Talk:Marathi people

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Maratha)

2006[edit]

Pl add brief biographies of prominent Maharashtrians. mahawiki 14:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great work on expanding this article. The last time I saw this was a stub. Commendeble work indeed.

--NRStalk|mail 13:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Credit goes to Arya Rajya Maharashtra.It is good to see Marathi wikipedians awakening and contributing finally.mahawiki 18:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos to Arya Rajya Maharashtra for the meticulous research and unbiased fact-based writing. Keep it on, Sir!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by A2carville (talk • contribs) 18:08, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia section[edit]

Very POV. There are claims of Maharashtra being the most improtant contributor in cricket, film, etc, etc but where are the stats? Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 07:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed all the POV sounding statements. I have also added references and citations, in case someone wants them. Also, Zaheer plays for Baroda team but he is originally from Shrirampur in Ahmadnagar district. He speaks fluent Marathi at his home and many times with Marathi media as well. He has a restaurant in Pune as well.
--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 07:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stop removing tags[edit]

Stop removing "citation needed" tags that other users add without providing citations. Also if I am right(admin:Bluguyen may please confirm), other WP articles are not supposed to be used as citations. Provide better citations and dont remove tags before providing citations. Also about Gururaj Deshpande, provide citation that he is Marathi. Sarvagnya 08:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sarvagnya,we are not supposed to provide citations for each and every senetence here.Pl dont forget their's a article about Kannadi ppl also!Stop taking revenge of ur defeats!Grow up.mahawiki 10:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is asking for citations for each and every thing. I am not asking for citation to prove that Madhuri Dixit(incidentally my favourite actress of all time - Aishwarya is not in my list of faves) is Marathi. I am only asking for citations for borderline cases and cases where the Marathi roots are not commonly known. Sarvagnya 17:10, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
But, then again, what do you define by borderline and commonly known. These things are subjective. What is known to you may be unknown to other. Similarly, what is unknown to you may be well-known to others. Can you give a citation to prove that "Madhuri Dixit is Marathi is commonly known" ? Why are mongering a war out of nothin' at all ? Why are you acting so childishly, Sarvagnya ? Take my advice, just chill !
--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 17:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So what is common for an Indian might not be for someone from say Iceland. a user from another location might not see it as common that Madhuri Dixit is from Bombay and ask for citation. [1]Can be a citation for her place and date of birth.

So defining borderline or commonly known is not required. Even mainstream can be challenged if one wants to. The way mahawiki and Arya are going people will start to question mainstream too. Sarvagnya is sticking to a narrower no of issues, and if uncited he has the right to remove it, and it not called vandalism. Also mahawiki has been told in the past not to use kannadi- he persists. The right term is Kannadiga. To persist with Kannadi is rude and counterproductive and can lead to admin's taking action. Why don't you take it as a challenge and source the citations ? Will add to the quality of the article and ensure what you source stays on the article rather than it get deleted a few months later. Haphar 18:06, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Am I missing something here ? There seems to be a link. Haphar, how do you know Mahawiki has been told not to use Kannadi before. And were you checking and picking where and when mahawiki used that word ? Why would you do that ? And how do you know "Kannadi" is rude ? Give me a citation ! The link you gave proves nothing. It just shows that IMDB knows Madhuri is Marathi. But say one of my friends doesn't know it. Say most people in the West don't know it. Then ? By the way, you forget that I can tag many "Kannadi" articles if I want. I know Sarvagnya got a considerable "defeat" at the hands of mahawiki in the Belgaon article and that's the reason why he is trying to create bumps in this article. But what about you ? I thought you were assuming good faith. But I seriously doubt now.... As for Kannadi and Kannadiga. Well, Kannadi is Marathi for Kannadiga. We, Marathi people refer to "People speaking Kannada language" as Kannadi. So, there is nothing rude about it. As I said give me a citation that "Kannadi" is rude and another one that "Kannadi" is not Marathi for Kannadiga.
Go get it !!! Will be a great challenge for you :)) !!!!!!
By the way, Arya and Mahawiki, you are doing a great job, keep on rocking !!!!
Also, I would say that this is a nonissue being blown out of proportion. This article is just fine. Let it be.
Sarvagnya, you need to remain civil and there is no need for a "Tit-for-Tat" attitude. These things are actually proving counterproductive to Wikipedia. Again I would tell the same thing that I told Haphar - Assume Good Faith Keep Rockin' but No Messin' !!!
--NRStalk|mail 18:19, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So if you would go through the history of the dispute which has been fought here and on other pages you would not ask that question ( where mahawiki was asked not to use the word) so he knows, and if you can search you would know too. So that is how i know. And if you could do some research before coming in you would know too. I am in Maharashtra- I know Marathi speaking people and no one here uses the word Kannadi. So if you claim it is a word that is used please do get the citation. As Mahwiki has been told not to use this before ( by an admin) the onus is on him to get the citation. The good faith is there, which is why the citations are being asked for. Would request you to help in the same. About Madhuri and the link ? I gave it to show place of birth and date of birth. and that's what I mentioned ( if you could read it ). I have given it as an example to give for her place and date of birth, not for her language. So if someone of your friends does not know about place or date , that's the link to get. So as you said Do assume good faith ( plus read a little bit) to help with the rockin man. So keep rockin in those citations please as there is no info on Israel or Mauritius that i have seen in all this singing. Haphar 18:48, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, cool guys. Well, really ! Actually, Marathi people use "Kannadi" while conversing in Marathi with other Marathi people. Obviously, they wouldn't use Kannadi with you. It's only here that I find that Kannadi is rude ! Anyway, if people don't like it then all I can say is don't use it. As for Israel, see Bene Israel.
And Keep Rockin'
--NRStalk|mail 04:18, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well North Indians while talking among themselves call all South Indians " Madrasi's". Which they might not find offensive but south Indians do. Since this is wikipedia and the word is being used in a discussion with a person who is a Kannadiga, restraint would help.Haphar 09:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sources required[edit]

