Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:05, 5 July 2023

May 2023

Hello, I'm The person who loves reading. Misplaced Pages is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Bajirao I seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. The person who loves reading (talk) 18:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok understood Aryan330 (talk) 18:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

@Aman.kumar.goel No,I am not

I just undid the unconstructive edits of user @Capitals00 which had no references, without providing sources he blanked whole result section with sources which provided in that.

I am not anti Mughal or anything but I just want to say that keep stayed what that was earlier or provide sources for your edit..

& That is not vandalism absolutely because vandalism is done by @Capitals00. He should discuss on talk page!

I just undid it stored to earlier edit!

That's it Aryan330 (talk) 05:52, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

There has been long discussion about the results on talk page so don't make these baseless claims. Read WP:ASPERSIONS. Aman Kumar Goel 05:54, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I didn't make any claime though!

You are trying to divert this discussion without taking action on @Capitals00!

Check your talk page Aryan330 (talk) 06:02, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Aman Kumar Goel 11:16, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. The thread is Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Aryan330 reported by User:Capitals00 (Result: ). Thank you. Capitals00 (talk) 16:37, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Unjustified warnings and incorrect removal of {{cn}} tags

Aryan330, the rambling warning you left at Ajayraj890's userpage accusing them of disruption, vandalism and edit-warring was unjustified. The user's adding of the {{cn}} tags to the two articles was perfectly fine. And your removal of the tags from the first page (without adding any inline citation) and from the page (while adding a wrongly formatted citation in the wrong place; fwiw I couldn't verify that that citation supported the infobox numbers) was what was in error.

Please slow down, learn wikipedia policies and norms, ask for advice when unsure, etc instead of edit-warring and warning users incorrectly. Your current path will simply lead to further sanctions. Abecedare (talk) 13:27, 3 July 2023 (UTC) (Fixed link to WP:IC. Abecedare (talk) 13:41, 3 July 2023 (UTC))

I have reverted your two edits. Please take it to the respective article talkpage and list the specific source(s) (with exact page number) that you believe support the tagged claims. I'll be happy to help you format the addition of the citations to the article at that point. Abecedare (talk) 13:31, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Abecedare

I just want to say that he should discuss first on talk page,as he said "it seems that strength is exaggerated" if it seems then he should give his evidence in talk page instead of directly adding citation tags as references are alreadyprovidedin reference section!

yes I should not add as "Disruption" I will take care of it further.

Thank you & kindly respond me on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Special:MobileDiff/1163057724Aryan330 (talk) 13:33, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Again, Ajayraj890's tagging and comment were perfectly correct. The burden (click that link!) is on those seeking to retain content in the article to provide proper citations. Abecedare (talk) 13:40, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Abecedare Ok, understood!

I need your help to do so as on mobile visual edits we couldn't able to mark Reference on battle template neither we able to cite some another source on reference list that's why I cant able to cite the link of bendre on reference list.that's why I removed that by saying that it is already present on references as they are present but I was unable to mark that on that place in template where citation needed.

Till then, kindly respond me on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Special:MobileDiff/1163057724 Aryan330 (talk) 13:49, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

You needn't worry about citation template formatting for the moment. Just post a comment on the relevant article talkpage specifying the reference in plain text (as in, Book X by Author Y says on Page N that "blah ...", if a URL is available, that's helpful but not necessary) and other editors involved editors can object or ask questions if needed.

As for the this diff: I'll let editors in that discussion respond since I haven't looked into Laine or Kincaid yet. Abecedare (talk) 14:11, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Abecedare

I would glad if you personally look into it as from some days many one sided users trying hard to let their side's positive side in light.it should look from neutral point of view!

So look personally for me.

Thanks Aryan330 (talk) 14:18, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

The article should be in a neutral point of view. Avoid the peacock terms in the paragraphs and cite much source as you can. You can't display anything without reliable sources. And since the article is in English, provide sources from English language as it makes the readers more comfortable. Ajayraj890 (talk) 14:30, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Abecedare Thank you Aryan330 (talk) 15:47, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

You have said that the references are already provided in the Reference section. But, the citation doesn't point to the infobox numbers. And please provide reliable and trustable sources. You have provided three sources for your article Battle of Umberkhind. One of them doesn't redirect to any links. And the Author of another source is BR Kamble. I haven't found any articles of that person. Moreover, the name of the source 'Studies in Shivaji and His Times. Shivaji University'. Is totally one sided. You haven't provided any other sources for this article. Ajayraj890 (talk) 13:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ajayraj890

As i mentioned above I couldn't able to cite that reference's link appropriately due to technical reasons.

although "Shivaji and times" is not one sided source as information about battle can't be of one sided!

In that way Audrey Trushkey's Aurangzeb the man and myth is also one sided but even that it's present on important Misplaced Pages articles! Aryan330 (talk) 13:53, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Even if both of the sources are from a neutral point of view, you have to provide the more reliable , conserved sources that support your claim.

I never said that the result of the battle is wrong. Since you haven't provided much sources that could support the statement on 'strength' in the infobox that have made, you can't make such a claim. If you provide some more sources (from a neutral point of view), I will cite that for you. Ajayraj890 (talk) 14:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ajayraj890

I had already said I didn't able to cite because of some technical reasons.

I will add it as it is not difficult as many sources claim about this battle it's just to wait for resolve that technical reasons. Aryan330 (talk) 14:15, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

You can name the sources. Can't you? I am not aganist the view of result of this battle. I am talking about the strength you have mentioned in the infobox. You should provide reliable sources for that. You can simply name that to me. I can cite them. Ajayraj890 (talk) 14:20, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ajayraj890

Thank you but I will add myself as it's additional sources, till now you can cite shivaji and his times for Battle of Umberkhind & indrajit sawant's for Battle of pawankhind.

