Talk:Soanian

Work to be done
The view of the Soanian has changed a lot over the decades. Originally though to be pre-Acheulean, in the 1990's it was reclassified as Mode 3, post-Acheulean, if you will. That would make it Middle Paleolithic. One of the links given is dead. The other appears to be a good historical analysis but it is not reflected in the text of the article. This needs to be studied and properly presented by someone with the time and inclination.Dave (talk) 11:01, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Sock puppetry
See. I'm willing to protect if it continues. Dougweller (talk) 17:20, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Edit wars by a sock puppet
To whom this may concern,

An IP hopper is making some serious nonconstructive edits on several Wikipedia articles, among which one is this. What this user does is delete any mentioning of Pakistan, deletes the History of Pakistan template and replaces a specific region (ie. Punjab, Sindh) with a vague, obsolete term "Indian subcontinent". The first bone of contention is why this user has an issue with Pakistan claiming its history. I don't see this user going to the Mauryan Empire and removing the History of India template. Clearly a bias is present.

The second issue is how this user is replacing specific regions with Indian subcontinent. This would be like replacing Texas with North America. It makes zero sense to me. I've tried several times to contact the user, but he or she seems to be using some program which prevents me from posting on his or her talk page. The user is also using several IDs at once which I am noting down here:, , , , ,

The other articles he is creating havoc on include: History of Sindh, Ror dynasty, Gandhara, Gandhara grave culture, Riwat,

Not only would I like to report his or her deconstruction edits, I'd also like to have his or her actual IP address banned for using several different user IDs at once. Thank you. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 02:48, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * This is pre-history! Not related to any nation state. (2600:1001:B025:D62C:1C23:8806:4DE9:D0F0 (talk) 10:38, 9 August 2017 (UTC))


 * @PAKHIGHWAY, your Texas example is a good one. If you were talking about stone age Texas, you would indeed call it "North America, present day Texas" or something to that effect. You would certainly not call it "United States", which is a recent nation-state. All your discussions are WP:FORUMy, without any sources, and this is not the way to go. The IP has pointed you to past discussions at Talk:Indian subcontinent, which you have refused to check. This doesn't bode well. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:08, 9 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Okay, I've removed History of India template from Mauryan Empire. Let's see how "fair" you folks are now. Furthermore, then my point about South Asia makes more sense and my proposals for South Asian Bronze Age and Middle Kingdoms of South Asia makes even more sense. Let's see how the double standards come flowing out now. --PAKHIGHWAY (talk) 14:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Making WP:POINTy edits is frowned upon. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:14, 9 August 2017 (UTC)