Can we get sources on Marathi people being primary in Goa- ie is Konkani= Marathi origin as well as sources to say Marathi people are "significant" in Mauritius as well as Israel. I think the total jews of Indian origin are miniscule in Israel. And I have no clue as to the numbers in Mauritius, but as the claim has been made, i am sure there would be reliable sources to back the claims. Haphar 13:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haphar firstly see Rashtrakuta Kaveri kannada and numerous other articles which have no sources.Ecah and everything cannot be cited (courtesy-a Kannadi wikipedian),on similar lines,each and every thing on this article cannot be backed by source.Few things are left for ur common sense.mahawiki 13:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So let me tell you a few rules of wikipedia. If it cannot be sourced then a citation required tag can be put and then if the details are not provided the uncited comments can be deleted. for instance check the tag put in the start of this article:- [2] Not my rules, not my interpretation, pls check with an admin if you doubt me ( and Blnguyen seems to be on a break so try another admin User:Gurubrahma, or User:Samir. Check the India article ( a featured article )- [3]the Demographics section gives it's references . So another article NOT conforming to this rule does not allow for this article to not adhere to the rules. You can ask for citations on those articles, and unless reliable sources are given ( for instance a blog discussion is not a reliable resource, neither is an obscure website not known to anyone else) you can remove the uncited content there also. Which is why superlatives like "director extraordiare" are POV and to be removed. You might know a famous personality and write stuff based on your knowledge, but that too would not be acceptable on wikipedia unless it can be backed up by sources. Haphar 17:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Systemized Vandalism[edit]

Few users are resorting to systemized and synchronized vandalism here. Although User:Sarvagnya stopped adding senseless tags, few editors are still making statements before confirming facts. Anyways, I am not gonna waste time on that, but let me make a few points.

As I said earlier, Zaheer Khan is from Maharashtra and is Marathi. Refer to my comment above. As for adding Farrokh Engineer and Karsan Ghavri, let me make it clear that this list is of Marathi people or people whose mother-tongue is Marathi or people of Marathi-origin, not of "people who reside in Maharashtra" or "Residents of Maharashtra". Farokkh Engineer and Karsan Ghavri, both do NOT speak Marathi. Their mother tongues are Farsi and Gujarathi respectively. Same thing applies for Shastri. If we include Residents of Maharashtra in this list, the list will become too long for Wikipedia. We would have to add Shahrukh Khan, Dino Morea, Shilpa Shetty (our Kannadi fanatic won't be happy then...;))...), Aishwarya Rai (I would be happy....;))...), Dilip Kumar and so on.... Tell me would they fit the definition of Marathi people. Also immigrants to Mumbai, never like calling themselves Maharashtrians or Marathi people. Another thing being this is an ethno-linguistic group, not a regional group.

As far as Norman Pritchard is concerned, he was not the first Indian to win medal. He won in 1930s when India was still a British colony. After independence Jadhav was the first Indian to win medal. Please do NOT belittle the great man's achievements.

I think most things are clear now. From now on, in future, please discuss on talk page before removing authentic information as POV or adding tags.

--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 14:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Pritchard did win it for India. Please mention " Independent India" if you want to make a claim of "first individual medal" and Maj Rathore also exists as an individual medal winner. Ratan Tata is born in Mumbai as were as his ancestors, that is different from a Shah Rukh who was born in Delhi and lived there till he was in his 20's. Raj Kapoor was not born in Maharashtra, though he stayed here, but Rishi /Randhir was as are their children ( ie Kareena) so none of them may be of your "original marathi stock" but compared to a Shah rukh or a Dilip kumar those born here in the state have a stronger claim to it. As mentioned if those born here speak the language do they qualify even if they are Parsi ?

