User talk:MatthewVanitas

Manually archiving old threads at User talk:MatthewVanitas/Archive A

Queensland Young Greens

I have provided two sources for the article as this is all I can currently find.

Can you explain why my article is being deleted, yet others are being accepted such as:

Young LNP: References are all from the political party (LNP = Liberal National Party) ^ http://lnp.org.au/ ^ http://www.youngliberal.org/executive ^ http://www.youngnationals.org.au/

Australian Young Labor: Only one reference from the political website. Another reference about one specific issue at the end of the article ^ "Australian Young Labor". Retrieved 2007-08-15. ^ "Labor's Bloody Rituals Lead to a Dead End". Retrieved 2007-10-21.

Young Greens of Sweden: No References. Listed as a stub - is this different? In that case how do I list my article as a stub?

Here are three comparable articles, similar organisations, exactly the same content and referencing and yet my article is not being approved. I'd appreciate your thoughts on this. If I don't agree, is there a way to contest your decision? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakeyboy1989 (talk • contribs) 04:44, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi mate, Thanks again for your assistance. I've replied to your message on my user talk page. Just wondering if you could give me a bit of final advice? Thanks Jakeyboy1989 (talk) 03:40, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

well that was a more pleasant discussion

now i dont know the current state but i had tred to move the article from user/josheastman/JO to JOshEastmanENT i did but then i believe it got deleted i tryed to repost the template so i can add the references but im not sure now because i have so many windows open and im not sure what is current now i give you permission to help me not vandilize something i spent hours putting together a proffessional article wiki is intended to have users hel enhance articles so do a f*ing search and see for yourself if you can contribute as opposed to deleting a legitamate article cmon now —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josheastman (talk • contribs) 04:25, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Please take a look

Hello MatthewVanitas, like yourself I am a member of the WikiProject Afghanistan, I have created a few pages related to this project and may I say after a lot of research. One of these is the page Lund Khwar. I can safely say that I have read almost every thing there is to read on Lund Khwar. A user 86.27.185.156 keeps violating wiki rules and my warning. Wiki rules because he is adding irrelevant info about his father to the page and irrelevant because I know the information is useless and not related. I have warned him for the second time. Please give it a look and please advise me what to do next. How are pages semi protected and how are abusers reported to moderators. Thank you. Msrafiq (talk) 20:28, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Matthew!! your reply was quite helpful, I really appreciate it. Though I love to add referenced backed well researched material to Wiki, I am not quite skilled with the various operating techniques here like reporting vandalism. I will do exactly as you say, Thanx again!!. Msrafiq (talk) 20:48, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

A swirl of bagpipers

		The India Star
		For the Indian bagpipe instrument articles. keep up your great work. AshLin (talk) 13:32, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

userspace warning templates

Hi- regarding this edit (and others like it), I'm not aware of a requirement that userspace drafts be templated up as if they were an article. In other words, there's no need for a notability template, as a draft isn't subject to the notability guidelines (yet). I do believe the noindex template can be mandated by an admin, but I can't find the documentation for that either. Are you aware of guidelines for userspace template use?

Also, have you considered archiving your talk page? tedder (talk) 15:14, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

You're definitely right that I'm long-overdue for archiving; I need to get around to finally using MizsaBot, so thanks for the poke.

I'm also not totally clear on the use of maintenance templates in Userspace, though I reckoned the engine doesn't auto-remove them. I wouldn't normally be as pushy about it, but the guy explicitly asked for feedback at RfF, has been non-responsive since receiving detailed feedback (and as I recall published before despite being a clear CSD case), so I figured it was good to keep clear about what he needs to publish. At the very least the "userspace draft" tag should stay up in case people googling him drift across it, to make it clear it's not an approved article yet. If I'm coming across as jerkish (I could see that), I can just keep it Watchlisted to make sure the "noindex" and "draft" tags stay up, and that it doesn't move to articlespace before he fixes the Notability issue. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

If you'd like, I'll set up the archiving, or you can just steal the code on my talk page and modify it slightly.

"googling" it is solved with either the userspace draft (USD) or noindex tag; the USD transcludes noindex, so both aren't required. I didn't know he asked at RfF; considering the lack of response I suppose the USD tag is appropriate. I'll keep it watchlisted for a while also; I came across it because he added a link from mainspace to userspace, which is absolutely forbidden. tedder (talk) 15:34, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Yep, very brief RfF request; posting just your link and no comment is often a bad sign for communications. Also chaps me as a brusque "review for me" rather than "hey, I'm not sure I did footnoting right, can someone take a look at my article about a this rapper?" Also note the username is identical to the subject, so almost definitely a CoI/autobio. I think this case may fall under my favourite (unofficial) WP guideline: Wikipedia:No one cares about your garage band. But I'll be a good sport, post on his Talk to apologise if I came off as being a jerk, and explain to him both what the article needs, and the need to respond to communication on a community effort. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. And yes, I agree on both COI and the "crappy myspace band" rationale. Not communicating makes things difficult. tedder (talk) 16:02, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Ivan Mitev

