Then go and report the person who concluded that the IP is a sock and also report the admin who agreed with the finding instead of creating your own imagination.

There is a policy called WP:UNDUE. Read again, I am saying you cannot REPEAT the same content. I already said "What you restored was almost 80% repetition of what already exists in the article." Editorkamran (talk) 09:08, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Editorkamran there is no need of reporting anyone, because IP was not identified as a sock to start with. Instead of going WP:PERSONAL, just identify the "80% parts" which you think were repeated Otherwise there is no reason for objection over the sourced content.

For example, there is no mention of rapes committed by Marathas in the current section nor of the resulting migration of people. If you failed to describe why you do not want these sections then I will move ahead for adding. Remember that WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT is not a reason for removal. Sutyarashi (talk) 10:03, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since the IP was dynamic, there was no need to block it as sock.

"Contemporary accounts of the invasions report mass gang rape against women, and mutilation of victims by the Marathas which included cutting off their hands and noses." Is the only sentence which hasn't been mentioned. Everything else is already there. Editorkamran (talk) 11:10, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]