Talk:Lahaul and Spiti district

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lahaul and Spiti district article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

India: Himachal Pradesh / Districts Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Himachal Pradesh (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Indian districts (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled

Those involved in editing this article might wish to contribute their thoughts to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mr Tan. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:45, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Indo-Caucasian

I am not sure that "Indo-Caucasian" makes any ethnographical sense. In my opinion this might be a relict of the attempts of the proponent of the Aryan race (Himmler) to prove the existance of lost remnants of an imagined Aryan race hidden somewhere on the Tibetan plateau. But I might be wrong

Moumine 23:00, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Would "Indo-European" do? Or simply "Caucasian"? JM Bell ° 09:44, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts

Can you explain about your reverts on the page? I could not see anymore disputes in the history anymore for a long time.

Tan 20:06, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What is you reason for removing the "dubious" tag? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:35, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anymore doubts about the history section? If there is, there should be ongoing discussions here. But there isn't. So, I don't see why the "dubious" tag should not be removed. Tan 21:11, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your lack of knowledge of the reason for the template isn't a ground for removing it. Let's wait and see what other editors have to say. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:01, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How long? Give me a dateline. It would be totally absurd if you are going to say that it is going to be up there for months on end. I will remove the notice if there are no debate concerning the historical content of Lahul and Spiti in one month's time, starting from today. Any objections?

Tan 22:09, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, more than a few hours. Think about it for yourself. Many editors edit only every few days, so at least a week. On the other hand, if you can't bear to wait that long, why not contact the editor who placed the template there, and ask? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:30, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your friend User:Moumine, right? I checked the history. And you have made a vandalism by removing I will remove the notice if there are no debate concerning the historical content of Lahul and Spiti in one month's time, starting from today. Any objections? my message. You have no right to remove people's messages at your own accord.

A week is nothing to me, and I had proposed one month. If that is your answer, I will have to agree to it.

Tan 13:13, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how part of your message got deleted; my suspeicion is that it's connected to the spate of deletions and duplications occurring recently. I certainly didn't delete it intentionally.

As for your snide comment about Mourmine, I had no idea that it was he who had placed the notice there. Now that you've discovered it, though, why don't you contact him? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:02, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have already notified Moumine about the removal of the dubious tag. I expect no objections, for I see no disputes on the content of the history section at all since it was put up on May 1.

Tan 15:36, 1 June 2005 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lahaul and Spiti district. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131113144353/http://www.censusindia.gov.in/Tables_Published/Basic_Data_Sheet.aspx to http://censusindia.gov.in/Tables_Published/Basic_Data_Sheet.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:08, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]