PadFoot2008

Could you please review the article on the Gupta-Saka War? It is mentioned in a source (though I'm unsure of its reliability) that the Guptas captured Sindh from the Sakas. However, during the same period, the Sassanids, followed by the Rai dynasty, were ruling over Sindh. DeepstoneV (talk) 19:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@DeepstoneV, I am not sure but as far as I am aware, the Magadhan Empire under the Gupta dynasty never directly ruled western states (like Malwa for instance). The western parts of the Magadhan Empire were vassals ruled by their own dynasties. The House of Aulikara ruled the Kingdom of Malwa as vassals of Kumaragupta of the Magadhan Empire for some time, so perhaps, the Rai dynasty might have ruled Sindh as vassals of the Magadhan Empire under Guptas for a period the same way but then could have come under Persian influence later on or earlier. Ancient history is usually pretty ambiguous in these cases. PadFoot2008 (talk) 01:57, 20 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi PadFoot2008, just wondering why you added the Use British English tag to Breakup of Spanish armed forces (1936) and changed the spelling within the article? This violates MOS:RETAIN which states "With few exceptions (e.g., when a topic has strong national ties or the change reduces ambiguity), there is no valid reason for changing from one acceptable option to another." AusLondonder (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello @AusLondonder, my bad, I wasn't aware of MOS:RETAIN. I was looking at WP:EngvarB. Thanks for informing me about it. PadFoot2008 13:47, 5 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, no worries. AusLondonder (talk) 17:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of battles involving the Maratha Confederacy, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Pratapgarh and Battle of Delhi.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

There is a consensus at INB (including admins), according to which location of various Indian states are arranged/written in the lead sentence. It is largely based on Britannica's definition. Let them stay that way. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:15, 14 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Fylindfotberserk, Okay, sorry I didn't know. PadFoot2008 13:08, 14 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Deccanis

added a link pointing to Hindustani

List of Indian monarchs

added a link pointing to Shahu

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from India into North India. 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. -- Mikeblas (talk) 15:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Alright, I am sorry I forgot this time. I shall do that next time onwards. PadFoot2008 04:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

State the specific reason of removing my sourced content in Maratha Empire article? Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 09:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your content was not sourced. It needs to be explicitly mentioned in a citation. Besides it doesn't need to be in the lead either. PadFoot2008 09:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

The Marathas - Cambridge History of India (Vol. 2, Part 4) : New Cambridge History of India : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive this is the source for protectors of Delhi throne pg 138 here is the quotation: For the Marathas, probably the two most significant events of the whole chaotic period in Delhi were a treaty in 1752, which made them protector of the Mughal throne (and gave them the right to collect chauth in the Punjab), and the civil war of 1753, by which the Maratha nominee ended up on the Mughal throne.

This is for Areal limit of the Empire/Confederacy (same source); Quoting: First, we shall look at the expanding areas controlled by the Marathas, and there were many. Maratha leaders pushed into Rajasthan, the area around Delhi, and on into the Punjab. They attacked Bundelkund and the borders of Uttar Pradesh. Further east, the Marathas attacked Orissa and the borders of Bengal and Bihar.

Advanced Study in the History of Modern India 1707-1813 - Jaswant Lal Mehta - Google Books pg 233-237

I can provide more sources if you want NOW?? Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 09:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

As I said before, it mentions the regions the Confederacy collected chauth from, not that the regions were a part of the Confederacy. And also please stop shouting. PadFoot2008 09:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

See my comment on Maratha Empire talk page Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 09:33, 24 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Did you see my new comments can i add now? Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 09:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Note that I have placed this notice on behalf of the requestor, and that I have no part to play in the dispute 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:10, 24 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

I recently added something on my User Page and I am informing you this since we both have an ongoing dispute about some information in the Maratha Empire article. So plz see my user page link I have already provided and don't consider me inactive or satisfied with any comment of yours and others unless I state so. I need to have a time limit for Wikipedia as I have to concentrate on other things (especially my studies) which are equally important for me if not more. So plz wait for my responses I may not be replying so fast as I did before. I hope you will be okay with it. Regards. Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 05:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

You need to gain a popular consensus for your edit in the article talk page itself. You don't have my consensus as of now. PadFoot2008 05:46, 25 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

This was not about consensus this was about something else though I understand what you are trying to say. Mohammad Umar Ali (talk) 05:53, 25 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shankaraji Narayan Gandekar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rajaram.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:59, 5 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, PadFoot2008,

Rather than creating a whole new set of categories, please consider going to WP:CFD or the speedy rename section of that page and request that the original categories be renamed. Then the category history can be preserved. And please do not try to move or rename categories yourself, it's best to let the CFD bot handle these operations. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:55, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Alright, thanks, I wasn't aware of that. I'll do that now. PadFoot2008 17:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Indigenous peoples in India

added links pointing to Nagas, Kalash and Gond

Northwest India

added a link pointing to Tibetan language

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:01, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:35, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, PadFoot2008,

