Highpeaks35 (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
As mentioned, per my statements above: "[[History of domes in India]]" meets most, if not all, Wikipedia policy and criteria. As such, can you look into this and the sources? Move to RFC to end this? Also, if you don't have time or have any reservations, can you point to someone who has expertise in RFC and sources? ([[User:Highpeaks35|Highpeaks35]] ([[User talk:Highpeaks35|talk]]) 23:04, 22 April 2019 (UTC)) |
As mentioned, per my statements above: "[[History of domes in India]]" meets most, if not all, Wikipedia policy and criteria. As such, can you look into this and the sources? Move to RFC to end this? Also, if you don't have time or have any reservations, can you point to someone who has expertise in RFC and sources? ([[User:Highpeaks35|Highpeaks35]] ([[User talk:Highpeaks35|talk]]) 23:04, 22 April 2019 (UTC)) |
||
Just because of Frowler's disruptive editing, i had to sign in. [[User:Hammy0007|Hammy0007]] ([[User talk:Hammy0007|talk]]) 02:13, 23 April 2019 (UTC) |
Revision as of 02:13, 23 April 2019
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on History of South Asian domes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131004214058/http://gilbert.aq.upm.es/sedhc/biblioteca_digital/Congresos/CIHC1/CIHC1_182.pdf to http://gilbert.aq.upm.es/sedhc/biblioteca_digital/Congresos/CIHC1/CIHC1_182.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:45, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
The Indian subcontinent nonsense
@Highpeaks35: You have been warned by several people about changing "South Asia" here there and everywhere to "Indian subcontinent." Your excuse that "South Asia" includes Afghanistan and therefore pages that do not include something specific to Afghanistan cannot correctly be called " ... South Asia" is an incorrect one. There is no such commonly accepted distinction. You were informed by admin @RegentsPark: on your user talk page that "South Asia" is the correct usage. This means that not only should you not be changing "South Asia" to "Indian subcontinent" henceforth, but also that you should be undoing your previous errors when given the opportunity. It is inexcusable that you have blithely made several recent edits without undoing the damage have already done. It is not my job to clean up after you. Also, the preposition "in" typically does not go with (sub) continent. Remember "Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent ..." Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:12, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- Fowler, I think Highpeaks35 is clean as far as this article goes. The article was already using Indian subcontinent and, from what I can see, they were merely cleaning up the references and adding clarifications. --regentspark (comment) 17:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- @RegentsPark: I mean he himself changed "South Asian" to "Indian subcontinent" in this page move in December 2018. He clearly understands, now in retrospect, that this was incorrect. He has been making all sorts of edits in the article, but hasn't fixed the page name. This is happening on dozens of pages. If it is not him, it is mysterious IPs which appear in conjunction with him, many of which have been blocked, ... I mean this is truly beyond the pale. And then he is relentlessly stuffing Hinduism-Buddhism-promotion nonsense everywhere. A stupa, usually a solid structure with some relics buried and sometimes with a tunnel running in, is not a dome, which is a hollow upper hemisphere. The Roman arch was not there in pre-Islamic India, what are the chances that a dome was. I'm frustrated at the damage that is being done to Wikipedia. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:00, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- Fowler&fowler, I did not add Hindu-Buddhism to that article, check the location and users who did it. Unless you are stating I can teleport myself from Southeast Asia, Indian subcontinent, West Asia to N. America? --They had terrible grammar I just copy-edited it. Now you are going moving close into WP:NPA. Even after my apology, you are bullying me. Unacceptable. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 19:47, 22 April 2019 (UTC))
- You are the one who changed the name from South Asian to Indian subcontinent. You have been told recently about correct usage. You have since then made edits to this page, but have done nothing about the page's name, for which you alone are responsible. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- That is most asinine logic on the planet. The change happened before I even knew you. No one, I mean no one, disputed this change for the last 6 months. Why should I change it? The onus is on you. RegentsPark, please let me know how I should move forward with this bullying by Fowler. I tried, I even apologized, but this user clearly is bulling me over their allergy to a valid term. I am done with this user. The user does not understand WP:Compromise, only my way or the highway. Let me know what actions I can take. Clearly, the user moved close to WP:NPA and bullying. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 20:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC))
