Talk:Rajput: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:11, 26 December 2005

This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions:

Announcement

Can you all try to rebuild this article at Rajput/temp and Talk:Rajput/temp? I can assure you this article is not going to get unprotected until a final version of the page is settles at Rajput/temp and I know that a lot of people aren't happy with the current state of this page. I hope you can all make an article that all of you (or at least a vast majority) are happy with. It wouldn't be a bad idea just to restart the article from scratch as a group, but at least find a version of the page that you are all happy with and we can unprotect the main article. As a side note, the amount of unrelated junk arriving on this talk page is unbelievable and is clogging up the page. Fir e Fox 12:50, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox did you warn Bachman for his insult against Indians? Should he be banned for NPA? Secondly having a separate page,logically, does not seem any different then the main page. People can disagree on this page also. For once Bachman is correct that issues need to be resolved. Let us take issues one by one. 1) Should rajput muslim be mentioned on rajput page?

--DPSingh 14:10, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No I didn't. No he shouldn't. And it is different. You can edit it all you like whilst it is out of public view. It's only your fault if you can't agree on a suitable verson. Fir e Fox 16:57, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why you told me about NPA and not him? It seems he being an admin knew about NPA and still willingly broke the rule. Or do rules apply differently to admins?

Lastly, just look at the archives. If people here could not agree by filling up 17 archives do you really think they will be able to reach an understanding. Now the time has come to take some decisions. Sticking point is inclusion of musalman rajput.

Also Raja has called Suryabandhu, Surya Bandar. This is highly derogatory. Since it is not English you would not understand it. I am feeling like replying to him here unless I hear something from you.

--DPSingh 17:14, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If whatever you want to reply has nothing to do with article, use his talk page. The NPA rule does not not-apply to admins, it is no different at all. If you want to risk reporting him for a personal attack, take it to the administrators noticeboard. I warn people when I see it, not when someone tells me to. Fir e Fox 17:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

this is offtopic, DPS is referring to a sarcastical remark of mine on Zora's talkpage; the only personal attacks I pleaded guilty of were "clown" and "incompetent", which perfectly pale in comparison with the vitriolic mudslinging from the part of their addressees. I realize there are some editors here who are uninterested in a solution. I will ask the arbcom to review the matter as soon as I can spare the time. dab (ᛏ) 17:43, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Solution is not forth coming because of your lack of knowledge bachman. When you can claim that muslims started claiming rajput status during the time of British, just to justify the fact there names started appearing in british books, this is pits of ignorance. This time your muslim friends will also disagree with you.

And you remark is racist and not sarcastic.

--DPSingh 17:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

yawn, I was referring to the sources brought forward. stop cursing me, start citing sources. We know there were "Muslim Rajputs" at least from the time of the British Raj. If you want to insist they existed even earlier, point us to your sources. dab (ᛏ) 18:03, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is the point no source before british calls them rajputs. Website link you pushed, iso* also mentions the fact that some rajputs converted to Islam but these converts are not rajputs. Problem is people like you are supporting a POV which has no basis and the dispute is continuing.

--DPSingh 18:08, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RFC

Firefox: What is the next step of RFC? Do I need to do anything? I see bachman has mobilized his supporters to the fullest even scaring away some hindus.

--DPSingh 18:08, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Look. If you knew what you were doing you would read up on WP:RFC, it's all there. Fir e Fox 18:10, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Raja you are a Suar ki aulad

--DPSingh 17:37, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Clans

Brothers I have created small stubs for each of these clans. Some have more info then the others. Sisodia can you add more sisodiya gotra/shakha and also expand on them? Suryabandhu would you like to expand on Pundir kula? SS/Shonan what would you like to focus on? Digvijay can you add some more chauhan gotra and see if you like Deora page?

Also if you have more info on any other shakha/gotra have a go at it.

Does anyone know if Sumrendra is around?

Suryavanshi
- BirGoojur: Churu
  - Sikarwar: Agra
- Dogra: Jammu
- Guhilote: Chittor/Udaipur
  - Sisodia: Chittor/Udaipur
  - Ranawat
- Kachwaha: Narwar/Jaipur
  - Kalyanot
  - Rajawat
  - Shekhawat
  - Jasrotia: Jasrot
- Pundir: Pundri
- Rathore: Marwar/Kannauj/Jodhpur/Bikaner
  - Jodha
  - Khokra
  - Kumpawat
  - Jaitawat
  - Karnot
Agnivanshi
- Chauhan: Ajmer
  - Deora: Sirohi
  - Hada: Hadoti/Ranathambore
  - Bhaduria: Bhadawar
  - Sonigurra: Jalore
- Solanki: Anahilawad (Patan)
  - Baghel
- Paramara, Ponwar (Parmar): Mount Abu/Dhar
- Pratihara (Parihara): Rajasthan, Kannauj
Chandravanshi
- Bhatti: Jaisalmer
- Bundela: Orchha
- Chandela: Mahoba/Khajuraho
- Chavda: Anahilwad
- Dahia: Haryana
- Katoch: Uttarakhand
- Jhala: Jhalavad
- Jadeja: Kutch
- Banaphar: Mahoba
  - Pathania: Uttarakhand
- Tuar: Delhi/Gwalior

Shivraj Singh 20:35, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shivraj, Here is info on Sisodias

Vansh Suryavansh

Kul (clan) Guhilot

Shakha Sisodia

Khamp/Gotra Chandawat, Ranawat, Shaktawat, Sarangdevot, Sangawat, Chandrawat, Kshemawat, Suhawat, Ahariya.

Notes:

(1) Sangawats are sometimes considered a division of Chandawat and sometimes a separate gotra.

(2) The Royal House of Mewar belongs to the Ranawat gotra.

-- sisodia

Shivraj, I will add some more chauhan gotra. Deora looks decent. I will add description of Surtan Deora, a teenager king who defeated many armies that Akbar sent against him. Problem was not bravery or sinews but money to mobilize big armies.

--DPSingh 18:11, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 139: / Line 139: @@
 -- sisodia
+Shivraj, I will add some more chauhan gotra.  Deora looks decent. I will add description of Surtan Deora, a teenager king who defeated many armies that Akbar sent against him. Problem was not bravery or sinews  but money to mobilize big armies.
+--[[User:DPSingh|DPSingh]] 18:11, 26 December 2005 (UTC)