he is overkeen to describe the loss of vengi and gangavadi by kulothungan i as 'further loss of territory' but in none of the pages on chalukya kings has he used the term loss of territory when it came to describing defeats of satyashraya which he has not acknowledge on the page on satyashraya but on the page on jaisimha this is an example of wikipedia getting turned to a jokerpedia jaisimha someshvara ahavamalla and his son vikkalan and singhanan vikramaditya vi and his brother someshvara ii when they simply fled the battle field lost their capital their generals were beheaded and the king's wife is also captured but he does not fail to describe that 'by hard fighting the chalukyas being in control of their territory all this against evidence of scores of inscriptions of chola kings found in kannada country like mysore region gangavadi manyakheta chitradurga distt courtesy bangalore area and kolar not a single inscription of any western chalukya king is found anywhere in tamil country yet he would 'contribute' someshwara may have occupied kanchi vikramaditya vi invaded kanchi and kept it for a few years all inaccurate and unclear pieces of information '''''