This is about the page Ivan Mitev. The page is locked and added to dead pages. The problem is that instead of "heart tone", the page should be directing to: heart sound. The page is locked and I cannot edit this. Then the page will be no longer dead. Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.125.51.66 (talk) 09:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Kayastha Cleanup

Sure, how can I help? Rflejeune (talk) 01:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's about time someone took the article in hand and got it under control. I will do my best to watch for any vandalism, and try to dig up some citations as I find the time. Was not familiar with the reftool so thanks for letting me know about that. Take care. Rflejeune (talk) 01:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Matthew!

Hi Matthew,

Thank you for your feedback for the article User:Sportindo/SixReps that I wrote earlier. I have made a lot of changes and I would really appreciate it if you would like to take a quick look and drop a comment or two for me.

Sportindo (talk) 03:57, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Cleanup Barnstar
		For your incredible clean up work on Indian caste related articles. —SpacemanSpiff 05:57, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Kelutviaq dead link

You recently removed a dead link here. Per WP:DEADLINK, wouldn't it be better to either replace the link with a working one or to leave the link, but with a dead link tag, rather than removing the link itself as a reference and, thus, degrading the quality of the article? Silverseren^C 06:08, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The place the link directs to appears to be a squatter site of unknown safety, and in any case, just judging by the URL, the older site may have been just a copyvio of the Grove book. I'd leave a deadlink if it were to a media outlet or such, but a link to a rather sketchy placeholder page that was probably a very non-reputable source (or a copyvio of an RS) in the past doesn't seem much of a loss. Agree/disagree? MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:14, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. I just wanted to make sure that this wasn't what you did for all dead links. Thanks for the explanation. Silverseren^C

06:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Purswani Family Tree

Dear Mr. Matthew Vanitas, Hi, I request you to please assit me in creating a new article "Purswani Family Tree". I am an old person and do not know the new technologies of operating tools. You have helped me earlier for "Kuhdabadi Sindhi swarankar", "Khudabad" and "Panchayati Hall". Thanking you in anticipation for your favour. gsp Gespee (talk) 14:38, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

May 5, 2011, Dear Mr. Matthew Vanitas, Hi, I have completed the above proposed article on my user:gespee/purswani. I request you to please move it article space. Many thanks for your assistance.201.225.88.74 (talk) 16:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

May 11, 2011. Greetings Mr. MatthewVanitas, I do not know how to post this draft "Request for Feedback". I request you to please do the needful on my behalf. Thanks a lot. gespee Gespee (talk) 23:58, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

June 10, 2011. Greetings Mr. MattewVanitas, on 12th May, you have directed my request to creat an article "Purswani Family Tree" to Mr. Michael but up to now nothing concreat has happened . Please assist me.Gespee (talk) 21:21, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Greetings dear Mr. MatthewVanitas, on 12/06/11, Mr. Michael moved the draft to mainspace saying that it is "passable". But Mr. Jac objected to it and immidiately shifted bach to my userspace. I request you to please help me and do the needful so that the draft can go to main space of the articles. I only rely on you because only you know me very well. I am a old person of 72 years and do not know moderen tacts to handle this matter. Please help me. Thanks Gespee (talk) 17:28, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Comp/tech help at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback

What RfF articles are open at computing? I have trouble navigating the Wikipedia:Requests for feedback to find anything interesting, as everything is in chronological order without classification. Diego Moya (talk) 20:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Greetings, in the larger sense of "computers"/tech, here are a few I recall not knowing what to do with:

• Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback#Sansa_c200_Series
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback#User:HookAndEye.2Foxwall_software
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback#Self-righting_mechanism
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback/2011_April_22#Gradle
• Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback/2011_April_22#User:Michael_Leeman.2FArkeia_Software.23History

MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:46, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to give them a look. Diego Moya (talk) 05:53, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps a bit late, but I might have some time to work on this too, at least for now. Seems worthwhile. W Nowicki (talk) 21:12, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Next Step at Thom Dutch

Hi Matthew. I was wondering what the next step I could take is? Is there a problem with my sources? I recognize they are internet based, but they seem quite reliable (3rd party, neutral, relevant). I know you are busy, feel free to tell me to just be patient if you want.

Thanks in advance.

Canadiandy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Canadiandy1 (talk • contribs) 04:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it is a sourcing issue; biographies generally require at least two separate suitable sources. The issue with your sources is they fit two of three of the requirements for a good source, but not the third. As is laid out in the classic WP:42 (an informal but straightforward summary of Wikipedia policy):

Articles require significant coverage

in reliable sources

that are independent of the subject.

