User talk:Homogenie

Welcome!

Hi Homogenie! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Kj cheetham (talk) 19:31, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Indo-Aryan migration to Assam

Please stop playing this blatant game of POV pushing. Place all the dates that are available. Chaipau (talk) 09:41, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cooch Behar State, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tibetan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Pala dynasty

Please stop your WP:POV runs in Wikipedia. Shin has said specifically said both areas—Karatoya to Lalitakanta and from Lalitakanta to Dikkaravasini—are part of Kamarupa (Both the areas were deemed Kamarupa). This was pointed out to you here [1] on Feb 4, to which you had no reply. And yet on Feb 11, you claimed falsely that Shin clearly did not consider Upper Assam to be part of Kamarupa here: [2].

This is a case of WP:IDHT, a form of WP:DE.

Chaipau (talk) 16:27, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Ahom kingdom

Do not remove cited texts. Your edit summary "Ahom knew about kamarupa in 16th century when they reached Karatoya river , did they excavate the site and found evidence about kamarupa and wrote that down in their buranji, this line is ahistorical)" is not enough to remove this. Amalendu Guha is a well known historian, who has published extensively.

Removing texts which are cited with reliable sources is WP:DE.

Chutia people

You have again removed reference in Chutia people here: [[3]]. Please do not remove citations because it is WP:DE.

Chaipau (talk) 00:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Chaipau:: WP:CONTEXTMATTERS Information provided in passing by an otherwise reliable source that is not related to the principal topics of the publication may not be reliable;editors should cite sources focused on the topic at hand where possible. Do know which source to cite. The journal hardly talks about the Chutias but mostly is limited to Bodo-Garo language Homogenie (talk) 02:18, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Kamarupa

You have again removed cited texts here: [4] Please do not remove these texts. WP:DE

Chaipau (talk) 11:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

This is the second time you have removed relevant material. [5] Please stop doing this. Chaipau (talk) 13:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Do not engage in slow-edit-war. Please discuss your issues with the text because I am at pains to see any. TrangaBellam (talk) 11:27, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Please stop

Please stop adding unrelated castes and social groups in the "See also" section of Kalita (caste). This is just disruptive. It's not a good way of drawing attention to other castes, if that's what you're trying to do. Bishonen | tålk 15:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC).

Mlechchha dynasty

Stop removing the map of Kamarupa from the Mlachchha dynasty. There is a consensus against your interpretation. Chaipau (talk) 15:13, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Ahom kingdom

Please do not "imply" something in Wikipedia. That is WP:SYNTH. If there existed a connection between the Ahom kingdom and China, please use a direct quote. Chaipau (talk) 13:22, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

@Chaipau: : the capital appears in the chronicle, "without" any political links, how do think it appeared there??!, also direct quotes are primary , there are direct quotes but they cant be used as secondary source are preferred.Homogenie (talk) 13:33, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

ARBIPA sanctions reminder

Homogenie, you have been informed of the ARBIPA sanctions. Please avoid WP:tendentious editing. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Varman dynasty

Please note that your edit is an example of WP:tendentious editing referred to above by Kautilya3. Chaipau (talk) 13:38, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Ahom kingdom

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Chaipau (talk) 05:58, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Foods habit of Ahom

Editor... Beef is not commonly eaten or not even eaten.... Why 14th-century food habit of ahom are mentioned?? Nowadays hardly any ahom even eats buffalo... When mentioning about this there should be a separately written about the things of nowadays not of 14th century ahoms.... abandoned culture — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonardondishant (talk • contribs) 06:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

As you clearly added a citation that they (Ahoms) stopped consuming it during the reign of Siva Singha, so it is not 14th century as you have claimed, again in the section we are referring to the original food habits of the Ahoms not the present one. Also see the citation of Gogoi (2011) p227, it states that they have no given up on their habits Homogenie (talk) 07:06, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

@Homogenie A small minority doesn't represent the whole of the community of above a million people, beef became a taboo subject by the 18th century many reference's are also given. Also why are you removing the indic name of the kings?? The indic name is given in the buranjis, the kings used the title of Maharajh. The ahom name of later kings were only used by the ahom preist, that's why you can see that mostly they are referred by their indic name. Jonardondishant (talk) 12:54, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Because the Tai names are standard, they were used from 13th century till the the end, will you write half in Tai and the rest half in Indic, know the meaning of STANDARD Homogenie (talk) 12:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