And I dont know why Haphar added Balwinder Sandhu. He removed it though.

Haphar, I know you are doing it in good faith, but the list should be limited to Marathi-speakers. If you want, we can create another article say "List of notable residents of Maharshtra" or something like that. You did a good job though.

--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 15:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zaheer Khan is from Shrirampur.He is a Maharashtrian since his mother-tongue is Marathi.mahawiki 15:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ettiquette[edit]

This is not a systemised vandalism. Someone with a POV that does not match yours is not a vandal. A vandal is someone who adds unrelated stuff which is not linked at all to the article. If you want to keep the article "ethno-linguistic" ,and if you want to keep people who have been in Maharashtra for some 3-4 generations out of your " Marathi People" article ( ie the Tata's) then please rename the article as Marathi "speaking" people. ( and if Farokh Engineer happens to know and "speak" Marathi despite being Parsi- does that still keep him out ?) I do not know of any other article on wiki that tries to be so parochial so I am not sure if it is the right way to go, but I am sure you will hear of it if such ethno linguistic cuts are O.K or not.Haphar 17:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haphar, if they speak Marathi, I have no objection to them being mentioned here. But the people themselves do not want to be called Marathi themselves. I don't know much about Parsis, but almost all other ethnic people, then they may be Punjabi or Gujarati or Kannadi, they don't want to call themselves Marathi. Even Parsis use a dialect of Farsi, highly influenced by Gujarati, then how can they be called Marathi. It's a group of people whose "Mother-Tongue" (Maayboli in Marathi) is Marathi. Marathi is based in their ethos. And that's what this group is.
See, I have utmost respect for the Tatas. I consider them as fellow "original" Mumbaikars. But, they are still not Marathi. They haven't adopted the language or the culture as yet. As it is this group is defined by ones who are traditionally Marathi or whose mother-tongue is Marathi. For example Zaheer Khan is Maharashtrian because his mother-tongue is Marathi. But then Munaf Patel is not Marathi, although he stays in Mumbai and plays for Mumbai because his mother-tongue is not Marathi. Similarly for others in this list. Maybe after 4-5 generations more, when the Tatas become more Marathianized, then they will be automatic inclusions in this group. But now, it won't be correct to put them in this group. Even the Tatas themselves wouldn't like it. (Although Ratan Tata said he is a Maharashtrian, while accepting "Maharashtra Gaurav" award. But for that see Maharashtrian article - The word has two meanings.)
I mistook Sarvagnya's edits for you. Sorry, I called your edits vandalism. Which they were not.
--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 18:01, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. He thought I made those edits and called it vandalism. Once he realised that someone else did it, the same edits became good faith edits. Ha ha. Sarvagnya 18:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Call the article "People of Marathi origin " then. No cause for confusion then. Haphar 18:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement[edit]

I have even added names to the lists of people on the page, so I am trying to "add" to the article and not take away from it. However the confrontational approach, not listening to others ( and the jumping in attacking comments by Rock Star) are not looking to resolve the issue but raise temperatures. So let me reiterate- there is a lot of good stuff in the article, and if the disputes go away you can work on adding even more to other articles you have interest in. But without citations there would be questions asked and the dispute would linger. Over the rest of the article and it's contents and disputes you all can continue. However I request that sources be given for the " significant population in Israel" as well as "significan population in Mauritius" claim. From the same logic you gave for Parsi's not being a part of Maratha people, Jews from Mumbai do not qualify as Marathi.Haphar 19:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also pls check the following links to get more names to add to your lists. :- [4] and [5] . Haphar 20:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Haphar, these guys, Arya and Mahwiki have done a really good job. I mean the last time I came here the article was a small stub. But they have really expanded it brilliantly. And if instead of appreciating their effort if we go on asking for citations and start finding small glitches then it certainly is not good. They deserve a good pat on the back. I mean, both of them seem to be new to Wikipedia and we must not sledge them rightaway.
As for Marathi Jews, Haphar, you don't seem to know about their history. No probs. I will provide some info. Bene Israeli Jews have been living in Maharashtra for more than 2000 years. That's a pretty long time. They have totally absorbed Marathi culture in them. Not only do they speak Marathi but they think Marathi. Their surnames are similar to those of Marathi Hindus (Cheulkar, Masurkar, etc..). In these 2000 years they have intermarried with Marathi Hindus and have adopted Marathi culture. But most of all, they refer to themselves as Marathi manoos (person). Tell you what there is a Marathi daily in Israel. For more information on Bene Israel (aka Marathi Jews) check the Wikipedia article on them. And all this info is from Wikipedia itself, the net and reputed newspapers like "The Times Of India". I think you must have confused Baghdadi Jews with Bene Israel. Baghdadi Jews are miniscule in population and very few of those are there in Maharashtra. Most of Baghdadi Jews are in Kolkata and Gujarat. So, one can't call them Marathi. Certainly, those haven't been mentioned in this article, I guess.
Last, but not the least, Keep Rockin' in Good Faith !!!!
--NRStalk|mail 04:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely ! it's a good job and it can be made better by clarifying some facts so that they can withstand scrutiny. For instance Bene Israel can be mentioned in the article itself ! with the wiki link so that people know about this aspect. I think it should also be highlighted that Jews stayed in India ( and Maharashtra in particular) with NO prosecution ( except maybe by the Portugese) unlike most other places where Jews stayed.
However the Bene Israel article shows them to be about .08% of the population of Israel. I do not think that can be seen as "significant" marathi presence. So the way around it can be to reword the table and name it "Areas with marathi presence" rather than "Areas with significant Marathi presence". Haphar 09:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The above troll is vgowda.The Kannadi fanatic is back again!Maharashtrians are best!

