Talk:Kushadhvaja

On 14 February 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Kushadhwaja to Kushadhvaja. The result of the discussion was moved.

Sankhuwasabha[edit]

Was "Sankhuwasabha of modern Nepal" related to the king Kushadhwaja?

"The king later moved to Sankasya after his brother Janak won a war against Sankasya, when Janak was attacked by the ruler of Sankasya. He continued to rule the area around Rajbiraj to his through key ministers as per local tale."

Etymologically Sankasya and Sankhuwasabha sound similar. Sankhuwasabha means; Sabha = Place of meetings. Moreover, geographically both are nearby regions. . If anyone has maintained books of lineage over centuries (as according to the tradition of Nepal) then please bring your evidence to make Wikipedia library great.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashanna01 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 14 February 2023[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Uncontested RM. (closed by non-admin page mover) Sceptre (talk) 00:29, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kushadhwaja → Kushadhvaja – Accurate spelling (W does not exist in Sanskrit). https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Hinduism/zrk0AwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=kushadhvaja&pg=PT285&printsec=frontcover+Chronikhiles (talk) 06:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Steel1943 (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Chronikhiles and BarrelProof: Notify RMTR participants. (BarrelProof, I didn't copy your comment since it seemed more procedural than consensus-forming; if you disagree, feel free to copy your comment.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:39, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the ping. Yes, my RMTR comments were purely procedural (and partly incorrect), so they have no value here. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.