@Homogenie I have clearly stated that due to some error I am not able to add the other name, also I had said to add the ahom name as well. Jonardondishant (talk) 13:04, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Look at the template of Ahom dynasty, the standard is Tai, not Indic. Even you want to put the Indic name as standard, what would you add as Hindu names pre-Suhunmung era, before Suhunmung, Ahom didnot used Hindu name, Tai is standard Homogenie (talk) 13:36, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

@HomogenieSuhunmung was the 14th king, In total there were 40 kings in which 12 kings were there with no indic name, there are more kings with indic than only their only ahom name... And what are you talking about, do you think that indic name was just given for no reason, The indic name was the formal name for the later king starting from Tungkhungia's, the tungkhungia were totally indianzed they had their coins struck on hindu gods. The coronation ceremony of the kings were based on 'protecting cows and brahmanas. When putting the name of a king put the full name with honours. Jonardondishant (talk) 01:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

There are 40 kings with Tai names, there are only 26 king with Indic name, what indic name do you give to the previous 14 kings before Suhunmung as they dont have one, moreover the Indic name is given in the lead itself, why do you want to keep repeating that twice! Makes no sense Homogenie (talk) 03:50, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

there is Bamuni Konwar Jonardondishant (talk) 06:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

It's really annoying that you are just on the names, your logic doesn't apply everywhere. The hindu name was not a second name, those who have the hindu name is there a problem to let it say there. Jonardondishant (talk) 06:21, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Isnt the Hindu name already in the lead!! you want to reintroduce again to show that some kind of mystical king resided near naga-assam border in 1700s, your editing shows that you are!! Homogenie (talk) 07:36, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

What are you talking about??? use clear words totally not understandable Jonardondishant (talk) 08:29, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Dimasa kingdom

There is no consensus that the speculations of Wade are acceptable in Wikipedia. Please do not insert this material in Dimasa kingdom till you get consensus agreement on it. Chaipau (talk) 13:53, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Well Dimasa is recognised by Ming, it is proven by the Metal plate found in Jorhat Wade 1994 page 130, so it is not speculative and they are accepted Laichen (2000) Most of these places have been succcessfully identified but locations of places such as Dagula, Xiao Gula, Dimasa, Diban, Menglun, Bajiata, Diwula were been wrongly put in modern Burma by especially by Chinese scholars. As a matter of fact these places were located in western Northern Mainland Southeast Asia, with Greater and Lesser Gula on northern and southern bank of the Brahmaputra valley respectively.p78 Homogenie (talk) 13:57, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Please follow the discussion at Talk:Ahom_kingdom#Ming_Shilu before putting up speculations by Wade etc in "Wikivoice". Chaipau (talk) 11:40, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Bhaskaravarman

You have removed a map with just an edit summary without and specific reference other than a vague "Shin (2017)".[6] Please note that you are such edit summaries are not sufficient. I have since added references to support the map. If you object, please take this to the talk page. Chaipau (talk) 02:56, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

The quote In Assam,this process began in 1871 when Cunningham ascertained that 'Kia-mo-Ieu-po' mentioned in HiuenTsang's account was 'Kamarupa', the kingdom of Bhaskaravarman, and equated it with modern Assam. For him,'Kamarupa' is the Sanskrit name of Assam, and its extent is defined as the whole valley of the Brahmaputra River, or modern Assam, together with Koch Behar and Bhutan. 63 This is, however, aproposition unsupported by either contemporary historical records or etymological explanation. p.34 Shin 2017

S.L Baruah has repeated the same claim from British historians without any modification for 100 years, this is bad history!! Homogenie (talk) 03:44, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

In this section Shin discusses the "etymological" origins and location of Pragjyotisha. She does not discuss the extent. Furthermore, S L Baruah and others have not used Cunningham at all. Chaipau (talk) 12:10, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Hariya Mandal

There is not need to keep highlighting Hariya Mandal's Mech roots. It is sufficiently mentioned. Biswa Singha did not make too much of it. Why should we in Wikipedia keep pointing it out? WP:DUE. Chaipau (talk) 23:44, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Reply

Hi, here is Study of 'Great Gula', 'Little Gula' and 'Dimasa'. The thesis is in the Chinese language, you can use google translate to read it. If somewhere not sure about the translation, I can briefly tell you what the story is.--Xiliuheshui · chat 10:38, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

@瑞丽江的河水: Thank you sir for the material Homogenie (talk) 10:50, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

@瑞丽江的河水: Sir could you give a overview of the text?! Homogenie (talk) 11:06, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

I translate part three (三) in page 27 which is conclusion.