Jai Hind Jai Maharashtra. mahawiki 05:17, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my, why are you guys hellbent on stalking us. Don't you have any other work. First of all, mind your language Kiritnut. Mumbai is Maharashtra's. Who is ruling Bangalore ? Gujarati Muslim Azim Premji !!!! You are fools. Don't you talk anything about our Empire ! We are extremely proud people. Not like you, who have left all your pride away. Kannnadi propaganda machine is going allguns blazing. Your gang of Kannadabadi, Sarvagni, Vgowda and you will not succeed. Please stop this nonsense. I hope you fools get wisdom first
-Arya Rajya Maharashtra 04:46, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of new section 'Festivals'[edit]

I have added new section 'Festivals' in this article. Not sure whether we should keep it here or move it to other main articles like Maharashtra. Work is still in progress...we may decide where it fits most and retain it either here or move it to appropriate article. Thanks!

Info4all 23:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Marathi People[edit]

I think Gururaj Deshpande (sycamore) is Kanadi. Anyone agrees? - Parag Jagtap

This section and List of people from Maharashtra have a lot of duplicate entries. I thought of putting a merge notice, but then I realized that List of people from Maharashtra also includes a lot of non-Marathi-speaking people (such as Parsis and Gujaratis). But still, I feel duplicating such a long list is not good. Any suggestions? utcursch | talk 15:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i feel name of Veer Vinak Damodar Savarkar should be added along with Lata Mangeshkar and Sunil Gavaskar...I cant understand why Ritesh Deshmukh name is put ...though he is a maharashtrian ..what is great thing has he done...Even Rajnikant and Rani Laxmibai can be added ,,,,i am talking abt the photo od maharashtrian on Marathi people page .... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yogesh.sakh (talk • contribs) 10:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

Despite requests still have no response on sources for claim of "significant" Maratha population in Israel and Mauritius. Bene Israel as a percentage of Israel population is in decimal points. No info at all on Mauritius. Request sources. Had removed the word significant in infobox, even that has been put back. Please find a way of resolving this, possibilities are- find a source- remove word "significant" or remove Israel and Mauritius from the list.Haphar 13:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved Mauritius and Israel to "Other". Pls discuss before reverting. Haphar 15:55, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

States other than those included in the population table may have larger Marathi population than certainly countries like Switzerland or even United Kingdom where Marathi people are a miniscule % of the British Indian population. User:Shakher59 16:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dawood Ibrahim[edit]

i think dawood ibrahim should be included in the other's section,his surname is kaskar,he was born in ratnagiri,and i think he would still be speaking marathi,you cant just selectively exclude people who you dont like,even if many gujarati's wont like jinnah,he is still in the gujarati people list125.63.91.11 06:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course he is marathi. (interpol profile of Dawood confirms that). But it makes no sense to include him here as he is so famous that he holds his own article Dawood Ibrahim.

disagreement regarding related ethnic groups[edit]

An anonymous user has left this comment on my user page [6]. I am copying it here to carry on with the discussion:

With regard to Marathi People -related ethnic groups , you "strictly speaking people can only be linguistically related". On what basis, you make this assertion ? i am a Maharastrian Deshastha . However, Kannada speaking Deshastha are so closely related that we never had problems getting married to each other !!.

I have requested 74.9.96.126 to continue the discussion here. There seems to be some confusion(to me or to him/her?) regarding the edit under question. So this has been my reply so far(on my user page):

OK first thing the edit summary you have written to me about "strictly speaking people can only be linguistically related" wasn't written by me but by User:AMbroodEY in this edit: [7] If you are talking about my revert of your edit [8] then that was because related peoples section usually refers to the ethnic-racial categories to which a community belongs.

