User talk:HaughtonBrit

Welcome!
Hello, HaughtonBrit, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:


 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Zandor (talk) 00:59, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Third Battle of Panipat
Hi HaughtonBrit, not sure what happened here. I restored the article and noticed your attempts at de-duplication. Unfortunately, they removed content, so I reverted them. Feel free though to make the initially wanted edit. – NJD-DE (talk) 23:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Sorry NJD....not sure how dupli ates got added when I was trying to revert to revision by Alivardi. But thank you for the help. HaughtonBrit (talk) 23:55, 25 April 2021 (UTC)


 * No worries, no need to say sorry. Weird things can happen from time to time. Just wanted to leave you a short explanation of why I reverted your edits. – NJD-DE (talk) 23:58, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

I check you are going to Change the history of Nawab of Amb until i make a article with Reference and with pictures MbIam9416 (talk) 00:23, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

You are using invalid references. Post proper references to support the comments and the historical accounts. Even the Suba Khan page is created by you. So it already looks all Fishy. All the sources in Suba Khan page is also invalid and the page is currently being considered for audit. HaughtonBrit (talk) 00:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

April 2021
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Third Battle of Panipat. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. – NJD-DE (talk) 00:46, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

I did but the editor Mblam with sock puppet of 119 keeps adding invalid sources and references that has no connection with the article. I stated that in my talk page to the editor but he keeps making the same invalid changes. Sorry for any inconvenience this has caused. HaughtonBrit (talk) 00:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I can understand how annoying it can be to end up in such a situation. In most cases reverting each other doesn't lead anywhere productive. No matter who is right here, in the end both of you might be blocked for disruptive editing and edit-warring.
 * If you believe this is a matter of socking, then please report it to WP:AIV or open a case at WP:SPI. – NJD-DE (talk) 00:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks NJD-DE. Can you please take a look at the history of Battle of Amritsar (1757) and see if my assumption is correct. In the history you can see the edit made by Mblam as user and as IP 119.160.65.93

I will have to figure out how to report it if you think its a matter of socking as well. HaughtonBrit (talk) 01:05, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I have to admit it does look convenient how MbIam9416 does not violate the WP:3RR-rule by the IP doing the revert on Second Anglo-Sikh War. But Battle of Amritsar (1757) is really a mess. I'd try to figure out if the source backs up their claims, but too late for me now.
 * If trying to have a conversation with them (and on a talk page, not the edit summaries) doesn't work, then you could consider reporting it at the edit-warring noticeboard. – NJD-DE (talk) 01:14, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

I understand. Its same here, getting late. But thanks for looking into it. Nice talking to you and thanks for all the help. HaughtonBrit (talk) 01:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Haughton Just take a look on book Imperial Gazette of India Page 218, and Tanoli Volume and Tarekh- hazara page number 314-436 , Al-Afghan Gulham Nabi Khan Page 36-46 this book in English Reference and make you clear everything .I don't create Vandalism I make page with evidence or edit with evidence. MbIam9416 (talk) 13:33, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

I am really Sorry to you if make you hurt. Best wishes MbIam9416 (talk) 13:34, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

You are well aware that those references are not valid and deliberately vandalizing the article by adding falsified information time and again. I think we are beyond having any further discussion. Your intentions are not sincere. HaughtonBrit (talk) 17:46, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Just check reference and make it so much easy for you to learn MbIam9416 (talk) 12:14, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Now don't Revert... Go to History person and tell them these Reference .he will tell you these references are Perfect MbIam9416 (talk) 12:15, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

You are like I said before have absolutely no credible reference to back your claim. Even the Kaushik Roy reference has no mention of the subject you are referring. You deliberately used that as a reference. Those will be reverted. HaughtonBrit (talk) 12:44, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Other contributors told you the same in your talk page. So please either use credible proof and also discuss the page of the claim you are making on the discussion page of the article for everyone to analyze before inserting such changes. Otherwise those will be reverted. Also, this is Wikipedia ENGLISH. So have the reference in English. HaughtonBrit (talk) 12:50, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I visit haripur Museums a city named by Harisingh Nalwa at there I found letter of ahmed shah abdali that was written at his time to Suba Khan. Here is article of Suba Khan Tanoli published on famous Pakistani News Channel https://www.dawn.com/news/1472639. His history was also published in the book of General Wilham Birdwood (Imperial Gazette of India) So you can take a look on it. Now i let myself out from Wikipedia. Just check them and include the history of panipat according to your own world. Thanks MbIam9416 (talk) 15:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