Your sources are from forum discussions and the like, which are not WP:Reliable sources because they are user-generated. To put it this way, if an academic writes for Egyptology Monthly, both he, the editor(s), and the magazine are putting their reputations on the line, so that at least theoretically guarantees some accuracy. On a forum, if "Egyptguy123" says something totally off-base about the Necropolis that shatters his credibility, not a huge deal, he just ditches that account, leaves the forum or re-regs under a different name. RS's come in a variety of flavours, but generally published magazines and books tend to meet RS, except when getting into touchy subjects where the publisher and his political/religious/etc. motivations and credibility are issues.

In your case, I assume this Dutch guy has been written about at some point. America is far enough from being an "oral culture" that it's pretty hard to be long-term famous without some articles about you, especially in the pre-internet period where most information was shared in print. Is it impossible, or just some hassle, to find whatever back issues of Camping Monthly and find a profile of him or something? Perhaps you could ask someone on one of your forums to post some scans from whatever back-issues of camping magazines they have that cover Dutch? Or maybe some small-run hammock camping books which aren't on GoogleBooks, but reside in hobbyist's libraries? MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:44, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I've been doing some searching and the reality is I can't find magazine or book articles. While Dutch has been doing what he does for a while, he has been low on the radar until lately. If you follow hammock camping you will find it is a bit of a cult thing lately and Shug, Dutch, Jeff, and Grizzly, have quite a strong following. I don't doubt if I looked in a year I would find the sourcing you are referring to, but at present he is just too new in his arena of influence. In fact, "Tarp Flyz" have been around for less than a month but there were a record 18 000 views and 473 replies on the initial introduction thread (http://www.hammockforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=30044&highlight=Tarp+Flyz)alone. I am fine with the reality that others will likely come along to edit and update the article (or it will remain merely a small obscure tidbit) and I would welcome their support. Do you recommend I drop this for now and wait for a greater volume of resource items, or should we be bold, put it out there, and then let the discussions and editing begin?--Canadiandy talk 05:53, 1 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Canadiandy1 (talk • contribs)

Gabriel Wilensky page comments

I have fixed your link rot comments. Thanks very much.Nrglaw (talk) 22:14, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Matara Central College

A tag has been placed on Matara Central College, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 23:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

School help

Hi MatthewVanitas. The Wikipedia Schools Project has set up a dedicated help and feedback page at WP:WPSCH/H. This for elementary?primary, middle, and high schools (often called college in the UK). It is not for universities or other degree awarding institutions.
If you assist at a Wikipedia help desk or noticeboard, you might wish to send enquirers there - we are quick to resond. However, WT:WPSCH still remains the place for general discussion about the management and policy of school articles. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:27, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Help require for the articles Aisha , Fatimah and Shia Islam in India

Help require for the articles Aisha , Fatimah and Shia Islam in India as the User:Faizhaider is trying to show this articles with only Shia perspective.

i can say this by refering his edits to the article Aisha he is trying to make it a negative influence article where as for Fatima and shia realated articles he is trying to make it a fairytale, i can say that he is using WP platform to reflect his own created views with his own refrences. not tolerating with reality and trying to make the article mess specially article Aisha, and on user page he is giveing wrong information and reverting the edits.

• EXAMPLE for article Fatimah there is a section in Quran for which when i asked for the third party source he removed saying reference already provided( where as the reference is of some other source not from Hadith books or Quran) AND for the article Aisha when provided the reference from other source in Quran he deleted saying Third Party source is required"""

at last i want to say, he is misusing authority given to him by WP.

Kindly help as i saw your edits in all Controversial articles. Please Advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omer123hussain (talk • contribs) 08:04, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Matthew! It seems I have thrown myself in cross-fire once again. :) Do you have any suggestions for me regarding the situation? --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider^tc_s 05:00, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt responce and guiding advice, i want to enquire wether we can use this site ( http://mb-soft.com/believe/txh/aisha.htm ) as reference for some information.plz advice, any way i had given some references for the article Aisha please check and advice if that is enough. --Omer123hussain (talk) 08:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Requests for Feedback

I do not know many editors who are willing to help at RfF. It seems that even the welcome committee is not as active as it once was. It worries me to see that so many of the most active editors focus on the "sexy" boards like AfD. New editors are doing major edits that have to be reverted because few editors are giving them pointers. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:06, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Triple pipes

Stole it! Mwahahahahaha! Silverseren^C 03:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Thom Dutch Situation