1)For Umberkhind I found out that someone edited the Mughals Numbers from "30000" to "50000" which is absolutely wrong as all sources which mentioned this battle including Rai Bagan mentioned mughal numbers as "30000" not "50000" instead that all numbers are right.you can change it by removing citation tag by citing my mentioned respective sources & Don't worry I will provide more and more sources further!

2) For Battle of Pawankhind Maratha Strength in all sources mentioned as "300" not "600" as mentioned in battle template that you can change by removing citation tag and citing source which I mentioned,I will add more sources to this article also soon..

Again I had not edited that templates as you mentioned..

As I suggested you to edit it's clearly can say that I have neutral point of view because I mentioned fault from both sides at battle of Umberkhind,it's Mughal Numbers exaggerated and at battle of Pawankhind Maratha numbers are exaggerated as I mentioned above. Happy edit

Thank you,

You can edit as mentioned above. Aryan330 (talk) 15:36, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Shivaji and his times, written by JADUNATH SARKAR. Is this the reference? If yes, provide the page number. Ajayraj890 (talk) 15:51, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ajayraj890 As i am not able to find that battle on Shivaji and his times because on Google book many pages are missing because of some error as this is not common.

But till now you can add citation on Battle of Umberkhind by using another source Maratha Generals and Personalities: A gist of great personalities of Marathas. (2014). (n.p.): Pratik gupta. there you can found it on page number 127 Aryan330 (talk) 16:18, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Okay, but I just found something now. The second reference Ajayraj890 (talk) 16:23, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ajayraj890 which first reference? Aryan330 (talk) 16:26, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

B. R. Kamble (1982). Studies in Shivaji and His Times. And I just found that the second reference doesn't mention the battle. Should i hand over this case to an administrator? I think you have to move this page to Draft space and should request for a review. Ajayraj890 (talk) 16:32, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ajayraj890 No as only due to citing errors we can't do that as this battle is renowned and mentioned in many sources and books!

I said you to add reference which I mentioned till nowMaratha Generals and Personalities: A gist of great personalities of Marathas. (2014). (n.p.): Pratik gupta. Aryan330 (talk) 16:34, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ajayraj890 Check Page number 341& 345 of second reference परमानंद, कवींद्र. श्री शिवभारत. भारत इतिहास संशोधन मंडळ,पुणे.

On last line of 341 it's clearly mentioned about Kartalab khan

& On 342-345 it's mentioned about shivaji's action in this battle Aryan330 (talk) 16:45, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Wait. Do you consider this as a reference to cite a Misplaced Pages article? I prefer you to read Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources before citing any sources. This reads like a fairytale. None of the other sources mentions about their conversation or anything. I think you should have a conversation with user:Deb. He/She will make you understand the problem with this article clearly. Ajayraj890 (talk) 16:58, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

It is not such a case. My articles were taken down many times. The reasons were lack of resources, lack of context, containing peacock terms etc. I checked the reference you have given now (Maratha Generals and Personalities: A gist of great personalities of Marathas. (2014). (n.p.): Pratik gupta.) and some other sources. None of them have an accurate conclusion about the strength. And i couldn't find any older sources that depicts this battle. Since this article doesn't have a reliable source, there are some limitations. I can edit this page completely giving result as Maratha victory as it should be. But i would be have to remove the strength tag since none of the reliable sources mentions that. Else we could move it to draft space and wait for a review. That would be a better idea in my opinion. Ajayraj890 (talk) 16:48, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ajayraj890

I already said you to check page number 127 of Maratha Generals and Personalities: A gist of great personalities of Marathas. (2014). (n.p.): Pratik gupta.there it's clearly mentioned that Mughals strength was of 30000 soldiers don't say wrong if haven't checked it!

on mentioned sources it's clearly mentioned so removing it can't be done to cause edit war.

As you said that instead of me you would like to cite it then it's only because I have given you this information otherwise I will be citing it in some days immediately after my technical error will resolve but because you said that you would like to help me thats why I am saying you to do so.

Note:- even if sources are not correct and you have added citation tag then editer can provide sources even after some months you can't remove it immediately as per Misplaced Pages policy!

& here the sources are also present so there is no point to remove it.

If would like to help me then cite it if would not then I will cite it within some days.

Thank you Aryan330 (talk) 16:58, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

@Ajayraj890 the source B. R. Kamble (1982). Studies in Shivaji and His Times is praised by Cambridge press & the source Maratha Generals and Personalities: A gist of great personalities of Marathas. (2014). (n.p.): Pratik gupta.) had no challenge till now for its accurate historical information with evidences. Aryan330 (talk) 17:05, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Maratha Generals and Personalities: A gist of great personalities of Marathas. (2014) is not a reliable source. Atleast you should have read the cover page of the book! Ajayraj890 (talk) 17:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

I hope you read the cover page of 'Maratha Generals and Personalities'. Its source is Misplaced Pages itself. Didn't you notice it till today? It is not a reliable source. Ajayraj890 (talk) 17:06, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Kindly respond

Please use TAlkpage of Sambhaji or Soyarabai to continue the discussion and not the Mughal-Maratha wars.Thanks. Jonathansammy (talk) 15:34, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

@Jonathansammy but on that talk page no need to improve because they didn't have any unconstructive edits,only Mughal-Maratha wars contain it which itself added just 5 days ago by Fowler & fowler.

So kindly look my reply on that talk page.

Thanks Aryan330 (talk) 16:05, 5 July 2023 (UTC)