User talk:Admantine123

How?

Can someone explain to me that, how's this Sangram Singh Patan article eligible for wikipedia article

Rajmama (talk) 13:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Rajmama, why this message to me? I am not the creator of that article.Admantine123 (talk) 16:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Vikas Shakya for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vikas Shakya is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vikas Shakya until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:47, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Siddharth Sukhlal kushwaha moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Siddharth Sukhlal kushwaha, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DSP2092^talk 18:32, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Upendra Kushwaha

Thanks, will do. Admantine123 (talk) 02:24, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on Narayan Singh Kushwah

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Narayan Singh Kushwah, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:25, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Admantine123. Thank you for your work on Ram Autar Shakya. User:Maliner, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

I have marked this article as patrolled as the subject passes WP:NPOL. Thank you.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Maliner}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Maliner (talk) 17:22, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, will expand it. Admantine123 (talk) 17:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Neofetch

The material you keep restoring violates WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:RS. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:17, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Unconstructive Revision Restore

Hello Admantine123

you seem to have restored Amar Singh I to your own changes you made a while ago, i understand that you did so to revert vandalism but this caused loss of a lot of info about campaigns of Mahabat Khan, Abdullah Khan,Aziz Koa and other details regarding him. The revision you reverted to talks more about Pratap(in that too some of its historicity is disputed) than Amar Singh. Also info about his involvement in literary works he undertook was lost. Please do not revert the page entirely back to your own changes on occurrence of any future vandalism.

Feel free to expand the article with any info you want to.

Thank You. Mewar11111 (talk) 18:46, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

You have used poor sources and removed the things from high quality source like that of Early. This is called vandalism and pov edit. Admantine123 (talk) 04:16, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Please add back any 'relevant' info you think is missing From Early in the article.

the sources i have used is R.C. Majumdar and Ram Vallabh Somani (who has done one of the most comprehensive research on history of Mewar). you are free to research about their credibility or take second opinion from any user who is a history scholar. Can you mention me what are your basis for calling their work as 'poor sources' then i might be able to clear your doubts

Reverting back to changes you made years ago i do not think is appropriate. this will undo all the efforts done by any other user

in your revision, under section 'Role in mughal-mewar conflict' two para's were dedicated to Pratap and Amar Singh role was summed up in few line, it lacked any details about the campaign and only mention their commander name . i have added info about their campaigns. Expanded it than before none of any previous relevant info is lost Mewar11111 (talk) 07:07, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't question R.C Majumdar as he is a prominent historian. I had doubt on that Mateswari publication source. Because most of such regional publication may have some pov with respect to Rajput history. They tend to glorify the events rather than observing it neutrally. Which is often visible from the language. I dispute your removal of that quote of Amar Singh's submission before jahangir, which was reliably sourced.- Admantine123 (talk) 07:37, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dinanath Kushwaha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deoria.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Manipulating source to distort facts ? Regarding Kushwaha article

Hello Admantine123

It seems like you are trying to distort facts by selectively omitting text/facts from the sentences of the very sources you use.

Example :

This is the text you added on Sep 21 , 2023

"The communities which merged into this caste cluster includes Marrar, Mali, Panar, Shakya, Maurya and Saini besides the three castes of Koeri, Kachhi and Murao, which originally formed the part of this cluster."

Source - Patel, Mahendra Lal (1997). Awareness in Weaker Section: Perspective Development and Prospects

This is the original text

"A number of families belonging to these caste groups, namely, Kachhi, Kachhwaha, Kushwaha, Mali, Marrar, Saini, Sonkar, Murai, Shakya, Mourya, Koyri, Koeri, and Panara have come closer to each other and have started intermarrying"

Question: Original text has the 'Kachhwaha' mentioned, which you omitted ! Can you please explain why this was done ?

NOTE: This can't be a mistake because you copy pasted this exact sentence from source in citation "_{A number of families belonging to these caste groups, namely, Kachhi, Kushwaha, Mali, Marrar, Saini, Murai, Shakya, Mourya, Koyri, Koeri, and Panara have come closer to each other and have started intermarrying.} " The only thing missing here is the 'Kachhwaha' community and the only way to do that is to specifically remove it from original sentence and then paste manipulated sentence as citation.

