User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive 19

Better source request for some of your uploads
Thanks for your uploads to Wikipedia. There is an issue with some of them, specifically: You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the images because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the images, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image files themselves. Please update the image descriptions with URLs that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
 * File:Victoria terminus 1900stereo.jpg
 * File:Hunting party mandalay1885.jpg

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 03:09, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cement&ConcreteAssociation-Man-on-Job-Leaflet-1958.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Cement&ConcreteAssociation-Man-on-Job-Leaflet-1958.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:14, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Better source request for File:Hunting party mandalay1885.jpg
Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia: You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
 * File:Hunting party mandalay1885.jpg

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 03:09, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * V. S. Naipaul (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Toro and Hugh Fraser


 * Mutesa II of Buganda (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Toro


 * Omugabe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Toro


 * Omukama of Toro (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Toro

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Wendy Doniger
We had some interesting discussions about the Wendy Doniger article, including systemic bias (even though I respectfully disagree with some of your points of view).

I invite you to read an interesting perspective on academic study of religion, albeit not from a professor (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/suhag-a-shukla-esq/academic-integrity-its-wh_b_4961453.html).

I am very troubled AAR's support of "any interpretation." In any academic discipline, interpretations should be supported, either through empirical data or research. The text of any writing (especially in Sanskrit) can be interpreted with many meanings but logic dictates that only plausible ones hold. In law, a statute or a treaty provision cannot be read in isolation but within the context of the law.

Yes, it is possible that a word can have 3 or 4 meanings, but one must interpret a word in light of the surroundnng text to see if it is plausible. I wish I had a good example in English.

Please review and let me know your comments.

Raj2004 (talk) 21:58, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The main problem, from my perspective, is that the Hindu America foundation doesn't have any alternative academic perspectives on Hinduism. Until they do, they will not be taken seriously.  Yes, all interpretations are allowed, as long as they pass muster with the experts.  That is the definition of academic freedom.  Being born into a tradition does not make a person an expert in that tradition.  Otherwise, Catholics would have been correct in rejecting Galileo (i.e. Heliocentrism), or Baptists in rejecting evolution.
 * That there is symbolism in Hinduism cannot be denied. After all there is a Mount Kailas in Tibet, and by now numerous photographs have been taken of every inch of its surface by both satellites and humans.  If Lord Shiva resides there, he does so symbolically or in some non-human-like presence.  Where are the Hindu America Foundation perspectives on that?
 * We also know quite definitively now (as a result of both Mitochondrial and Y-chromosome DNA studies) that all humans originated in Africa and that the ancestors of those who currently live outside Africa, migrated out no more than 60,000 years ago. So, Hinduism cannot be ageless and timeless, as is often insinuated.  Otherwise, why would it only privilege the geography of India (Ganges, Saraswati, Sapta-Sindhu, ... why not the Nile, Zambezi, Limpopo, ... indeed the Amazon, the Orinoco, the Mississippi) in its mythology?  Where are the Hindu American Foundation perspectives on that?  I don't mean some website, but where are the academic publications?
 * Anyway, this page is not that of a general discussion group on Hinduism, so we can't really have that debate here, but since you asked me to respond, I have done so briefly. Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  22:36, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

I think you are confusing the issues. Heliocentrism or evolution relates to scientific issues that are remotely tangential to religion. To be a Christian does not require you that believe that the sun revolves around the earth. You simply have to accept Jesus.

Interpretation is a different thing. On other hand, scientific theory is different. The fact that the earth revolves around the sun or human evolution is either unquestionable (in the case of the earth's revolving) or supported by overwhelmingly strong scientific evidence ( fossil record or molecular analysis; that's why evolution is phrased a scientific theory vs a scientific law whose evidence is unquestionable (Boyle's law of gases, Newton's laws of motion).