Based on the above, we can draw the following conclusions:

1. Da-Gu-La or Great Gula (大古剌) is refer to Pegu of Mon people
2. Xiao-Gu-La or Little Gula (小古剌) is refer to Gaur in the northern Sylhet, Assam
3. Di-Ma-Sa (底马撒) is refer to Dimapur of Assam (the location is close to Little Gula)

So, the Baiyi Zhuan said:

The sentence "Xi-Tian (Western Sky) and Gu-La at the west (of Mong Mao)" (西天、古剌在其西), refer to India and Gaur in the northern Sylhet, Assam. In short, it's referred to as eastern India, not nowadays Pegu of Myanmar. About the other place name in Baiyi Zhuan, we will discuss it one by one when there is a chance in the future.

Hope my translation is understandable. Any questions be feel free to ask me.--Xiliuheshui · chat 11:37, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

@瑞丽江的河水: Sir, do you have more material regarding the Da-Gula polity/state? Homogenie (talk) 11:50, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

I have Gong Yin (1988) and Fang Guo-yu (1987) User:Chaipau mentioned here. Chen, Xie and Lu (1986) I'm not sure what's that is, if I know the full name I can find it.--Xiliuheshui · chat 12:01, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Dagula according to Wade (1994) is a polity near Dimasa, which is located in today's Assam, the ruler was Po-di-na-lang, i have taken the source from here [7], other source pre-1994 claims Da-Gula to be Pegu, Sir could you pass me Gong Yin (1998) and Fang Guo-yu (1987) Homogenie (talk) 12:27, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Geoff Wade said is correct. In the seventh chapter on "Geography" in the Ming Shi, it is noted that Da Gu-la was Pegu. This identification has been followed by most modern scholars. I can say all of Chinese scholars agree with this statement. They believe Dimasa and Xiao Gu-la is located in lower Burma. At that time they didn't know a Dimasa plate was dicovered in Assam. Chen Yi-sein's view makes sense, but his view can't deal with the conflict that Wade mentioned. I translate Fang Guoyu's chapter to you:

〔Dagula Xuanwei Si〕

〔Dimasa Xuanwei Si〕

Geography chapter of Ming Shi recorded: "Dagula Military & Civilian Xuanweishi Si located in the southwest of Mengyang, also called Pegu. It is near the south sea, neighbour with Siam." Also recorded: "Dimasa Xuanweishi Si is located in the southeast of Dagula." Note: The establishment of these two Xuanweisi is recorded in Ming Taizong Shilu, Xinwei day of August, Yongle Emperor year 3. MSL recorded: "send officer Zhou Rang to give the gift to Mengyang Military & Civilian Xuanwei Si, and also Dagula, Xiaogula, Dimasa, Chashan, Menglun." Again, Dingsi day May, year 4 recorded: "Meng Jingxian, the military officer of Tengchong, back from Dagula. The chief Po-di-na-lang sends chieftain Xuan-ma-sa to tribute." Again, Renwu day June, year 4 recorded: "Dagula chief Po-di-na-lang send chieftain Xuan-ma-sa as an envoy to tribute. He said 'there are 7 places in my territory: Dagula, Xiaogula, Dimasa, Chashan, Diban, Menglun, and Bajiata. All located in the extremely remote southwest, never communicated with China. Today, the emperor sends an officer to claim the decision, and our people all agree to be vassals. Please set the officer to rule us. We will continue to recruit the other close non-vassals people.' Emperor agreed. Established two Xuanwei Si at Dagula and Dimasa, because of the large area. Established Zhangguan Si at Xiaogula, Chashan, Diban, Menglun, Bajiata. Appoint Po-di-na-lang to be the Xuanweishi (officer title) of Dagula, La-wang-pa to be the Xuanweishi of Dimasa. Bai-zhang, Zao-zhang, Kan-jia-li-mei, Dao-han-ti, Dao-qing-han to be the Zhangguan (officer title) of Xiaogula and other Zhangguan Si. Give them seal and plate. Send officer Zhou Rang took to them, and also give some gift." After that, Dagula, Dimasa and Xiaogula tribute records can be seen in MSL Renzi July Yongle year 5, Wuzi June Yongle year 6, Wuchen February Yongle year 22, Dingsi September Hongxi year 1.

Ming Taizong Shilu Volume 5, Bingzi day August Yongle year 6 recorded: "send officer Zhou Rang to visit Dagula Xuanweishi Po-di-na-lang. Zhou Rang back and said: 'Po-di-na-lang unauthorized attack Diban, Menglun, Bajiata three Zhangguansi, and occupied the area, also carried off the chief Jia-li-mei. Please send armed forces to subdue him. The emperor sends a message to urge Po-di-na-lang." But nothing was recorded thereafter. These three Zhangguansi might be annexed by Dagula, and haven't been re-establish.

