Talk:Bully Kutta

message: I've just reverted this because there have been at least three sockpuppets of  very active here since November 2018. Unfortunately, I'm not knowledgeable enough to work out which of the intervening edits may actually have been improvements. That means I'm dumping work on someone else, sorry, but I know Malik has been pushing a considerable POV at other articles. - Sitush (talk) 21:57, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Socking 

message: I recognize that these countries have their differences.  I feel for you.
That being said, I think that the present borders between them are irrelevant to this origin myth.  Indeed, the borders have fluctuated and been malleable  long before these nations were split.  Moreover, the landrace and breed can fairly be assumed to have crossed whatever borders may have existed.  Dogs are no respecter of national pedigree!  Further, dog breeders are notorious for sharing their stock.
To the extent that the British were involved (in both places), the breeding stock and its patrimony gets ever more confusing, I am sure.  The credit and/or blame for this breed (I am not a huge fan) is shared. And once again, the borders were irrelevant.
Additionally, WP:Verifiability governs in Wikipedia, not WP:Truth.
So Coexistence in this article and a truce in Wikipedia hurts no one.  7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:13, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I am in complete agreement with you User:7&6=thirteen. If you look at the edit history of this article, you will see ample evidence of edit warring, where nationalists are removing "Pakistan" from the article (see Exhibit A and Exhibit B), for example) or nationalists are removing "Indian" from the article (see Exhibit C, Exhibit D, Exhibit E, for example). In 1947, Pakistan was created through the partition of India; naturally much of the flora and fauna, such as the Bully Kutta, are found on both sides of the border (the Punjab region, as with the Kashmir region, is shared by both the modern Republic of India and the modern Islamic Republic of Pakistan). Nationalists on both sides of the border are trying to claim this dog breed for themselves, despite the fact that it originated in a time when the country was undivided. The solution to this problem is to include both India and Pakistan as the country of origin for this breed; some sources mention that this breed was created in the Thanjavur and Tiruchi districts of Madras (now located in the modern Republic of India), while others mention that it was created in Sind (now located in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan). Rather than mentioning one of these alone, I have mentioned both to maintain neutrality and to satisfy both parties. With the multiple names assigned to this breed, my suggestion is to leave the majority of them in the infobox or footnoted, in order to prevent more edit warring by nationalists—terms that do not mention "India" or "Pakistan" are safe for the lede, such as the simple "Bully Dog" or "Bully Kutta", though the oldest term for this breed seems to be the Indian Mastiff (which was recorded in literature from the British Raj, which was authored when India was undivided). I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 03:37, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Pakistan]] and [[India]] as originator

message: Shouldn't this be Category:Dog Breeds originating in India and Pakistan? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:27, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I proposed it here.  7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:33, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi User:7&6=thirteen! It looks like there is already a category called Category:Dog breeds originating in Pakistan. The article as of now has Category:Dog breeds originating in Pakistan, as well as Category:Dog breeds originating in India, due to the fact that sources mention the origin of the Bully Kutta as either in Thanjavur or in Sind. I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 02:23, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename category: Category:Dog breeds originating in India