- You are aware of correct usage now. It has nothing to do with me. You were informed per your own query on your talk page by two admins on April 7 and 8, 2019 (see here). You have certainly been aware of your earlier error since April 8th. You have however not bothered to correct the error even though you have made several edits to this (i.e. History of domes .. pageP) between April 17, 2019 and April 22, 2019. This is not the only page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- That is most asinine logic on the planet. The change happened before I even knew you. No one, I mean no one, disputed this change for the last 6 months. Why should I change it? The onus is on you. RegentsPark, please let me know how I should move forward with this bullying by Fowler. I tried, I even apologized, but this user clearly is bulling me over their allergy to a valid term. I am done with this user. The user does not understand WP:Compromise, only my way or the highway. Let me know what actions I can take. Clearly, the user moved close to WP:NPA and bullying. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 20:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC))
- You are the one who changed the name from South Asian to Indian subcontinent. You have been told recently about correct usage. You have since then made edits to this page, but have done nothing about the page's name, for which you alone are responsible. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- Fowler&fowler, I did not add Hindu-Buddhism to that article, check the location and users who did it. Unless you are stating I can teleport myself from Southeast Asia, Indian subcontinent, West Asia to N. America? --They had terrible grammar I just copy-edited it. Now you are going moving close into WP:NPA. Even after my apology, you are bullying me. Unacceptable. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 19:47, 22 April 2019 (UTC))
- @RegentsPark: I mean he himself changed "South Asian" to "Indian subcontinent" in this page move in December 2018. He clearly understands, now in retrospect, that this was incorrect. He has been making all sorts of edits in the article, but hasn't fixed the page name. This is happening on dozens of pages. If it is not him, it is mysterious IPs which appear in conjunction with him, many of which have been blocked, ... I mean this is truly beyond the pale. And then he is relentlessly stuffing Hinduism-Buddhism-promotion nonsense everywhere. A stupa, usually a solid structure with some relics buried and sometimes with a tunnel running in, is not a dome, which is a hollow upper hemisphere. The Roman arch was not there in pre-Islamic India, what are the chances that a dome was. I'm frustrated at the damage that is being done to Wikipedia. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:00, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Fowler&fowler, I do not know any wiki policy which states "Indian subcontinent" is invalid. Nor is there a policy which states a non-disputed content should be reversed back. You are making stuff up as you see fit. Regardless, most of the references in this article uses "India". South Asia here is more WP:OR, honestly, it should be changed to "India" (since most references uses "India"). (Highpeaks35 (talk) 20:48, 22 April 2019 (UTC))
- This page began life as a section of the Dome page, called South Asian and Mughal Domes in 2010. In 2015 that section was split-off to create the "History of South Asian and Mughal Domes" in this edit, which the top of this page proclaims as well. Later in 2015, the principal editor of the Dome page, @AmateurEditor:, changed the name to "History of South Asian Domes," in this edit. To such a page, with a nine-year history of "South Asia(n)" in its title, you @Highpeaks35: came along and on December 6, 2018, in this edit, changed the name to "History of Domes in the Indian subcontinent," with edit summary, "(Highpeaks35 moved page History of South Asian domes to History of domes in the Indian subcontinent: Improve accuracy; not related to Afghanistan )," marking as "minor" edit, and discussing it nowhere on this talk page. On 7th and 8th April, 2019 two admins told you on your talk page that in their opinion, there was no reason to change "South Asia" to "Indian subcontinent" as I've already indicated above. You tell me, how am I to make sense of your attempting to Wikilawyer through the evidence of precedence and administrative opinion? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
My Lord, sorry to bother you. Can you assist with this? You are much more knowledge about sourcing than me. What I can see: the sources clearly point to "History of domes in India"; and below is my reasons "History of South Asian domes", which was the name I originally changed here does not meet Wikipedia policies.
- The vast majority of the sources clearly mentions "India", which meets WP:COMMONNAME and WP:RS. Sources are paramount.
- The vast majority, if not all, of the content, is about the area making up present-day India, or at best pre-partitioned India. South Asia here is WP:FRINGE.
- There is no such thing as "South Asian domes" which was the original name here. It is clear WP:OR.
- Fowler&fowler main claim is - it is the name used for almost a decade. I thought Wikipedia has no deadline, per WP:NODEADLINE.
As mentioned, per my statements above: "History of domes in India" meets most, if not all, Wikipedia policy and criteria. As such, can you look into this and the sources? Move to RFC to end this? Also, if you don't have time or have any reservations, can you point to someone who has expertise in RFC and sources? (Highpeaks35 (talk) 23:04, 22 April 2019 (UTC)) Just because of Frowler's disruptive editing, i had to sign in. Hammy0007 (talk) 02:13, 23 April 2019 (UTC)