Yes, the overwhelming scientific evidence favors man's origins in Africa, but since evolution is considered a scientific theory, it does not mean that Hindu theories regarding geography are wrong because in the area of evolution, scientists, unlike many areas of physics and chemistry admit that there are holes. As you may not be aware, not all adhere to out of Africa theory. See Wikipedia article on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans. In this theory, different groups of Homo erectus species evolved in different regions giving rise to Africans, Chinese, etc.

Interpretation of a text is a very different thing, by contrast with scientific evidence. You can't question Newton's laws of motion. But interpreting a text is a very different things as one word can have multiple meanings (you have to admit that), and some of the interpretations (as alleged by Doniger's opponents are less likely plausible.

Yes, HAF does not have academic experts, but that is a fault of systemic bias, as I argued in the Talk section for the Doniger. Regarding Shiva, etc, you can never prove matters of religion. For example, in Christianity, some even question whether Christ was crucified, or whether he was single (i.e., married). No organization, religious or otherwise, (HAF included) can provide a perspective on that. That is an article of faith or belief, which we cannot prove by scientific evidence. Until the 1600s, we could not see bacteria (because the microscope was not invented). Does that mean bacteria are not there? Scientific tools can prove things that exist in nature, but matters of faith are outside the purview of science.However, with matters of faith, there's no point on arguing about matters of faith because there can never be an answer.

But we can have a perspective on an interpretation of a verse, because words have meaning and have to be interpreted in the context of the text. That is something that both sides of the debate can hold.

You seem to imply that any interpretation can hold weight in religious studies. Academic disciplines have to be supported by evidence, and an interpretation that is less plausible should be given less weight. I am not saying Doniger's interpretation is wrong but it is less likely plausible. Some can interpret a crucifix as a phallic symbol, but such an interpretation is not likely plausible. I don't think you would agree with that interpretation. So you can see why many Hindus were offended by Doniger's interpretations. The problem in Sanskrit is that every word can have many interpretations, and can be different even in its pronunciation. That I think is the heart of issue. Doniger is an Indologist, but is she a professor of Sanskrit (i.e., linguistics, etc? You can be a professor of German studies but that does not mean that a person is a professor of German (i.e., linguistics, etc). It would be interesting to see such views of professors, who would be skilled in Sanskrit etymology, etc.

If the religious academy in the West really wants a debate, then they should invite serious scholars to debate this (we should see if there are qualified Sanskrit scholars in India or elsewhere to debate this, not people like the churchmen critical of Galileo (who are not open to reason).

Regarding HAF, members of HAF (http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?262511#1) have pointed out many academic deficiencies with Doniger. Please read the whole article. They cited "Prof. Michael Witzel, Wales Professor of Sanskrit in the Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies at Harvard University [who] posted the following remarks about Doniger's translations to a mailing list and called her translations "UNREALIABLE" [sic] and "idiosyncratic:"

So if her translation is unreliable, how can she get a proper interpretation?

Also, you are correct that you don't have to be a member of a religion to be an expert. The same outlook article states that "Hindu society acknowledges and celebrates any genuine scholars of Hinduism, irrespective of their gender, race or caste. For example, the late Sir John Woodroffe / Arthur Avalon is regarded by even the most traditional and orthodox of Hindu acharyas, including the late Shankaracharya of Sringeri, as one of the great Tantric scholars of modern times—despite his being [not] * * * Hindu."

Thanks for your thoughts.

Raj2004 (talk) 00:07, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Article on nytimes
Hi Fowler, have a look here. The first article talks about her reaction on the law. What do you think about using that as a quote instead of following section:
 * "Referring to Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code which criminalizes "deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class of citizens”[37] Doniger said:


 * They [Penguin India] were finally defeated by the true villain of this piece – the Indian law that makes it a criminal rather than civil offense to publish a book that offends any Hindu, a law that jeopardizes the physical safety of any publisher, no matter how ludicrous the accusation brought against a book.[38]"