Request 74.9.96.126 to add his points here so we can discuss the issue. Thank you --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 13:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Related ethnic groups: Indo-european & Indo-iranian now refer to language group rather than ethnic. As a Marathi man, I believe, I have stronger links, ethnically and culturally to the Dravidian population of Andhra, Karnataka , Kerala or Tamil Nadu than to Europeans such as Russians, French or German or even to the Iranians. I am a Maharastrian Deshastha brahmin. Kannada speaking Deshastha brahmin are so closely related to us related that we freely intermarry !! 24.187.26.104 23:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)Shakher59 22:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even Lingayts across the borders intermarry. I am not sure as to whether the related categoies should include only linguistic categories or also (geopgraphically) neighbouring groups. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 05:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lingayats and Deshahtas make a very small percentage of Marathi population like the Bene Israelis... Plus Kannada Deshashta Brahmins were originally Maharashtrians who moved south. The question is not what you feel but facts. Most Marathi population has Indo-Aryan origins, and the template must reflect that. Konkanastha Brahmins are said to be descedents of West Asian immigrants while Bene Israelis are decendents of Hebrews... Should we put that in the template? No.... It is inevitable that given the geographical proximity there are bound to be communities that are heterogenous product of the two... Amey Aryan DaBrood© 11:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The other contested area is that of the dravidian lineage of the maharashtrians. Maharashtrians do not have any genetic similarity to the dravidians though culturally some habits might be dravidian influenced such as coconuts and rice being included in the diet. This too, is limited only to to the konkan and southern regions of maharashtra. I'm a deshashtha brahmin myself and my great grandfather was C.Hayavadana Rao who who was an eminent historian and wrote the mysore gazette and did extensive research on south Indian history as well as maratha History. He has personally stated in his works that Maratha or maharashtrians are in no way genetically related to the dravidians. They are more closely related to the Indo greek tribes who moved south during the second wave of greek incursions. Greeks are not distant to Indians and most of us have greek lineage and they have contributed considerably to the north indian and west indian genetic pool. Coming to the huns, the Huns left a mark when they arrived in India during 4th century. Indo Scythian lineage needs no explanation. And maharashtrians do not resemble kannada or telugu people physically. Though there might be similarities among kannada deshastha and marathi deshasthas, we must remember that the kannada deshastha brahmins were originally maharashtrians. It is not one's feeling of nearness to an ethnic group that proves the basis of the ethnic origin but genetic tests and historical facts. I hope that settles the issue.Jcavale 09:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK it seems that the related groups category has become a very contested entry; so the editor of the template have removed that section. [9]. So I guess that ends this issue.--Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 05:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"related groups" info removed from infobox[edit]

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 17:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Significant population[edit]