GlynClarke (talk) 00:57, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

GlynClarke, That is not said in the context of Kachhwaha Rajput, that is said in context of Kachhi caste, the term Kachhwaha has never been described by any author as Kachhwaha Rajput clan of Jaipur, they are saying that in context of Kachhi caste of agriculturist. Second thing is please don't make Wikipedia a place to write your pseudo historical assumption that Kachhwaha Rajputs and Kushwaha are same. No caste is weaker or stronger in present scenario. You don't need to link yourself with any caste to raise your social status, something you and few editors who choose to edit only selective articles are trying to do here.You think that anyhow merging with a Rajput clan will make you high,but this fact is used by them to claim that you are low and you have nothing to show to the world that's y to gain social recognition you are linking up with them. Be yourself like the Yadav and Jat caste. I am tired reporting disruptive editors who are here for sanskritising purpose.I am not against your caste.Your caste is presently more politically powerful than those with whom you are trying to link. And if even after that you are trying to do that... you are proving yourself low and giving them a chance to say that you are low.Admantine123 (talk) 07:08, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

GlynClarke, terms can be similar. And William Pinch also never said that Kachhwaha stands for that family of Man Singh and all from Jaipur. He was saying about cultivator Kachhwaha. Also in the source of Patel, Mahendra Lal, he wrote Koyri, Koeri as different caste, but they are just different pronunciation. So be selective in including the text from book. In present scenario too the surname Kushwah in Madhya Pradesh is used both by minority Rajput caste and OBC Kushwaha, about whom we are taking here. But outside Madhya Pradesh Kushwaha stand for the agricultural caste cluster of Koeri Kachhi Murao only. Even nowadays a general reader or common Indian will always understand Kushwaha to be the OBC Kushwaha, the agriculturist and except few history reader, no-one knows that there is something like Kachhwaha Rajput. We know that because we have grown up reading mediaeval history. But, the agriculturist Kushwahas are more renowned and produce more Notable politicians presently. It is disgusting to tackle editors who anyhow want to link them with Jaipur family now, by putting pseudo historical assumption. Believe me, there is no need to do so and my advice to all of you is that rather than forging manipulated history, you should preserve what is your real history. Admantine123 (talk) 07:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

(1) I have the presented the facts as they are. But it looks like you are pushing your own POV and using SYNTH by selectively omitting words from the very sources you are citing. This is against Wikipedia Guidelines and I will have to raise complain against you if you continue to vandalize.

(2) There is no linking of Kushwaha/Kachhwaha/Kachhi to Kachhwaha of Rajasthan. If you see properly I have not linked Kachhwaha article when mentioning Kachhwaha word in Kushwaha article. But as we very clearly see, in the same sources (whose text you manipulated) Kachhwaha is part of Kushwaha. whether this Kachhwaha is same as Kachhwaha of Rajasthan that is NOT the topic of this discussion , nor is mentioned or implied anywhere.

Pasting the excerpts again from the same legitimate sources:

>> Original Text from Book "_{Kushvaha-kshatriya identity was espoused by agricultural communities well known throughout the Gangetic north for an expertise in small-scale vegetable and (to an increasingly limited extent after the turn of the twentieth century) poppy cultivation. Prominent among them were Kachhi and Murao agriculturalists of central Uttar Pradesh, Kachhvahas of western Uttar Pradesh, and Koiris of Bihar and eastern Uttar Pradesh.}" Source: Peasants and Monks in British India

