User Talk: Sutyarashi

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(30d)
| archive = User talk:Sutyarashi/%(year)d
}}{{Talk header|search=yes|arpol=no|wp=no|disclaimer=no|bottom=no||}}

{{Talkref}}

Addition of Pashto to Swati language section

please review the actual edit before labeling it as disruptive. I did not remove Hindko or Urdu from the language section; I only added Pashto.
You should also look at Battagram District ↗, where Pashto is listed as a major language and is widely spoken by Swatis. Given that Swatis form a significant part of the population there, adding Pashto to the language section is a factual and sourced improvement, not disruptive editing.
If you disagree with the addition, please discuss the sources and content rather than making accusations about editor conduct. G000p10 (talk) 13:52, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

:Read the messages regarding contentious topics I left at your talk page. Sutyarashi (talk) 14:46, 7 June 2026 (UTC)
::i did and sadly you couldn't give me an answer to why you reverted it G000p10 (talk) 18:22, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

''The Signpost'': 21 June 2026

<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2026-06-21}} </div> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * '''Read this Signpost in full ↗''' * Single-page ↗ * Unsubscribe ↗ * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:19, 21 June 2026 (UTC) </div></div>

Disambiguation link notification for June 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gilgit Scouts ↗, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bunji ↗ was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:29, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Tajikistan era change

At Tajikistan ↗, you changed BC to BCE. You can't do that without getting consensus. Can you please self revert? Masterhatch (talk) 12:19, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

:I was under assumption that BCE and CE is preferable over BC and AD. Can you cite any specific WP policy in this regard? Sutyarashi (talk) 12:24, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

::Nether is preferable over the other. But you can't change without consensus.

::MOS:ERA ↗ states: "The default calendar era ↗s are Anno Domini ↗ ({{xt|BC}} and {{xt|AD}}) and Common Era ↗ ({{xt|BCE}} and {{xt|CE}}). Either convention may be appropriate for use in Wikipedia articles depending on the article context. Apply {{section link|Wikipedia:Manual of Style|Retaining existing styles}} with regard to changes from one era to the other."

::You then go to {{section link|Wikipedia:Manual of Style|Retaining existing styles}} and it says: "Sometimes the MoS provides more than one acceptable style or gives no specific guidance. When either of two styles is acceptable it is generally considered inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change."

::I hope this helps! Masterhatch (talk) 12:32, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Durand Line

At Durand Line ↗, when a section has no sources, instead of half a dozen "cn" tags, just put an "unsourced section" tag at the top. Masterhatch (talk) 12:22, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Speedy deletion ↗ nomination of :Yasin massacre ↗

48px|left|alt=|link= ↗
{{Quote box|quote=<p>If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article ↗.</p><p>You may want to consider using the Article Wizard ↗ to help you create articles.</p>|width=20%|align=right}}
A tag has been placed on :Yasin massacre ↗ requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion ↗, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally ↗, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion ↗, such articles may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may '''contest the nomination''' by visiting the page ↗ and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines ↗. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=Yasin+massacre|deleting administrator}}.   Sakiv (talk) 16:11, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

The disambiguation page is unnecessary. The 1948 massacre is known only by its full name, and the mere presence of the word 'Yassin' does not link it to the 1863 massacre.--Sakiv (talk) 16:16, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

:Failed to see how CSD A11 is applicable here. It is obviously not something I invented, coined, or discovered, but a disambiguation page for articles with similar enough names to cause confusion. Sutyarashi (talk) 16:25, 5 July 2026 (UTC)
::Not that Dayr Yasin massacre ↗ very obviously redirects to 1948 massacre; Google search for "Yasin massacre" also brings up it, not the 1863 event. There's sufficient ground for disamb to exist. Sutyarashi (talk) 16:28, 5 July 2026 (UTC)
:::The significant disparity in article size and notoriety makes this disambiguation page inappropriate. Sakiv (talk) 16:39, 5 July 2026 (UTC)
::::Explain how is it inappropriate. Sutyarashi (talk) 16:46, 5 July 2026 (UTC)
:::::The other massacre is not well-known enough to be treated like the Deir Yassin massacre. Its article was only created 4 months ago. The 1948 event has a two-word name, which is highly distinct and clearly differentiates the two events. Sakiv (talk) 16:50, 5 July 2026 (UTC)
::::::No one is treating it like other, and it still does not explain how disambiguation is inappropriate. Not to mention how does it fall under criteria of something invented, coined, or discovered? Sutyarashi (talk) 20:02, 5 July 2026 (UTC)