User talk:Joshua Jonathan

For convenience: {{mdf|1=[[User talk:Joshua Jonathan]]|2=reason, ~~~~}}

Stopping thought

This article has already had a contested prod. That means you need to file an AfD if you think it should be deleted. Randy Kryn has already objected to the removal of the article, and I support him. Please follow process, don't just redirect when you know the move is contested. I don't see any evidence that you've discussed this on the talk page and gotten support for it. Skyerise (talk) 17:34, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Skyerise: I see, though I also don't see any reason to keep an article with an u defined topic and only one reference, to a non-RS. Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:51, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For contentious topics

Thanks joshua for the consideration to remind me to be more vigilant regarding topics related to afghanistan paksitan and india Settlingstar (talk) 10:22, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

recent correction

Thanks for pointing out the discrepancy in dates on Bill Fray.

I had followed this source: 'It is with great sadness that we announce the passing of Bill Fay, who died peacefully this morning (February 21st) in London, aged 81,” Dead Oceans said in a statement. “Bill was a gentle man and a gentlema...' from a RS, and I reverted to previous.

thanks again, Augmented Seventh (talk) 22:02, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Advice needed

To be continued at Talk:History of India

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

hello! I recently came across the History of India article and below the "Magadha" section was "the Hindush soldier, from the tomb of Xerxes I" which was wrongly written as "Indian warrior" considering he was a "soldier of the Persian empire" from the "Indus valley" not a "Soldier of Magadha" from the "Ganges valley"

I need advice as I don't want to do something which might be wrong, thanks. Qaiser-i-Mashriq (talk) 23:01, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Qaiser-i-Mashriq: it was added here, by User:पाटलिपुत्र. I think he can explain more. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:36, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Qaiser-i-Mashriq:, Joshua Jonathan. The warrior is labelled as Hiduya 𐏃𐎡𐎯𐎢𐎹 (h-i-du-u-y) in Achaemenid script [1][2] on the Xerxes and Darius tombs ([3]). This term is translated as "Indian" by Lecoq 1997 p.225 and Encyclopedia Iranica ("Then the enumeration turns southeast, naming Drangians, Arachosians, Sattagydians (Thataguš), Gandharans, and Indians" [4]). According to Lecoq, these lists do not strictly represent Achaemenid satrapies, but rather a list of the people contributing troops to the Achaemenids ("On ne sait pas exactement ce que représentent ces listes de peuples: Il ne peut s'agir, en tout cas, de divisions administratives, à finalité fiscale, de satrapies." p.135). Beyond this, I do not know for certain whether this figure necessarily represents a man from Hindush (then Achaemenid territory), or a mercenary from the lands beyond to the east. Maybe there are more sources on that, but I am not aware of them. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 06:55, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The name "Hindush/Indus" had not developed it's pan south Asian meaning yet, it was specifically referring to the Hindush satrapy of the Persian empire, just like how a soldier from "Macedonia" then don't mean from the "Macedonia" of today but contemporary"Greece" because those places share name only Qaiser-i-Mashriq (talk) 09:11, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I agree with Qaiser-i-Mashriq. These are depictions of tribute payments, and only the Persian provinces paid tribute. The picture is showing the tribute payments from Hindush, not Magadha. This is ridiculous, पाटलिपुत्र! I have seen dozens of mistranslations of even Herdotus, let alone Xerxes! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 03:04, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Move

The page Empuraan was moved by a new user without any explanation. L2: Empuraan is a stylization, not the actual title (onscreen title is Empuraan - Lucifer 2). Can you move that to its original title? The user also started a page with an arbitrary title L Franchise (film series). The makers has not said anywhere that the franchise's title is "L". Besides, title is also in incorrect format - the disambiguation "franchise" is followed by another disambiguation "film series". 2409:4073:4D1C:705:6C1D:8689:4ACA:6281 (talk) 13:36, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]