What is the definition of significant population, 5000, 20,000, 100,000 .... ? If it is 20,000 , then there are probably more than that number in USA. I am not sure one can say that Mauritius & Israel has that many "Marathi People" because although the number may have been higher originally but over the decades there has been mixing with other communities —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.187.26.104 (talk) 02:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A reliable reference has been added as to the number of Marathi people in USA. One editor believes that is not a notable fact. However, he has no problem with leaving Mauritius & Israel alone as places with significant population of Marathi people. The references citing these don't seem to be that strong. In fact, I have added them myself. Obviously this editor is not being objective. The whole Marathi people article is riddled with information without any citations. Thanks. --74.9.96.122 (talk) 12:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all let me inform you , in case you dont already know that you are not supposed to remove fact tags. Second please understand that Wikipedia has some rules and regualtions. Oner of them is: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information Also seeWikipedia is not a directory. Wikipedia is not a place to indiscriminatley add any information you like. What is the percentage of Marathi people in US. The article states that 1 out of 7494 Americans speak Marathi. That's 0.013%. Not even 0.1%. If every country where a Marathi person lives is to be included(and it will happen if poeple keep insisting that "because I live in xyz country, it should be included", like you did) then we will have to add 100 countries to the list.The reference you provided may be reliable but that does not make the subject itself notable.
The ethnologue is a reputed institution working on languages. It is quoted very frequently for linguistic information. So if you have any doubts about the authenticity of its information please feel free to send them a mail. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 12:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. D' Souza, you did not answer my question regarding defining what is significant population. There are only 4000 Bene Israeli left in India but that gets a paragraph. A large number of Marathi people were taken to Mauritius more than a century ago. Very few, if any speak Marathi mainly because the colonial authorities forbade languages other than english & french. Having said that they do retain a distinct Marathi identity. In fact, there is a separate Marathi Mandal of Mauritius Marathi people in London. Talking about London or UK, i don't have any problem with removing that country from significant population section because I lived most of my life in UK and knew how few Marathi were there compared to Punjabi or Gujarati people. The Gulf countries I am sure have large number of Marathis but inclusion of them in the table will depend on once again how you define " significant" By the way, 35,000 people is not a small number regardless of what % . By % parsi probably are fewer than that of Indian population. would you recommend removing articles on that community ? Thanks. --74.9.96.122 (talk) 13:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no hard rule as to what constitutes a signnificant population. But I am sure that even by the most lenient standards 0.013% does not make it significant. The reason that Bene Israelis are mentioned in this article is because they are a unique sub group within this community. You dont mind UK being removed because you don't live there , isnt it? :-). Tommmorow someone from UK will insist that UK should be added to the infobox, next someone from Australia , then NZ and so on. Do you get what I am trying to convey . All it will end up doing is make the infobox into a very long list of countries. Take my advice and simply mention Anglosphere. That will cover all English speaking countries. That is what have done on the Mangalorean Catholics article.--Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 05:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You got it wrong, my friend !. I am a British citizen and have spent major part of my life there. Three generations of my extended family live there. And so I know how few Marathis are in UK compared with USA where I live now and that is why I would not include UK as having any significant Marathi population. Bene israeli are unique. Agreed but so are all the other castes and communities in Maharasthra in their own way ! Thanks. --74.9.96.122 (talk) 13:20, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still! It becomes original research. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 05:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Deepak , you seemed to have very passionate belief regarding this section. I don't understand why adding USA was original research when a good reference was cited ?. The word Anglosphere does not seem without controversy so let's leave that one out as well as USA. I would recommend removing israel and Mauritius as well because the majority of "Marathi population" there does not speak Marathi or even identify themselves as Marathi. I would like to see comments by other editors or administrators on this issue. --24.187.26.104 (talk) 14:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not doubting the accuracy of your reference. The point is you can find 100 similar refrences for 100 different countries where Marathis stay. Isn't it much beter to collectively club them into a single entity which is more representative of the wide spread of migrant Marathis. What I meant by original research was your statement that "Britan does not have enough Marathis.." and so forth , which came from your personal expreinces rather than from some reputable source. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 17:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mr. D'Souza, you can not and I repeat can not lump UK & USA together because although the two countries speak the same language, the similarity ends there. The two cultures have evolved quite separately so lumping them together under "Anglosphere" is not a good idea. As you rightly said, you will find Marathi manoos in every corner of the world, so why not just put " Rest of the World" ? I am confused your making point that my statement that "Britan does not have enough Marathis.." being original research. I had no intention of that statement appearing in the main article and so the question of original research does not arise.--24.187.26.104 (talk) 19:57, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh! I am tired and this is my final post on this topic. When you say something like "Talking about London or UK, i don't have any problem with removing that country from significant population section because I lived most of my life in UK and knew how few Marathi were there compared to Punjabi or Gujarati people." it is original research. Original because you as an editor have done this "research", not some verified and reputable researcher. I would like to add a lot of stuff to articles like Konkani language which I know by obsevation but cannot since I cannot find some book or website by some proper linguist which proves that it is correct. Such original research runs the risk of being lopsided(it is from the editors own environment) and incorrect(it cannot be verified). Like I said : You may be ok with not including UK , some Marathi from UK will come around soon and say that you are wrong(and so on). I am wasting my time here. Please go ahead and add/remove any country you are pleased with. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 17:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi[edit]

hi mi deepali mala mns ch web var sadasya banayach ahe , mi kay kru, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.184.58.51 (talk) 11:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

unfortunately this place is called wikipedia. This is not MNS's property and we do not direct people how and were they become MNS volunteers. you better keep away from here. --Onef9day (talk) 14:14, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

is ths article is written by a CKP person[edit]

in the community section, the castism described,

i can clearly see the partiality given to CKPs, expressing their good people in that section,

none of other castes great people are expressed here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.243.109.146 (talk) 13:22, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to edit this article but make sure what you add is relevant to this article and if possible add citation as well. Hope to see your contributions to wikipedia in general and this article in particular. --Onef9day (talk) 14:00, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

About surnames[edit]

Gavaskar,and Mayekar are surnames used by people who have their roots in Goa and who later migrated to Konkan and then Desh,during Portuguese rule,Gavaskars are from Gavshi and Mayekars are from Maye..

are they Marathi? or Konkani?

