Talk:Ranbir Singh of Jammu and Kashmir

"Palak Paneer Singh"

Can we have a reference of this person, or is this meant to be some sort of joke- Palak paneer is a popular dish in Indian cuisine — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.37.215.72 (talk) 13:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Discussion regarding the religion of the concerned rulers

@SpTheMan: we see you have a concern regarding the religion of Ranbir Singh of Jammu and Kashmir and Hari Singh. But to resolve that you dont have to opt to edit the article. Specially 3 times in a row which you did. That counts to break 3 revert rule for which you can get blocked. All you need to do is create a discussion like this in the talk page of the article. And ping the editor like this @Kautilya3:. But don't prefer to edit right away. Then in the discussion you has to provide your views, citations, proofs all you can in the favour of your concern to the editor with whom you have contradiction regarding the edit. In this case Kautilya3 (talk · contribs).

Now here we you have concern regarding the religion of the rulers in question. So let me ask you first. Can you provide enough citations from sites or book excerpts to prove your point. Then put them into your discussion. We see you have another concern that having the word "Hindu" in the title of the book doesn't make anyone Hindu. Now Kautilya3 (talk · contribs), can you provide particular excerpt from the book which says that Rulers in question are Hindus or any other citation to supplement your points. As SpTheMan (talk · contribs) said having the word "Hindu" in the title of the book doesn't make anyone Hindu.

SpTheMan (talk · contribs) in this way you can politely ask the editors about sources. They have to answer. You can ask for perfect answer or citation. Then you both can compare your sources and citations and reliability. And try to reach a point on which you both agree. No editor will deny you to answer if you have any I mean really any question regarding their sources, its reliability. There is a whole list on wikipedia which says what's reliable and what's not.Check here WP:RS. And then even if there is dead lock between you two. You can ask for third opinion. Check here WP:3O. But third is neither compulsory nor an obligation for you to follow. But its good to have a third opinion as it may be in your favour or against. Having a query on discussion page sort out sooner or later since many editors check these articles and their talk pages to involve in a fruitful discussion and to reach a desired point or consensus.

Even if some editor don't want to either discuss with you or change the edit after the consensus. You can report them to WP:AN but that's a very long shot. For present try to indulge in discussion that Why the concerned ruler is Sikh or Hindu. No editor can say you are wasting time or disturbing them. All you have to do is be Humble, be polite. And ask them Why you are wrong. But you cant do that while doing edit and saying this in summary. You have to open a discussion for that. And never be scared to ask. Ask the editor (as in this case) which excerpt of the book says that. Editor can't deny you that. He has to answer that if he is citing book as reference. You are not wasting anyone's time. But just be polite, more humble and ask exactly, to the point, and precise of what you need. Thank you. Edward Zigma (talk) 04:19, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Edward Zigma, there is no dispute here. A dispute would occur only after the editor provides a reliable source that supports his content, or checks the source cited (direct link) and finds that it does not support the stated content. Right now, the editor is just being disruptive. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:43, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Give him some time . He will learn. And second I never said anything disputed. I said that the user has concern regarding the religion of these rulers. And asked him for sources too.Edward Zigma (talk) 09:47, 21 November 2019 (UTC)