Talk:Dogra–Tibetan war/Archive 1

Acclaimed information provided in the Section Background is not POV and the references and sources cited are academic and acclaimed but Zanhe is reverting on the basis of lies!


The version which gives information in the Section titled “Background” in the article in question  is absolutely not POV and does not contain an iota of POV and the references and sources cited are academic and acclaimed and if Zanhe who is obviously an ethnic Chinese and obviously wants to do China a favour by arbitrarily reverting has any issues,  he has to obviously discuss his issues, real or imaginary in the talk page, but Zanhe is confident since he is aware that Wikipedia as a matter of policy unconditionally and absolutely supports Chinese territorial claims in India as  obviously in the articles Aksai Chin, Sanju Pass and Hindutash and can for inordinate period of time  protect the aforesaid articles and prevent Indians from editing articles pertaining to areas inside India and block decent  Indian editors like the renowned editor, Hindutashravi  in order to facilitate China. The substantiated information provided pertains to the line, "Historians continue to debate the reasons for the invasion....", and this editor is not at all responsible for that particular line. The line in question,"Historians continue to debate the reasons for the invasion; some say control of Tibet would have given Gulab Singh a monopoly on the lucrative pashmina wool trade of Tibet, others believe that he aimed to establish a land bridge between Ladakh and Nepal to create a Sikh-Gorkha alliance against the British" is sourced to Bakshi (2002), p. 96 and has been a part of the article since Revision as of 18:40, 19 October 2011 done by Andres rojas2 and not done by this editor and the pertinent information provided by me  pertains to the aforesaid line and furnishes reasons for the liberation of Shang Shung including Guge in what is historically western Ladakh and is not POV and cites acclaimed Sources and references,  but  Zanhe has intermittently  alleged that the information is POV and it is for him and his coterie  to pin point each and every line separately and individually  which according to him is POV rather than making unsubstantiated sweeping statements,  in the Talk Page of this article and if he does not he and his coterie  ought to be blocked, but he does not have to since the powers that be in  Wikipedia including Jimmy Wales as a matter of policy unconditionally and absolutely  support Chinese territorial claims in India as  obviously in the articles Aksai Chin, Sanju Pass and Hindutash and can for inordinate period of time  protect the aforesaid articles and prevent Indians from editing articles pertaining to areas inside India and block decent  Indian editors like the renowned editor, Hindutashravi   in order to facilitate China though the claim is that Wikipedia is allegedly  the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit! Even the title "Sino-Sikh War" is per se false and the title ought to be Indo-Tibetan War. China was hardly in the picture. China was ruled by the Ming Dynasty till 1644 during which period Tibet was an independent country and the preceding Yuan dynasty 1294 was an alien and foreign Mongolian Dynasty which for the first time  occupied both Tibet and China bringing both the countries under their common control. Again the so-called Qing dynasty was a foreign dynasty from adjoining Manchuria which occupied both inter alia Tibet and China and by the late 19th century Manchu  "hegemony over Tibet remained in theory but in actuality was a dead letter",  whereas the Dogras were predominantly Hindu Dogra Rajput dynasty under the suzerainty of the Sikh Empire and Hence the war was primarily between the Tibetans and Indians.


 * Amazing that a new IP editor could be so familiar with the exploits of the notorious User:Hindutashravi who was blocked a decade ago. Or could it be yet another reincarnation of that "renowned" editor, whose IP socks have caused Hindutash and Sanju Pass to be permanently protected? -Zanhe (talk) 22:58, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Unsourced
I couldn't make any head or tail of what you are saying above. But taking the first sentence of your addition:

where is the source for this statement, including the "however" part? Who made a connection between Zorawar Singh and the "rich indigenous Indian civilization"? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 07:14, 10 June 2019 (UTC)


 * There's no point trying to make sense of what the IP is saying. Take a look at Talk:Hindutash: this is exactly the same rambling and incoherent style as the "renowned" editor . -Zanhe (talk) 22:09, 10 June 2019 (UTC)