and also mentioned in William Wilson Hunter( Imperial Gazette of india ) Tarekh - e - Hazara or Gulham Nabi Khan Al-Afghan Thanks MbIam9416 (talk) 15:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Just to say you travelled and got a letter and posted picture and that this writer published this story or that story is not what Wikipedia is bound to consider a source. You need to show the excerpt or snippet from the credible source. You need to show translation. Going by someone's word is not considered reliable source. HaughtonBrit (talk) 16:45, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Take a look on article of Dawn News I already mentioned MbIam9416 (talk) 16:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Tarikh e Hazara. al-Afghan Take a look MbIam9416 (talk) 16:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

is your mind is alright MbIam9416 (talk) 16:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Read and Type in Article MbIam9416 (talk) 16:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Even the link has no reference to support the claim you keep inserting. You have to bring forth evidence to back your claim for everyone to analyze. Foremost, it needs to be in language, readable for everyone to look into. HaughtonBrit (talk) 17:00, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Tarekh - e - Hazara .. Imperial Gazette https://dsal.uchicago.edu/reference/gazetteer/pager.html?objectid=DS405.1.I34_V23_225.gif MbIam9416 (talk) 17:04, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Tarekh e Hazara https://archive.org/details/TarikhEHazaraByDr.SherBahadurKhanPunni MbIam9416 (talk) 17:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

https://historyofpashtuns.blogspot.com/2017/07/tanolis-or-tunawalis.html?m=1 MbIam9416 (talk) 17:07, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

We have already gone through these sources and other contributors have also told you that these are not reliable.

Tarekh - e - Hazara .. Imperial Gazette The uchicago.edu has no reference to the claim you inserted in the two articles.

Tarekh e Hazara This is not in English. How do you expect anyone who visit ENGLISH Wikipedia site to consider this reliable? You need translated book with page number that shows the translation of the claim you are making on both articles.

The last link is a blog. Do you understand that Blog is a personal site? Blogs are not reliable and once again these have no reference to the claims you made on the two articles. HaughtonBrit (talk) 17:23, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

https://www.dawn.com/news/1472639 This news of Suba Khan Tanoli published in the Dawn News is the English Reflection of Tarekh e Hazara written by Sher bahadur Punni historians of ahmed shah abdal Just take a look on this article it make you clear everything it include Battle of Amritsar( Mathura ) Now this is the last news published by Pakistan old and International news Channel ( Dawn ) MbIam9416 (talk) 19:39, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Mathura is a city in UP. Mathura is not Amritsar. The link has no reference to Battle of Amritsar. HaughtonBrit (talk) 22:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

One other problem with the link is that, dawn.com clearly states:

The views expressed by this writer and commenters below do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.

So this makes the source unreliable for Wikipedia.

Therefore, you need better supporting cites.

This will help you understand that why media cities like dawn.com are not considered reliable by Wikipedia Potentially unreliable sources

HaughtonBrit (talk) 22:34, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

book written by Author..as Dawan news is a book written by author MbIam9416 (talk) 00:59, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I do not understand but see my previous message again. Thanks. HaughtonBrit (talk) 01:06, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.210025/page/n163/mode/2up?q=Suba+khan+Tanoli I found a Source in English take a look MbIam9416 (talk) 01:24, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.52266/page/216/mode/2up?q=Suba+Khan+Tanoli also take a look on this source also MbIam9416 (talk) 01:28, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Page Number for the source? HaughtonBrit (talk) 01:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

in First one is page 163 and in second one page 216 MbIam9416 (talk) 01:33, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

There is nothing in those pages related to the article or claim. HaughtonBrit (talk) 01:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

also in page 164 or 163 in Tribe and Caste history book MbIam9416 (talk) 01:36, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Census of India 1891: Punjab and its Feudatories Part I - The Report on the Census (Vol. XIX Page numbers 216 MbIam9416 (talk) 01:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

or in Dr SB Panni 'Tareekh i Hazara' (Urdu:History of Hazara) pub Peshawar, 1969, pp. 340-341  MbIam9416 (talk) 01:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

What are you trying to show? These pages have nothing that is related to the article or claims. HaughtonBrit (talk) 01:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Page 216 is about Excess of Female deaths. I do not understand what you are trying to show. These page sources have nothing related to article. HaughtonBrit (talk) 01:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank You
Sir, much thanks to you for reverting the changes and correcting the comment. I copied and pasted the comment so it looks to another user that I deliberately removed the content. Infact it makes no difference at all. As you can see the user also removed the source by Dennis SHowlater, a military historian. I was just trying to be neutral and that is why I stated 180-600 due to different numbers in sources.

No problem. I went through all your sources to make sure the comments were as your sources stated. Only one was incomplete, so I updated it. I would also highly suggest you to use your user account instead of anon IPs. Looks like you recently created the account so please continue to use your account to make edits. I went through the source discussion you had on WP:RSN and they all looked OK for the article. 180 to 600 sounds reasonable. HaughtonBrit (talk) 00:48, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Unholy (2021 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Satanic ritual. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 05:58, 21 July 2021 (UTC)