That way we can avoid the full explanation of section 295a.--106.51.135.87 (talk) 04:25, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * What she said earlier was notable because it was the author's spontaneous reaction to her book being banned. It was notable for its newsworthiness, not for the reliability of its content.  Now, however, we have the same author's considered analysis.  It is no longer a piece of news. It has to be evaluated like any other Wikipedia source.  There it fails as it is not a neutral source and it is not manifestly reliable (Doniger is not a lawyer or writing in a law journal.)  So, I'd let the previous version remain, even with its clunkiness.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  05:00, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Indus Valley Civilization
Why is branding some as Hindutva is being allowed because of believing in alternate theories about Indus Valley civilization. Even the link posted there is of certain book where don't refer to Hindutva. Historians like B. B. Lal was former Director General of Archaeological survey of India and he supports theory of association of Saraswati river with Indus Valley civilization. Ashok4himself (talk) 16:30, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

I read the citation in the googlebook and nowhere found the mention of the term Hindutva groups from page 28-32 as given in the reference. You can verify it too. http://books.google.co.in/books?id=dEBY37og6PYC&pg=PR4&lpg=PR4&dq=A+Global+History+of+Architecture.+Hoboken,+N.J.:+J.+Wiley+%26+Sons&source=bl&ots=gbAan3Genj&sig=wlN4UK4_QfKFpL5ZBYBP1rvrmpc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=F4MkU4WwNeygige0yoCIDQ&ved=0CEEQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false

Ashok4himself (talk) 16:50, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * My apologies. That does seem odd, a book on architecture.  I have removed the Hindutva reference.  As for BB Lal, he may have headed up ASI, but he did so at a time, when it had become a highly politicized body.  Present-day scientific studies, do posit the existence of the Ghaggar-Hakra river, but the identification of the Aryans of the north-west of the mid-second millennium BCE with the earlier IVC, mid third-millennium BCE, is completely unreliable.  Most IVC archeologists, very few of whom are from India, discount this theory.  Lal's books on Saraswati, all written in his retirement, are not reliable.  I know the books, so please don't list them here.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  17:04, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited V. S. Naipaul, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Francisco Miranda (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Rajasthan
Are you aware of any such battle ? If it did happen, it would seem somewhat important, but the references dont seem super reliable. I have added another reference I found, but its not convincing as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Rajasthan I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations (talk) 14:46, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I haven't, but I'll check.  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  14:51, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

FYI
Indra's Net: Defending Hinduism's Philosophical Unity. Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   14:26, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

V. S. Naipaul
Do not add switch statements. They should not be added to articles. There are exactly 2 articles that have them. They do not work as you think. The images are only changed when the article is edited. This is consensus. 19:31, 26 March 2014‎ User:Bgwhite
 * Consensus where? I'm aware that pictures change when the page is purged or rebuilt. So what?   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  18:37, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * If an editor wants an image, but it has changed, they won't get it. Pages should be in a consistent manor.  This article will not change often, nullifying the switch action.   There is a reason only two articles have it because it's not allowed. Bgwhite (talk) 20:25, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, that's a good point. And, yes, this article once it stabilizes will not be edited much.  True.  Thanks.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  21:08, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Sugata Bose
Hi Fowler and Fowler; thanks so much for your message on my page. I am, as you noted, a new Wikipedia editor, and this is the first time I have been motivated to correct what I perceived as somewhat misleading selection of materials on the page at hand. I understand and of course agree that scholarly reviews take precedent over popular ones; however, His Majesty's Opponent seems to have been published as a trade book, and most of the reviews were accordingly published in more popular outlets. The three which I had listed and which you have glossed as trade reviews were authored by professional historians at Cambridge and Jawaharlal Nehru University, as well as a now-retired Calcutta University historian. The Wainwright review that you mention is fairly equivocal in its content (it does indeed note that Bose's speculation as to Subhas Chandra's impact had he remained alive is not persuasive), while the Zachariah review is more resoundingly negative. I am not sure as to why a book which has received broad positive accolades from scholars should be cast in such a damning way here, though all of these changes appear to have been made in the wake of Bose's nomination as a TMC Lok Sabha candidate. Please let me know your thoughts; I would love to find language here that is not as inaccurately damning as I believe these edits are. Many thanks, and thanks for your wonderful work evident in so many contributions to Indian history here. Humanshu (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * A scholarly source on Wikipedia is one that is peer-reviewed (before publication), reviewed in scholarly journals after publication or published by scholarly publishers, not one authored by academics, especially in popular newspapers. The same problem recently showed up on Wendy Doniger's trade book, The Hindus: An Alternative History.  (See: The Hindus: An Alternative History).   It has nothing to do with elections.  I for one don't even know what TMC is.  I assumed Bose is an American citizen.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  19:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
Couldn't ping you.  Occult Zone  ( Talk ) 13:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Princely State
Hi Fowler&fowler,

I was wondering whether you could clear something up for me which is causing me a bit of confusion. I noticed it was you that made the following edit on the article entitled "Princely State": https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Princely_state&diff=236917278&oldid=236916517

You've written: "52 States in Burma: all except the Karen States were included in British India".

However, on the article entitled "British Raj", under the sub-heading "Princely States", it says: "The princely states did not form a part of British India (i.e. the presidencies and provinces), as they were not directly under British rule."

The two statements appear to contradict one another - however, as I don't know the subject matter very well, I have no doubt that there is a perfectly reasonable explanation. I was just wondering whether you could shed some light on it.

All the best and kind regards,

Standingfish (talk) 02:19, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Good point. This, as I remember it, was a point of confusion for me as well.  The IGI, vol 4, p. 101 (see here) says exactly that.  But in their definition of "British India" and "Native/Princely States," they make the usual distinction (see this page of IGI and the next.
 * I'll try to look around and see what turns up. If I had to guess I'd say that the minor states (i.e. all except the Karen states) were essentially absorbed within British India (governed by British Indian laws for example), but the former rulers were allowed some privileges.  What these privileges were I have no clue.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  10:27, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Better source request for File:Hunting party mandalay1885.jpg
Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia: You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
 * File:Hunting party mandalay1885.jpg

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 03:06, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Ceded Conquered Provinces details.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:15, 18 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Another one of your uploads, File:CededConqueredProvincesDelhiTerritory.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:15, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

One is Impressed!

 * Thank you very much! A pleasant surprise indeed!!   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  04:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Neolithic mehrgarh.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Neolithic mehrgarh.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  TLSuda  (talk) 14:05, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Better source request for File:Hunting party mandalay1885.jpg
Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia: You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
 * File:Hunting party mandalay1885.jpg

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 03:05, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Better source request for File:Hunting party mandalay1885.jpg
Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia: You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
 * File:Hunting party mandalay1885.jpg

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 03:05, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Better source request for File:Hunting party mandalay1885.jpg
Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia: You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
 * File:Hunting party mandalay1885.jpg

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 03:06, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Train-to-pakistan-delhi1947.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Train-to-pakistan-delhi1947.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.  TLSuda  (talk) 01:04, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Young-refugee-delhi1947.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Young-refugee-delhi1947.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.  TLSuda  (talk) 01:04, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:India at end of British period 1947.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:India at end of British period 1947.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 00:32, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Partition-of-India-Spate-Jan-1948.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Partition-of-India-Spate-Jan-1948.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 00:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Jinnah fatimasalwar.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Jinnah fatimasalwar.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:52, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Kanthiravanarasaraja1 statue.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kanthiravanarasaraja1 statue.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:06, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Strafford cripps gandhi 1942.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Strafford cripps gandhi 1942.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:27, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Strafford cripps gandhi 1942.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Strafford cripps gandhi 1942.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:53, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

James Chadwick
I am looking for a reviewer to trake a look at James Chadwick, which is at FAC at the moment. If you have the time, could you take a peek? Hawkeye7 (talk) 14:49, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Kashmir-Accession-Document-a.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kashmir-Accession-Document-a.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 11:43, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Kashmir-Accession-Document-b.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kashmir-Accession-Document-b.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 11:44, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

File:Kashmir-Accession-Document-a.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kashmir-Accession-Document-a.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 11:44, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

MIA?
Hi Fowler. You should have been back one year ago. Hope all is well. --regentspark (comment) 03:08, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:CharanSinghRedFortDelhi15August1979.JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:CharanSinghRedFortDelhi15August1979.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:24, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mehrgarh figurine3000bce.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Mehrgarh figurine3000bce.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:24, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Upper-bari-doab-prevailing-religions1947a.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Upper-bari-doab-prevailing-religions1947a.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Finnusertop (talk &#124; guestbook &#124; contribs) 17:18, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Kashmir
What's wrong with having a panorama of Kashmir's largest city and age-old capital in Kashmir article? kashmiri TALK  15:17, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, this an article about the Kashmir region, the geographical region which is the subject of the oldest dispute before the UN, the claims on which by the three disputants are not recognized by the major powers, including the US, Britain, France, Germany, ... The pictures need to be balanced.  I've been around long enough that I can smell out irredentism whether in profusion of text or images.
 * Not sure what you mean by "non-recognition of claims". Certainly, jurisdiction of the trio over their respective parts is recognised and respected by the international community. As to the selection of pictures, I'd like if they were representative of the whole region, i.e., show both natural features and material culture. Hence, while I don't object removal of a pic of Vivekananda, a picture of the largest population centre of Kashmir is entirely appropriate IMHO. The Kashmiris on both sides of the LoC are proud of Srinagar, its architecture, the houseboats on the Lakes, etc., and the fact of having a photo of the city should not be turned into a political issue.
 * I'm afraid they are not. The CIA factbook states, "Kashmir remains the site of the world's largest and most militarized territorial dispute with portions under the de facto administration of China (Aksai Chin), India (Jammu and Kashmir), and Pakistan (Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas);"  It is de facto administration.  The US has never recognized India's claim even over the region J&K it governs de facto.  In fact, as far as I'm aware, the US still considers India's offer of a plebiscite in Kashmir to not be formally abandoned.  Realpolitik, of course, is different.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  17:19, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Srinagar and Dal lake were already represented in the economy section; however, your picture is much better (hi def). So, I've put it in the economy section, and indeed urban centers are drivers of regional economy.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  17:24, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

WP:ADMIN NOTICEBOARD
I have a raised a note in Admin notice board and left notes in the talk page in a new section.rueben_lys (talk · contribs) 22:27, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Gallery in Subhas Bose article
I hope that you are doing well. Well I have a question, do you remember I talked to you a year or two ago about the galleries in Subhas Bose article. At that time you told that you got a suggestion from an FA review. I feel the gallery does not really look good. Would you mind if I start a discussion on the talk page asking comments? Thanks --Tito Dutta (talk) 11:39, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Not at all. Go ahead.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  11:42, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Gandhi
See what happens when you go AWOL :) --regentspark (comment) 21:33, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * :) For sure. The only saving grace is that my memory seems to have gone to dogs too.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  21:37, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!
Thank you! Fowler&amp;fowler «Talk»  22:53, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

RFC
Please comment here: Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics --Tito Dutta (talk) 23:27, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Muhammad Iqbal
Since you provided guidance to me regarding the sources on Mohenjo-daro. I came across some content which was recently added to Muhammad Iqbal. I was wondering what is your opinion regarding the sources and content added. This is not the mainstream view of Iqbal's relationship with Jinnah. Since you know how to identify the Hindu nationalist sources vs. neutral sources, i hope you can help me regarding these as well. The text which was added with the sources:

"Few months before his death, an ailing Iqbal met with Jawaharlal Nehru where he criticised Jinnah and praised Nehru by saying, "What is there common between Jinnah and you? He is a politician, you are a patriot."