Note: Mon–Khmer people reside in the area between Irrawaddy triangle and the Salween river mouth, Pegu and Martaban are the centre. According to Burmese records, Martaban was the capital since the 13 century, and move to Pegu in 1369. So, the Deng-long state which was recorded in Yuan books should locate at Martaban, and the Gula in Ming books should locate at Pegu. Gula chief said his territory includes Dimasa, and it was established as Xuanweisi, so Dimasa should locate in a prosperous place, which might be the Tanintharyi around Martaban. One more thing worth noting: History of Burma recorded Pegu king Razadarit died in 1423, then the Mon kingdom was torn apart. So Ming's book didn't record any tribute event after Hongxi year 1 (1425).

——page 1010 - 1011, Zhong guo xi nan li shi di li kao shi (Study on the Historical Geography in Southwest China) by Fang Guoyu, 1987

I translate it word by word, and restore the original text as much as possible. But limited to my English level, forgive me that I can only do this. There is nothing new in Gong Yin (1998), the material he used is Ming Shi, Fang Guo-yu's has covered it.--Xiliuheshui · chat 21:10, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Wade (1994) is right regarding Da-gula being a polity located in what is today North Myanmar. Thank you sir for giving your time Homogenie (talk) 23:35, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

One thing you might be interested in. In Inscriptions of Pagan, Pinya and Ava: Translation, with Notes translated by Taw Sein Ko mentioned a principality "Kachin Hills" ruled by Maw (Mong Mao), which recorded in a 1442 AD inscription. But in another translation which translates by Gordon Luce, he gave the original name transcription "Tiḿmasā", and bracket "(Kachin Hills)" (in A 15th Century Inscription and Library at Pagán, Burma, an article in Malalasekera Commemoration Volume).--Xiliuheshui · chat 23:59, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Timmasa (Dimasa) might had contact with Mong Mao. Sir could you look at another polity by the name of "Tiora" or "Tiura"! It should be located near Dimasa kingdom (Timisa) Homogenie (talk) 02:03, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Sorry I never heard this. I'm familiar with Mong Mao, don't know Assam very well.--Xiliuheshui · chat 11:19, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

@瑞丽江的河水: A 15th Century Inscription and Library at Pagán, Burma, an article in Malalasekera Commemoration Volume Where do i get a copy of this? i have searched this online, couldnot really get it in any platform Homogenie (talk) 07:46, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2022

You edits in Koch dynasty are disputed. In fact you have removed cited material with a self proclaimed assertion. This is WP:OR and WP:POV. Please participate in the discussion in the talk page, obtain resolution and consensus and then edit, please. Chaipau (talk) 15:07, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

This is no WP:POV, everything is added, also Chiknagram is same as Khutanghat Homogenie (talk) 15:27, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Gour Kingdom

Hi homogenie, I have reverted your edits on Gour Kingdom as the source has no mention of Sylhet. UserNumber (talk) 22:39, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

@UserNumber: Gour of Assam, Sylhet previously included the Barak valley of Assam. Homogenie (talk) 22:51, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

The Barak Valley came under Assam during British rule, what you are citing is talking about hundreds and hundreds of years before that. UserNumber (talk) 22:54, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

@UserNumber: please look at the discussion User_talk:Homogenie#Reply

Homogenie (talk) 23:00, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Urgently need help

Homogenie Hey someone is vandalising the ahom wiki page.... please recover the old page and take strict action for the vandalizer.

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Abecedare (talk) 16:16, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Disruptive-editing at Koch dynasty

Homogenie, you have been previously warned by admin SpacemanSpiff about non-collaborative editing. Your recent edits at Koch dynasty indicate that those issues have cropped up again. In particular, this edit was clearly against the third-opinion offered by LauritzT. If you didn't understand the opinion, or disagreed with it, you needed to discuss that on the talk-page till consensus was reached instead of trying to wikilawyer that retaining one of the two reference, while removing the other along with the article-statement they were used to support, somehow reflected the outcome of the discussion at that point.
I have informed you about the discretionary sanctions applicable to this subject area in the section above. Any more disruptive editing will lead to a block or topic-ban. Abecedare (talk) 16:33, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2022

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for edit-warrig at Sukaphaa within 30-minutes of being given (another) warning about non-colaborative editing. To be clear, this block is not a reflection on the merits of the edits at Sukaphaa but for not even attempting to discuss the dispute on the talk-page.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Abecedare (talk) 17:09, 19 April 2022 (UTC)