Please do not edit war over categories. It is just as disruptive as other kinds of edit-warring. If you find an edit reverted, please discuss it on the article talk page, do not revert a revert. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:38, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Liz, I am not edit warring over a category. I accidentally reverted a person [1] and then I self-reverted [2]. PadFoot2008 07:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, some of your recent page moves, such as moving Govindachandra (Gahadavala dynasty) to Govindachandra of Kannauj do not make sense. As the article on the Gahadavala dynasty mentions, the Gahadavala kings likely lived and ruled from Varanasi, not Kannauj (which was not even the contemporary name of that place). Almost all of Govindachandra's inscriptions are issued from Varanasi. Also, I am not sure which "convention of monarch related articles" are you referring to in your edit summaries. utcursch | talk 23:50, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Utcursch, most monarch articles use this convention. Just search "George I of" in Wikipedia itself, for example. Also there isn't much of a requirement to use contemporary names I think? And just see it's usage here in Google Books and ngrams [3] [4] [5]. Though I should mention here that the popular usage in reliable sources is "of Kanauj" not "of Kannauj", but given that the article has double 'n's in its title, I decided to keep the convention. PadFoot2008 02:29, 18 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of monarchs of Malwa, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jayavarman.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:25, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Quadrilateral Security Dialogue have been undone because they did not appear constructive but disruptive, see Dravidian peoples and Indigenous peoples in India. If you think you can claim that Dravidian languages are associated with the hypothetical AASI component as well as to Andamanese without presenting any source, and in the same act of breath call the mainstream view that Dravidian spreaded outgoing from the IVC as Fringe and ignoring studies published in reputable journals, than you may be NOT HERE for this encyclopedia. This is not your personal playground. What you did at Indigenous peoples in India is even more questionable, if not outright vandalism. 45.129.86.225 (talk) 05:30, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

A tag has been placed on Template:Country data Mughal Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_April_30#Template:Country_data_Mughal_Empire. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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. Abecedare (talk) 15:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. – sbaio 13:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Sbaio, I made just one revert. How is that an edit war? Which Wikipedia policy says that one revert is an edit war (barring some projects where 1RR applies)? I think you might have considered my latest edit as a revert, which it wasn't. I simply changes 'S' → 's'. PadFoot (talk) 13:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to History of Hinduism, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at History of Hinduism. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Edit-warring again; how many warnings do you need? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 18:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC) Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 18:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Mate, what you are doing is edit warring as well. PadFoot (talk) 18:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at History of Hinduism, you may be blocked from editing. Stop edit-warring; one more revert and I'll report you. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 19:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, PadFoot2008. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

• Wikipedia:Requested moves
• Category:Requested moves, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Primefac (talk) 15:20, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains underway. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

What is with all of these unnecessary page moves? I'm cleaning up about a dozen broken redirects from all of your terrible page moves. These were thoughtlessly done. If this happens again, I will remove your page mover right as you are causing damage with it rather than solving problems. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Liz, I am extremely sorry and I apologise for all the inconveniences caused by me. This was my first round robin move, and I am going to make sure something like this never happens again. PadFoot (talk) 17:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

PadFoot, regarding your second set of moves, reverting from Afghan–Maratha War did not require a round-robin swap. You should have just moved it directly back. You can move a page to another title with a redirect so long as that redirect has never been edited. See WP:MOR (possible for all autoconfirmed editors) and WP:PMR#delete-redirect (possible for page movers).

Also, when a round-robin swap is necessary, you should suppress the redirect on all three moves. (WP:ROBIN "Note: Redirects are suppressed during all moves in the round-robin page move process.") As it is, you left an extra redirect at Draft:Move/Afghan–Maratha War that you should nominate for speedy deletion with {{db-g6|rationale=redirect created during a [[WP:ROBIN|round-robin]] swap that should have been suppressed per [[WP:PMRC#4]]}}.

I recommend using User:Ahecht/Scripts/pageswap to avoid mistakes during round-robin swaps – and just to make them easier in general. It reduces, but does not eliminate, the chance of causing Liz (or less likely me) to come to your talk page. SilverLocust 💬 03:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Done, that's for telling me about this. I will try to make sure I don't do anything that might cause you or Liz to come to my talk page :) PadFoot (talk) 04:05, 6 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Also, those moves of war articles to use hyphens are incorrect per MOS:DUALNATIONALITIES. See examples like Mexican–American War, Philippine–American War, 1948 Arab–Israeli War, Chechen–Russian conflict, Swedish–Norwegian War, Soviet–Afghan War. SilverLocust 💬 03:10, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

@SilverLocust, I wasn't fully aware of MOS:DUALNATIONALITIES, thanks for informing me about it. So, if a combining form like Franco- or Anglo- is used we use a hyphen, but if something like Polish or Swedish is used we use an en dash? That's interesting. I wonder why some nationalities don't have a combining form, while others do. PadFoot (talk) 12:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I also fixed Polish–Russian War (1609–1618) [6] which I had recently moved per the move discussion in the talk page (regarding the dates). PadFoot (talk) 12:49, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:57, 7 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kingdom of Kannauj, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ama.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:01, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply