| Revision as of 06:57, 2 October 2022 editTrangaBellam (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,563 edits →The article is not the history of Pakistan as a state: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 12:36, 28 July 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,067 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:History of Pakistan/Archive 1) (bot |
| (66 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{calm}} |
|
|
{{Pakistani English}} |
|
{{Calm}} |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|1= |
|
{{Vital article|level=4|topic=History|class=B}} |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Pakistan|importance=Top|History=y}} |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Pakistan|class=B|importance=Top |History=y}} |
|
{{WikiProject History |importance=Top}} |
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism|class=B |
|
{{WikiProject British Empire |importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject India |importance=High}} |
| ⚫ |
}} |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Bangladesh|importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject History|peer-review=no|class=B|importance=Top|portal=yes|B-Class-1=yes|B-Class-2=yes|B-Class-3=yes|B-Class-4=yes|B-Class-5=yes|B-Class-6=yes}} |
|
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{contentious topics/talk notice|ipa}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
| algo = old(31d) |
|
| algo = old(31d) |
| Line 20: |
Line 21: |
|
{{To do}} |
|
{{To do}} |
|
{{archives}} |
|
{{archives}} |
|
|
{{Broken anchors|links= |
|
|
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#The Shahi Kingdoms and the Muslim invasions) has been ] before. <!-- {"title":"The Shahi Kingdoms and the Muslim invasions","appear":{"revid":188878597,"parentid":188876748,"timestamp":"2008-02-03T20:53:17Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":824844413,"parentid":824055114,"timestamp":"2018-02-09T21:13:00Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} --> |
|
|
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#The Shahi Kingdoms and the Muslim invasions) has been ] before. <!-- {"title":"The Shahi Kingdoms and the Muslim invasions","appear":{"revid":188878597,"parentid":188876748,"timestamp":"2008-02-03T20:53:17Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":824844413,"parentid":824055114,"timestamp":"2018-02-09T21:13:00Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} --> |
|
⚫ |
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Geography == |
|
== The article is not the history of Pakistan as a state == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What step took Muslim rules to resit British ] (]) 05:27, 24 March 2024 (UTC) |
|
The lead that is currently in the article has been in place for nearly 15 years. History if Pakistan is the history of the region that is today Pakistan. In other words, "ancient Pakistan" is an apt term. The old notion that Pakistan exists only after 1947 was settled long ago in many discussions both on this talk page and in the History of India and History of South Asia pages. It was decided that History of India is the history of the region that is today the Republic of India; if is UNDUE to include Mohenjo-daro or Gandhara or Taxila beyond a cursory mention in a history of India; the same applies, for example, to Dacca ] and the deindustrialization of Bengal. It is mostly a part of the history of Bangladesh. It is also UNDUE to claim the region of Pakistan in the realms of all sorts of Indian kingdoms the evidence of whose sovereignty in Pakistan is meagre or nonexistent. ]] 14:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{ping|User:Fowler&fowler}} Could you actually point me to the supposed "consensus" in question that you claim as the reason for your mass deletion of content ? And anyway is all this 6-months material you are indiscrimately reverting in contravention of this supposed consensus? This seems like a pretty cavalier way of managing article content.... <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">]]</span> ] 14:32, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::It was summarized by ] admin and arbitrator, the editor who was responsible for nearly 20 India-related Featured Articles on Misplaced Pages, in from April 2007 ]] 14:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Have no bone in the dispute but the same Nichalp who was site-banned by the ArbCom for, let's just say, some pretty interesting stuff? Not even considering that it was over 15 years ago, an eon in internet-era. ] (]) 06:57, 2 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:So I see the issue is the lead. I was concerned about the mass removal of content. I tried to contribute in improving the article and was confused where my contributions were wrong ] (]) 14:53, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::The lead is a DUE summary of article content, and in some sense a template of what the content should not stray beyond. I believe your additions were UNDUE. ]] 15:10, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::{{ping|User:Fowler&fowler}} The 15-year-old post by ] seems to be a common-sense comment, not a "consensus" as you claimed. Anyway, can you specify which new content in the introduction, or specifically which content in the body of the article, you consider might be "undue"? <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">]]</span> ] 15:22, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::It is very much the consensus. It has been followed scrupulously both on the ] page (in many discussions, which you will have to find yourself on ]) and on the ] pages. Why do you think both pages, especially the ] page concentrates only on the history in the region that is today the ]? |
|
|
::::I have told you again and again, please do not ping me. ]] 16:05, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I have removed more ] content, and as I state below in reply to Johnbod, I plan to bring the prose size down to 10K words. ]] 17:58, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::{{ping|User:Fowler&fowler}}The way you have been doing this is beyond common sense I'm afraid, and shows complete disrespect for the contributions of others: first you start by deleting the last 6 months of edits (by the way, you are already at your 3rd revert here, on the verge of breaking, again, the ] rule), and then you go on with a flurry of edits. It should be the other way around: you should edit from the '''''latest version''''', taking into account the edits from the last 6 months, and then trim as necessary. But instead of that, you are simply blanket-deleting the efforts of all contributors from the last 6 months: how to you expect these contributors to react? This is the opposite of collaborative editing: don't be surprised if you are reverted again by multiple users. ] too said that valuable content may have been added in the last 6 months: these contributions have to be respected and deserve more careful analysis. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">]]</span> ] 18:28, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Johnbod is saying politely that the article needs to be reduced drastically. They certainly did not say "valuable content." I know I am at 3RR, I say in my edit summary that sometimes you have to take that risk when Misplaced Pages norms of ] and ] are being violently violated in the worst possible way, when India-POV history consisting of the smallest kingdoms described without supportive sources in one-sentence sections are being added to the History of Pakistan. It is a little ridiculous when the Maurya Empire section in the History of Pakistan has twice the geographical extent in its map and is described in double the prose needed in the lead of the ] page. Those are the sections I have removed or reduced. I wrote his article long time ago. It has changed a lot since, but I don't intervene unless I see gross WP violations. I know I am following WP policy in the best interpretations of ARBIPA. ]] 18:39, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Again, please do not ping me Patliputra. What is it you do not understand? ]] 18:40, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Also, ] is going through a very difficult time right now, with floods ravaging the country. This is not the time for Indian editors or India-POV-promoting editors to gang up on Pakistan-related pages. I see no Pakistani editors opposing here. Very likely they are preoccupied with real life. ]] 18:52, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::I am asking for admin help here {{re|Vanamonde93|El_C|Bishonen|RegentsPark}} ]] 18:55, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::I confess I cannot figure out what the dispute is here; would anyone care to summarize it? <span style="font-family:Papyrus">] (])</span> 22:22, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::I'm with Vanamonde93 on this. Happy to help if someone can give a (very brief) summary. Also pinging {{ping|Mar4d}} who may be able to help (unfortunately ] appears to be moribund). --] <small>(])</small> 23:36, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::Hello Vanamonde, In the main, India-POV editors have been editing it prolifically adding regions of Pakistan to realms of little-known Hindu, Buddhist, Central Asia-based or India-based kingdoms of the past, especially of the early medieval era. The article had not only become bloated with 14,500 words, but also unduly weighted toward that early medieval (pre-Islamic) period, thereby also giving an opportunity for editors to spam this history of Pakistan page with Hindu- or Buddhist-related images of sculpture, reliefs, or coins—images that would never appear in the history of India or South Asia. There were also some Islamic regional kingdoms whose bloat was not so extensive.]] 23:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::I've reduced it to 11,500 odd words and plan to reduce it further to about 10,000 words which is the size of the FA ]. I had written the History of Pakistan page long ago. It has changed quite a bit, of course, since then, but the edits of the last six months have been outsized, i.e. caused the article to be unduly weighted by this underlying POV. I sincerely believe that much of it is caused by the absence of active Pakistani editors. ]] 23:48, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::: in which I left it in April 2007. It had 9,500 words, beautiful pictures, and balanced content. (It is one of the things, I believe, that Mar4d (mentioned by RegentsPark above) ]). I am not of course advocating a return to then—for one the sourcing standards were very different then—but had 14,500 words. The sections on neolithic ] and IVC, for example, were smaller than their counterparts in the ] page! But these other kingdoms had picked up the slack. |
|
|
:::::::::I've reduced it to , and will be reducing some of the post-1947 content as well until the article size is down to approximately 10,000 words ]] 00:29, 2 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Fasial masjid kis ne Azad karwaya == |
|
== Recent big reversion == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fasial masjid kis ne Azad karwaya ] (]) 09:52, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
. Firstly, the article was already too long at the 180K raw bytes version that F&F reverted to, and now is 218K, which is just far too long. As far as I can see, the bulk of the difference is a series of edits by ] and ] in August and September, mostly copying over material from satellite articles such as those on various medieval kingdoms. Some of this may be a good idea, but there is too much of it. At the least the material needs to be thinned out. ] (]) 14:28, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{ping|User:Johnbod}} Yes, my main issue is with the indiscriminate reverting. If there is some undue material, someone could at least have the courtesy to go and edit the content accordingly. 6 months worth of contributions cannot be all wrong (usually...). Best <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">]]</span> ] 14:35, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:I wasn't paying attention to the article size reverted to, only the lead. I agree that there is too much extraneous material, and I'm happy to revert it farther back. The new material is mostly India-POV history being applied Pakistan-related geography. It is the result of Pakistani editors disappearing from Misplaced Pages. ]] 14:43, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:I've reduced it further. Despite my reduction, it still remains in very poor state. It seems that long and biases histories are being written ''here'' about empires that would not be possible on the empire's own pages because those are being better monitored for UNDUE ]] 16:53, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:The page's prose size was 14,371 words. The most obscure Indian kingdoms which are not mentioned anywhere in ] make their appearance here. I have removed the UNDUE additions and brought the size down to 11,507 words. It needs to be reduced further to 10,000 words. The size of the ] page, for example, is 10,662 words ]] 17:05, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Content removal == |
|
== History == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
پاکستان کے وجود کے لیے اسٹیبلشمنٹ کے کردار پر تح تحقیق کریں ] (]) 08:09, 28 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
{{ping|User:पाटलिपुत्र}}, {{ping|User:Fowler&fowler}}, {{ping|User:Sutyarashi}} Fowler reverted some recent edits because of "too much WP:UNDUE material". My question is why my contributions got deleted. I believe I literally improved the page with my contributions. Could someone explain to me how my edits were wrong? ] (]) 14:30, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:I have opened a thread above. Please don't disrespect Misplaced Pages policy by starting a new thread. State what you need to in the thread above. ]] 14:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