Although a strong advocater of a separate Muslim state, towards the end of his life, Iqbal expressed serious reservations against the creation of such a state and felt that it's creation would be injurious to India as a whole and Muslims especially according to British writer Edward Thompson. "  Sh eri ff  |  ☎ 911  | 20:42, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The statement is sourced to Rajmohan Gandhi so is likely accurate. That said, it appears to be un-contextualized in the article. Gandhi mentions it in the light of the complicated relationship of Jinnah and Iqbal. In our article it gives the impression that Iqbal was disillusioned by Jinnah. --regentspark (comment) 21:03, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks regentspark, how about the other source because everything is not supported by Rajmohan Gandhi!tt
 * The attribution to Jinnah is fully supported by the Rajmohan Gandhi reference so the Singh reference is unnecessary. But, I suggest either removing it for now (till Fowler figures it out!) or contextualizing it in a para on the relationship between Iqbal and Jinnah along the lines that Rajmohan Gandhi follows. --regentspark (comment) 02:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello both, I'm on vacation and traveling. (Sorry I forgot to put the notice on my talk page.)  So, I don't have access to sources.  I would agree with RP.  Rajmohan Gandhi is reliable and the Brigadier is not (the title itself is dubious).  The brigadier says on some page or other that Timur the Lame massacred 100,000 people in Delhi, and the weight of the sacred thread collected from the bodies of the dead was one ton (= 1000 kg).  I just found a shopkeeper and had him weigh three yards of twine, much thicker and longer than a sacred thread, and it weighed 5 grams.  But 5 grams times 100,000 is only half a ton.  :)   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  00:02, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ganges, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malda. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Flag of the Mughal Empire
Hi again. Long time ago, User:Abecedare (who I hope is in good health) started a discussion here Talk:Flag_of_the_Mughal_Empire and he also had pinged you but you were away. Take a look at that discussion and now see the new one here Talk:Flag_of_the_Mughal_Empire. I curious to know your views on the latest one and would be happy with your participation in it. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I have been repeatedly removing that flag from all the articles that link to it. It is entirely fictitious and the reinstatements are, I think, usually by socks of Mughal Lohar. - Sitush (talk) 01:59, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

March 2016
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=707656680 your edit] to Rakhigarhi may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:07, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Tentative figure of 124 hectare Nath (field report)

2016 March Indian Collaboration of the Months
Hello, We are happy to inform you that WikiProject Indian Collaborations of the month is going to be restarted this month and we want your active support here. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:19, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Please nominate an article or vote other nominations here. The process will continue till 10 March.
 * 2) Should we introduce prizes for the best participants? If so, what should be the criteria, and what prizes should we give? Share your views here.

Subash Chandra Bose Peer review
Judging by how much work you did at SCB, I think it stands a fair chance for reaching FA status, at least in terms of sourcing. Apart from a few areas left to cover (legacy etc), I think the vast amount of content you've added needs to be restructured per MOS/guidelines, copyediting for better flow and be made accessible to our layperson readers. I can help with that. If you're interested (and hopefully have time) I recommend opening a Peer review of it, so that I may post comments there. I'm willing to give a thorough review which you can refer to later, in case you're busy at the moment. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:25, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi there. I am traveling now and will be until mid-April.  I did want to say that I've actually written very little of the Subhas Chandra Bose article, though I have added many of the pictures.  I have written the lead (with a view to writing the rest of the article later), Chapter 2 (With the Indian National Congress 1921–32), and the chapter, "Death of Subhas Chandra Bose," based on the longer Wikipedia page Death of Subhas Chandra Bose, which I did write in its entirety; I have written nothing else in any other chapter.  The SCB article itself, in my view, is in poor state and nowhere near FA status.  The Death of SCB page perhaps could be made more complete and it could be nominated for good article (and eventually for FA).   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  17:22, 16 March 2016