Nijgoykar (talk) 02:47, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of Indo-Aryan term[edit]

I wonder why Indo-Aryan term keeps repeating again and again when it is already used into intro section and opener. It looks so odd when one reads this article. I thing it needs some rework. General population can be considered as Indo-Aryan but Marathi community is a mixture of several smaller sections. Say Davidian(specially Kannadigas) and others like parsis, Israelis etc. also make a good composition of the community. Moreover marathis are not just aryans (i guess). they can be the greeks, Indo-Scythians, huns, Davidian and aryans. I think repeating Indo-Aryan again and again is useless to readers. and it is very sad to see just majority get hi-lights while minorities are left aside. --Swaminworld (talk) 04:17, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well there are no pure Indo-Aryans, or Dravidians per se... Indo-Aryan especially in scholarly parlance would be used to refer to speakers of one of the Indo-Aryan languages of which Marathi is one... 216.171.6.147 (talk) 13:07, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The term Indo-Aryan should be used only to describe a language group and not in case of categorizing people.The theory has been outdated.eg:Hindi,Marathi,Konkani, Gujarati,Sindhi are belong to Indo-Aryan group of languages and Kannada,Tamil,Telugu,Malayalam,Tulu belong to the Dravidian group.

Nijgoykar (talk) 12:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

However, every region in the world has ethnic groups. Ethnicity is not RACE at all. Ethnicity is defined by beliefs, culture, religion, lifestyle, geographic location and Nation. Sometimes Several ethnic groups overlap. For example Konkani being a sub ethnic group of Marathi, which itself is a subgroup to Umbrella Ethnic Group called Indo-Aryan. Indo-Aryan is not a RACE. It is just that someone gave it a name Indo-Aryan. You can call it Indo-Dravidian. In ancient times we did not have states like we have now. At that time people were lived in small groups and it is just a guess that some vedic sanskrit speaking people migrate to indian subcontinent and mingled with already living people. Migrations do happen all the time. Today many Marathi have migrated to other countries. BTW Konkani subgroup overlaps with Kannada Konkani subgroup too. Any ethnic group has subgroupings, sometimes overlapping with other ethnicities as well. Large population of MH and Guj is descendant of Indo-Scythians. It is not that they are purely Indo-Scythians. Whatever culture you see in western line today is result of long assimilation of several ethnicities giving birth to a unique sub ethnicities. Similarly you can see eastern part has different culture. Suppose today large population from Bengal migrates to Pune, after several centuries a new ethnic group will develop pertaining qualities of both parent ethnic groups. It is just a question of how societies grow. Indo-Aryan is certainly not a RACE but surely an ethnic group. Refs : South Asian ethnic groups, Indo-Aryan peoples, Homosapiens. Please do not confuse RACE with Self-Respect Movement or Dravidistan. --Onef9day Talk! 22:42, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Certain Marathi communities are of Scytho-Dravidian ethnicity. Credible evidence below. I agree the article is heavy on the term Indo-Aryan. Looks like an Aryan supremacist article. Nevertheless, I am making an edit. Kindly do not edit abruptly, before discussing on this talk page.

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=LnoREHdzxt8C&pg=PA31&dq=scytho+dravidian+maratha&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAGoVChMIl5nD0YD6yAIVxsamCh0SDgSd#v=onepage&q=scytho%20dravidian%20maratha&f=false

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=8WNEcgMr11kC&pg=PA71&dq=scytho+dravidian+maratha&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAmoVChMIl5nD0YD6yAIVxsamCh0SDgSd#v=onepage&q=scytho%20dravidian%20maratha&f=false

Amit20081980 (talk) 10:03, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


This section ("Usage of the term Indo-Aryan") of the talk page has already made it clear that Marathi people cannot be neatly classified as either Indo-Aryans, Scytho-Dravidians, or Indo-Dravidians. Yet, the reference to "Indo-Aryan" simply does not go away. I am removing a mention of the word 'Indo-Aryan' in the sub-section "Food". Further, I am also adding this page to the category called 'Dravidian people', reason being this page is already a part of the category 'Indo-Aryan people'.

KIndly do not make abrupt changes. Request users to read this section of the talk page first

Amit20081980 (talk) 09:53, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

template[edit]

ok i have created a template to represent marathi people better.--Onef9day Talk! 17:24, 3 April 2011 (UTC) {{Marathis}}[reply]

Marathi surnames[edit]

Half of the surnames mentioned here in this article as Marathi surnames are of Goan Konkani origin. eg:Gavaskar,Madkaikar both Gavshi and Madkai are in Goa not in Maharashtra. Nijgoykar (talk) 15:25, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rajinikanth 2010 - still 113555 crop.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Rajinikanth 2010 - still 113555 crop.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Rajinikanth 2010 - still 113555 crop.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:30, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vikram Pandit[edit]

This guy has to be the most famous Marathi person in the USA. Why is he not mentioned? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.40.209.178 (talk) 22:25, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Unnecessary Use of Indo-Aryan[edit]

It looks like the article is in a tone of unnecessary emphasis on the Indo-Aryan ethnicity. Marathis is actually Dravidian. So please rectify this mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.245.162.223 (talk) 05:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Images of famous Maharashtrians[edit]

