Talk:Pushyabhuti dynasty

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pushyabhuti dynasty article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

The use of the contentious topics procedure has been authorised by the community for pages related to South Asian social groups, including this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.

Former countries

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles

India: History Mid‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup.

Nepal Low‑importance

	Nepal portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nepal, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Nepal-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and add your name to the member's list.NepalWikipedia:WikiProject NepalTemplate:WikiProject NepalNepal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge

I propose to merge Empire of Harsha into this page since it's about the empire of one of the kings of this dynasty. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 22:26, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with suitable copyedit and rearrangement of text. Covers the same topic.--Nizil (talk) 18:16, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Capankajsmilyo: It is a reasonable proposal. Both are short, the dynasty would benefit from greater depth, and the empire material would benefit from greater context. Is there an advantage to merging to the dynasty rather than merging to the ruler Harsha? --Worldbruce (talk) 05:35, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good option too Worldbruce -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 12:30, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I propose against the merging of 'Pushtyabhuti dynasty' page with 'Empire of Harsha' page. Because 'Pushtyabhuti dynasty' page talks about the dynasty while 'Empire of Harsha' page gives details about a great ruler. He is a very important ruler so he needs to be discussed in a separate page.

Though I propose to merge 'Empire of Harsha' page with 'Harsha' page because both page talks about same person. 202.41.10.3 (talk) 14:38, 29 May 2017 (UTC)Ratan Singh[reply]

I also support not merging to the dynasty, but to the biography is ok. Johnbod (talk) 16:07, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; formally proposed this on the Harsha page. Perhaps better to have discussion now on its talk page, Talk:Harsha#Merge. Klbrain (talk) 05:25, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Title

@Highpeaks35: Anjana Motihar Chandra is not a historian - she is a freelance writer. The book is not WP:HISTRS-compliant at all. Hans Bakker (cited in the article) prefers the term Pushyabhuti (Puṣyabhūti) to describe the family, as do several other reputed historians. utcursch | talk 14:46, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that absolutely makes sense. I was reading the book, and made the change based on it. I have no issue with the title. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 18:26, 31 July 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 October 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The information given in the article that Pushyabhuti Dynasty was a Jatt Dynasty is factually wrong.As per the interpretation of the ancient text either this dynasty was Bais Rajput or from Vaishya caste but certainly not from Jatt caste.

Please change the article otherwise it's misrepresentation of history. Abhimanyu200 (talk) 17:45, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 16:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not a Jatt dynasty

Pushabhuti were not jat. Correct it. Jatt were not even present in northern India at 7th century. Ndnsnd (talk) 12:13, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 December 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This is with respect to the Origin of Pushyabhuti.

In Arya-Manjushri it is written that Harshavardhan was a Bais. Now, Bais is also a clan of Kshatriya Rajput.

So, it cannot be said conclusively that Harshvardhan was a Viashya caste.

Please remove the mention of Vaishya caste in the origin section.You can mention that he was a "Bais" as mentioned in Arya-Manjushri, the primery source. Abhimanyu200 (talk) 18:42, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 12:50, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]