>> Original Text from Book : "_{The reclassification by identification as other backward classes has placed them in various disadvantageous situations, as political reservations are not permitted to OBC persons. A number of families belonging to these caste groups, namely, Kachhi, Kachhwaha, Kushwaha, Mali, Marrar, Saini, Sonkar, Murai, Shakya, Mourya, Koyri, Koeri, and Panara have come closer to each other and have started intermarrying. They have now developed an all-India network to ensure caste solidarity without jeopardizing the caste interests.}" Source: Awareness in Weaker Section: Perspective Development and Prospects GlynClarke (talk) 12:42, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Then properly write the spelling of Kachhvaha as mentioned in the source. No author have said that they both are same. Pinch mentions them but he is talking about cultivator kachhhvaha of western Uttar Pradesh and not any Rajput clan. Also, learn editing before starting to edit contentious articles. You have left error after your addition on that page. Admantine123 (talk) 12:47, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Also, I am not here to add something on a single article like some people are doing here with two three accounts. So, its not me, who need to care about complaints. Admantine123 (talk) 12:53, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

All spellings are copy-paste from the source as is. Without manipulation like you were doing !So read before you rage. Regarding editing, yes i am learning, thank you for the kind suggestion. GlynClarke (talk) 12:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Copy paste is called WP:Copyvio. You need to learn that too. Admantine123 (talk) 13:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

GlynClarke please take some time from your busy schedule to undo the error message in that article. Admantine123 (talk) 12:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

And I shall definitely try to do that. GlynClarke (talk) 12:57, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

It seems you have the time right now. Why don't you remove that redlink from the quote that is showing up in reference section. Admantine123 (talk) 13:08, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes I am trying to check how to do, meanwhile if you can remove those errors without removing the Kachhwaha mention please feel free to do that. GlynClarke (talk) 13:15, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

You created that mess. Its you who will improve that. I am not going to do that on your behalf. Admantine123 (talk) 13:18, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

You may request someone at WP: Teahouse to do that for you. Admantine123 (talk) 13:24, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

GlynClarke, I will reiterate. Whatever be the intention behind forcibly including the Kachhwaha word, it was not at all necessary as it creates confusion. Kachhi call themselves Kachhwaha and even without linking many will understand it to be Kachhwaha Rajput of Rajasthan. Specially kids visiting Wikipedia. They will argue on social media that jaipur fort was made by their ancestors and will make fun of themselves among others. No aware person from this caste group links themselves with Kachhwaha nor any caste organisation of Kushwaha caste claim Jaipur family to be their own. I have read them differently. Specially in context of Mandal politics, Bihar land Reform drive and their rise along with Yadavs and Kurmis. Whoever trying to link them by manipulating the loopholes of Wikipedia is making fun of themselves and branding their own community as lowly, not having any contribution of their own. Admantine123 (talk) 13:02, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

As already mentioned above (please re-read) there is no linking of Kushwaha/Kachhwaha/Kachhi to Kachhwaha of Rajasthan, mentioned or implied anywhere. At Wikipedia we focus on presenting facts without worrying about socio-political outcomes. You seem to be too emotionally involved to think rationally. GlynClarke (talk) 13:13, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Well, I have nothing to reply on this. I have explained everything already. A genuine advice for you and others is you people should also contribute to Wikipedia by editing other articles rather than appearing only occassionally to edit particular articles by doing minor edits rather than any significant improvement in it. Admantine123 (talk) 13:21, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Lonia

Hello Admantine123. I saw that you had recently been in an editing dispute with another editor on the Lonia article. The other editor has since been blocked, however I wanted to check that you were aware of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring and in particular the three revert rule, which applies to you whether or not you are in the right when changing something back to how it should be. Inadvertently breaking the 3RR rule can have serious consequences including being blocked from editing, so be sure to bear that in mind when you next revert someone else's edits. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:47, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Regarding Kachhwaha article

Below arguments are regarding and limited only to Kachhwaha clan mentioned on the the Kachhwaha article.

There is an overwhelming evidence that the name 'Kushwaha' is and has been used as synonym for Kachhwaha.

I am presenting some of the evidences below. If there are any legitimate and fact based counters ( not emotions, not opinion, not OR ) please present.

I will wait for a week and if there are no reliable counters I will be adding Kushwaha as a synonym of Kachhwaha.