The size of this section is clearly getting out of hand. We need some rules on inclusion of a person in this section. Any suggestions ? For contemporary people, I would restrict it to eminent people like Lata or Sachin Tendulkar who have been honored with Bharat Ratna or Padma Vibhushan. Are Reitesh Deshmukh or Urmila Matondkar more noteworthy than say V. Shantaram or Nutan ?Jonathansammy (talk) 17:45, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Martial tradition[edit]

I have removed almost the entire content of the "Martial tradition" section, which was basically a massive dose of synthesis trying to link the Maratha Empire to the Marathi people. The empire relied extensively on local treaties and armies, it did not govern from the centre and the extent to which Marathi people (as opposed to Maratha people) were key to its success was not explained. Do not try to coatrack puffery. - Sitush (talk) 21:14, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sitush, Let me try and come up with a better write-up next time. But even before doing research, I would like to highlight a few points based on common sense:

  • Agreed that not all population from the Maratha polity was ethnic Marathi, since Marathis ruled almost whole of India. But what about the fact that all rulers/princes were Marathis? For e.g. the Maharajas (Scindias, Holkars), the Peshwa (Bhats) and the Chhatrapati (Bhosales).
  • It did govern from the centre - Emperor Chhatrapati of Satara (de jure) and Peshwa of Pune (de facto). Any doubts?
  • If Marathis are not key to the success of Maratha Empire, then who is? Greeks, Africans?
  • According to Encyclopaedia Britannica, Marathas led by Shivaji ended Islamic rule in India[1]

- Amit20081980 — Preceding undated comment added 17:18, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/595729/Bal-Gangadhar-Tilak

History[edit]

This section needs serious revision. it reads more as history of rulers of Maharashtra rather than history of marathi people. Although related, there should be more on social history of the community. Also, there is absolutely nothing about Marathi people under the British colonial rule and the period following Indian independenceJonathansammy (talk) 20:39, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, more details of history can be included, but as name of this article is Marathi people so there is difficult to find online sources regarding people specific history. We can improve History of Maharashtra. One should understand that this page is not about History of Maharashtra or Culture of Maharashtra or Maratha empire. Here more focus should be on Anthropology and Sociology of Marathi people. I think section of "caste" needs expansion, because there are far more communities or castes of Marathi people than mentioned in this article.--Human3015TALK  21:09, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Marathi people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:40, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Marathi people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:40, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Maratha Navy[edit]

Currently the naval arm of the Marathas has no mention at all, which certainly deserves a mention. Hence I am adding it (under History). Kindly do not make changes without discussing on talk page.

Amit20081980 (talk) 18:07, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


How reliable is the reference on Kanhoji Angre establishing a base on Andaman ?[[For a brief period, the Maratha Navy also established its base at the Andaman Islands in the Bay of Bengal.[23] ]] I can not find any other references to corroborate it. I suggest removing it until you find additional information on this topic. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 18:33, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Remove template of citations for 'Verification'[edit]

This article has now become a well refrenced article...so plz remove the template — Preceding unsigned comment added by MansonT (talk • contribs) 18:46, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Flag[edit]

@MansonT: Please explain how does File:Flag of the Maratha Empire.svg belong in the infobox? Marathi people and Maratha Empire are not the same thing. utcursch | talk 19:45, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Marathi people. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 14:06, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marathi people. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 06:05, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

marathi diaspora[edit]

earlier this page used to show marathis in other countries with population but now it's showing only indian population Menovus01 (talk) 16:14, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The term Ghati[edit]

A2carville, Since the word 'Ghati' has a section to itself, I believe it can feature in the lede. It is used to refer to the villagers living along the Western Ghats. The word itself is not obviously that much pejorative like say "Bhaiya" in Maharashtra or as you have inferred in the edit summary, "The N word" for African-Americans. We can very well remove the word 'Pejorative' and can frame it like The exonym Ghati used especially for Marathi people from the villages in Western Ghats is sometimes used for all Marathi people. Will it be OK? Jonathansammy, would you weigh in? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:38, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Photo gallery of Notable people[edit]

A new photo gallery section on notable Marathi people was added recently to this page, however if you check any Wikipedia featured or Good article on different peoples from around the world, you will not find any galleries of their respective famous people. See here [10] and [11] and If the goal is get this page to a Good article or featured article status, then I recommend we remove this gallery.List of Marathi people has photos that also appear in this gallery.Interested people can always go to that page to see a full list of famous marathi people.I have written a separate note to User:Morekar already but would like to have views of other editors in this matter too.Thanks. Jonathansammy (talk) 16:26, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Marathi Hindu ceremonies[edit]

We have images related to wedding and death. It would be good to have images related to Barse, and Jawal. Thanks. Jonathansammy (talk) 19:56, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Marathi_people&oldid=1208786539"