User talk:Traing

Hello, Traing, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Manual of Style
Also feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message.

Sino-Indian War

Yes, I do realize that, which was why I was willing to accept many of your edits. And that is also why I listed all those points in detail which I thought were inaccurate, POV, misleading, or biased, so that you could see for yourself, instead of me continuing down an endless edit war and simply reverting everything. No doubt you believe strongly in your views, but it could be worth your time to understand other perspectives as well, and perhaps why others believe equally strongly in the opposite. Perhaps you would take the same consideration and stop deleting my edits, then?--Yuje 22:33, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will have to do more research to actually find a source about this war. I have the diplomatic USSR involvement in my memory and I think few things happened without an opinion from Washington and Moscow. I will tell you more in a few weeks, since I'm quite busy. Wandalstouring 15:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see that your article failed A class because of too little participation. I'm quite busy now, but I will try to get enough knowledgable reviewers and nominate it again. You did quite a good work in my opinion, what I found out is that peace negotiations were rather complicated, perhaps some more details(as notes) would help the interested reader. Wandalstouring 18:40, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Didn't realize I broke the 3RR rule, but if I did, then so did you, since each my of edits was itself reverted by you, and you start all your edits with a revert. --Yuje 07:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

With wars, getting neutral sources are difficult. Nathu La has some information, sourced from [1], but if it is the same incident, the dates are horribly wrong. Maybe you could try a google domain search on the site:.in domain? www.loc.gov is also a good place to search. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

India China 1962

Dude,

Duuno about neutral, but I only picked what looked like "facts" from the source. That she is a marxist does not kill her arguments.

And I beleieve that it is important to have those details (post war developments).

Let that section be for now. There is a lot to add. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mikeslackenerny (talk • contribs) 07:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Chalo botbhai ne sign kar diya

Mikeslackenerny

Sorry mate. Not used to the references thing. Will do those shortly. ps: Search on "Colombo Proposals 1962"

Mikeslackenerny 07:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

india china boder disputes timeline

http://www.rediff.com/news/chtime.htm

Cheers! Mikeslackenerny 07:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another section that can be expanded is the Aftermath one. The 1962 war has had a lasting impact on the psyche of India. Let me dig up all I can on that.

And I guess the Chinese internment in Rajasthan (post the ceasefire!), though an ugly incident, also needs to be mentioned in the article.

Added later: text of Sino-Pak 1963 agreement

http://www.claudearpi.net/maintenance/uploaded_pics/SinoPakAgreement.pdf

And a note by Maxwell in 2001

http://www.claudearpi.net/maintenance/uploaded_pics/AnIntroductiontotheHendersonBrooks.pdf

Mikeslackenerny 09:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More at: http://www.claudearpi.net/index.php?nav=documents&lang=1

Notes section in Sino-India artcle

Seems corrupted. Should restore from an old version?

Great Power

Looks like your friend Faraz (talk · contribs) decided to add his cruft, analysis and Indophobia to the page.Baka man 01:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sorry...

i am currently a bit busy so couldn't respond immediately on the sino-indian war. When i get some time I'll try to chip in for that article. Thanks. Idleguy 10:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

India in Great Power

Stop reverting the changes I made. Your changes are baseless and meritless. Claiming that India won all 3 wars is ridicilous.

48 and 65 ended in cease fire and 71 lead to the creation of bangladesh. the 99 war is not included here. and the rest is true, India lost 1,100 soldiers when it deployed them in Sri Lanka and that was the result that its PM go assassinated by Tamil Tigers.

And this maybe news to you, but India is embroiled in a insurgency in its North Eastern province of Assam.

Do you want me to provide links?

Don't revert again or I will alert the MODS.

Mercenary2k 06:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No one claimed that India won the 48 or 65 War. Both wars were in stalemate when ceasefire was declared. debating what could have happened had the war continued is baseless and going into speculation. the only war which historians claim that india won was the 71 war. the 99 war is not being discussed here. Mercenary2k 06:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

99 Was not an official war between two countries. It was a bloody border skrimmish. This Article is wrong in stating that India won all 3 wars against Pakistan. 48 ended in stalemate and then cease fire, same thing with 65, only 71 can be claimed an indian victory. India's PM getting assassinated is relevant because it was the first time that India tried to deploy forces overseas to exert its influence over its neighbours but it ended disastarously and thus merits inclusion into this article.

You are blindly reverting my edits without a proper thought process, and if you are new to wikipedia, let me educate you, this is not allowed.

Mercenary2k 06:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then you don't know the subject matter in which you are editing. Your reverts are baseless and without merit. I am in the process of getting proper citations. Which should end this debate. Mercenary2k 06:40, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lankan_Civil_War#Indian_involvement

And as such inclusion of India's disastrous deployment of troops in Sri Lanka merits inclusion if we are discussing India as a global power. Bad things need to be highligted as well and not only the good points. Mercenary2k 06:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warnings

June 2007

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sino-Indian War. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Vectro 07:18, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly suggest you post a request for help on WT:INB and seek editors like Idleguy and Deeptrivia, who have done good work on India's military history. It is also advisable to just open a content WP:RFC, asking for opinion from across Wikipedia. Rama's arrow (just a sexy boy) 07:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

review help

User talk:Oldwindybear is informing himself about the conflict. Feel free to submit your article to a peer review. I think it will help to iron out any problems with the content. I will try to get another reviewer for the writing style. Wandalstouring 19:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sino-Indian War

I added subheadings to the section on the discussion page to make it easier to read and follow. --Yuje 04:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please contact me

Hi Traing. I am a journalist and would like to contact you for an article I am writing. Could you please contact me urgently at venky (dot) vembu (at) gmail (dot) com. I am posting it here because you have not specified an email ID.

Seperatist user posting inflammatory messages

On Talk:Sino-Indian War, an IP user (check the history) has been going on about India's Rape of Goa and keeps posting links to Goan seperatist websites. He also goes on about Indian bullying of Sikkim and Bhutan and his words, despite being irrelevant, remain on the talk page, sending viewers of the talk page to Free Goa websites. How does one deal with this? Traing 02:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is the free encyclopedia and some people think that they are free to post any materials they want to post. Perhaps they fail to understand the encyclopedic nature of this Wikipedia. Over a period of time, such editors understand the futility of their useless contributions, and go of their own or are driven out. As such, please don't worry much - the time will take care of such editors, if your assessment is about that IP user is correct. I don't find any need to become unduly wary of such edits. Please continue to add value to the project. Thanks. --Bhadani (talk) 02:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What does biradaari mean?? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

coordinator elections of the military history project

Hi Traing

I propose you to run for the position as coordinator in the elections of the Military history wikiproject. Greetings Wandalstouring 11:13, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A class review finished

Here is the result of the last A class review with enough participants. There are some minor problems since I don't agree that the article length is a problem. Wandalstouring 12:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sino-Indian War.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sino-Indian War.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:36, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]