Evidence are below:

(1) Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan (3 Vols)

By James Tod · 1987

Says "Kushwaha or Kachhwaha" are part of 36 royal races

https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Annals_and_Antiquities_of_Rajasthan_3_Vo/9BBTEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=kushwaha%20kachhwaha&pg=PA98-IA1&printsec=frontcover

(2) Indian History Congress , 1970

1970. Part 2. Proceedings of the 32nd session, Jabalpur · Part 2

Says that Kushwaha deteriorated and was called Kachhwaha 

https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Indian_History_Congress/rove0AbvHBsC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=kushwaha+kachhwaha&dq=kushwaha+kachhwaha&printsec=frontcover

(3) Memoranda on Native States in India, Together with a List of Independent Ruling Chiefs, Chiefs of Frontier States, and Other Notables with Their Proper Forms of Address ( 1911, British govt )

Says that "The Jaipur Chief is the head of the Kachhwaha or Kushwaha clan of Rajputs,"

https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.35691/page/n109/mode/2up?q=kushwaha

(4) Memoranda on The Indian States 1935   (British govt)

Says that "The Jaipur Ruling Prince is the head of the Kachwaha or Kushwaha clan of Rajputs and is of the solar line tracing his descent from Kush, one of the sons of Rama, King of Ayodhya."

https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.284347/page/n211/mode/2up?q=kushwaha+kachhwaha

(4) THE MODERN REVIEW  VOL. 83,FEBRUARY-DECEMBER  1948  (govt)

Says that The clan Kachhwaha is the corrupted form of the word Kushwaha

https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.18328/page/n685/mode/2up?q=kushwaha+kachhwaha

(5) Encyclopaedia Asiatica,vol.5,ed.3   

by Balfour,edward

Says the second son of Rama, gave his fresh butter, which gives the sauce an exquisite name to the Kushwaha or Cutchwaha princes of Nirwar and Amber.

https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.94229/page/n237/mode/2up?q=kushwaha+kachhwaha

GlynClarke (talk) 20:36, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

GlynClarke Here you lose. Tod is rejected by Wikipedia community and is considered an unreliable source. None of the sources you have listed are considered reliable and if you add it they will be easily reverted by senior editors like Sitush, Ekdalian and many others. Tod was considered reliable long ago because of his biased views and he is considered someone who was very impressed with Rajputs. You may check the history of Rajput article. There the same source was removed after a long discussion. This is what you call policies. Now personal view is that most of the people I mean Notables using Kushwaha surname nowadays are not those Kachhwaha from whose side you are here. They must be a minority group unable to make even a single MLA of their own. These sources are poor quality and even a newspaper source will defeat them easily. The source of your knowledge, which seems to be the Self Published Sources of Rajput community and their caste website are not reliable on Wiki. Admantine123 (talk) 20:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Most of the sources comes under WP:RAJ and are highly unreliable.

First two are from Tod, and he is too unreliable. This is not Hindi Wikipedia where the editors can add what they read on blogs. Kachhwaha royal house is never known as Kushwaha in history. I am a post graduate in history, they were always called kachhwaha. Their adoption of Kushwaha is a latest phenomenon. I am not surprised as they even claim Yadav and Saini surname to be their own. Actually they lost the race of civilization to the obc castes and want to show the world that they are still relevant, that's why associating themselves with them anyhow. On the policy side.... you try to add them. I will urge the senior editors who will remove them outrightly as they all are very poor opinionated sources. Admantine123 (talk) 20:57, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

OK Thanks. But even if we ignore evidence 1 and 2. Still we have the 4 more evidences from govt sources (indian and British) which clearly establish that Kushwaha has been used as a synonym if Kachhwaha Rajputs. And just to clarify the argument here is NOT where they were actually Kushwaha or not, or related to Kush (Lord Ram) or not, the argument is wether they were referred to as Kushwaha and Kachhwaha both by others or not. In this case, we clearly see that Kushwaha and Kachhwaha were/are being used interchangeably or as a synonym. GlynClarke (talk) 21:05, 7 October 2023 (UTC)