I've been doing some searching and the reality is I can't find magazine or book articles. While Dutch has been doing what he does for a while, he has been low on the radar until lately. If you follow hammock camping you will find it is a bit of a cult thing lately and Shug, Dutch, Jeff, and Grizzly, have quite a strong following. I don't doubt if I looked in a year I would find the sourcing you are referring to, but at present he is just too new in his arena of influence. In fact, "Tarp Flyz" have been around for less than a month but there were a record 18 000 views and 473 replies on the initial introduction thread (http://www.hammockforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=30044&highlight=Tarp+Flyz)alone. I am fine with the reality that others will likely come along to edit and update the article (or it will remain merely a small obscure tidbit) and I would welcome their support. Do you recommend I drop this for now and wait for a greater volume of resource items, or should we be bold, put it out there, and then let the discussions and editing begin?--Canadiandy talk 07:26, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Ram Rahim Singh and Dera Sacha Sauda

Dear Mathew Vanitas, Would you be kind enough to tell me how I can e mail you. Thanks in anticipation, Best regards, (Bandagharka (talk) 10:13, 3 May 2011 (UTC)).

Swami Nigamananda Cleanup

Dear MatthewVanitas, How are u? Little worry, as we had no communication since couple of weeks. The article Swami Nigamananda is ready and waiting for necessary cleanup. Your attention is required now. Please do the needful. Regards Dcmpuri (talk) 13:30, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Dear MatthewVanitas, Excellent job! A tons of thanks to you from my inner heart.

This is an interim reply. I will come back again to discuss further about Swami NIgamananda.

Once again thanks and appreciated for your step by step help to achieve this my goal.

Best Regards Dcmpuri (talk) 07:09, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Info at Indian Magicians

Thanks for moving it, but as it was copy and paste of a complete newspaper article I've deleted it entirely. Dougweller (talk) 13:55, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Copyright question

Is anything from a .mil address public domain? I found a high quality picture at army.mil to help User:Patricedward, but I wanted to check with you how we should go about judging the copyright status of a picture. Also, should we let him try and learn, or should we be bold and do it ourselves? Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:43, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

My understanding is that anything on a .mil that doesn't have a separate attribution like "courtesy of Reuters" is fair game; I've gotten scads of images of Afghanistan just by searching GoogleImages with "nuristan site:*mil" boolean, etc. Same goes for .gov in most (all?) cases where the image/text is "an original production of a US federal source". So far as the editor: I'd say give him a week, maybe poke him and say "reminder, photo would be easy and awesome", and if this person gets confirmed as Surgeon General and the editor isn't on the ball, then BEBOLD. But in the short-term I like to try to guide editors into doing it themselves. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:03, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Alrighty. I have helped push the article in the right direction, but for the photo (and maybe infobox), I'll try and give the creator a couple of nudges. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:23, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Sri Gnanananada Giri Swami of Jyotir Mutt - Devi Mathaji

Hi Matthew,

Thanks for reviewing the page. The problem about Sri Gnanananda birthday is unknown. Even repeat request from him, he didn't mention to anyone. Some predicted he is about 250 years due to heavy tapas. 1) So please help me how to put this ? 2)Can I also have the Hindu subtopic at the side ? 3) Can I put this page for public and continue editing ?

Thanks and God bless you.

Best regards Mathaji —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devimathaji (talk • contribs) 13:17, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

MiG-37 Ferret

I have reinstated the hoax template and added my reasoning to the talk page. Sorry for forgetting to add the info to the talk page. This is what set me searching on Google, btw: this Wikipedia article Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:40, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Ambazonia

Hi, I have been trying to edit the information about Ambazonia which have multiple issues; lies & distortions, but have not been able to do so. I had wanted to contact you but did not know how. I finally learned how to do so by reading "how to contact a specific editor.

The correct information about Ambazonia can be found on Government of Ambazonia Official Website at: http://www.ambazonia.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=207&Itemid=34

which is exactly the same information I have provided. I have studied the formatting and did that in my last edit but you sill undo my edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ambazonia&oldid=427767477

What am I doing wrong, and how do I correct this problem?

Tanyi Ojongmboh —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dejongt (talk • contribs) 22:10, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Greetings, I've replied on your User Talk page, so let's continue the discussion there so we can keep it consolidated. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:57, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Kunwaryogendrasinghlodhikheriyarafatpur

Dear Matthew Vanitas I don’t know what information you have about lodhi’s? Before you write or make comments on lodhi’s you must read 1. Riveda (3,53,23) 2. Manusmriti (VII-54) 3. Garag Sahimta 4. Shiv Puran 5. Jati Anuvesan And if don’t, than do not give your silly conclusion. Right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kunwaryogendrasinghlodhikheriyarafatpur (talk • contribs) 09:10, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Kurmi

Hello MatthewVanitas Why you people are making kurmi shudra.. do you understand the old caste system of india? This is well known that kurmies are Kshatriya and you are making shudra, you are not decider of this issue.. please take a look to history properly and understand the matter. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.168.109.1 (talk) 08:26, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll move on, Thanks for your time.

I'll take your silence on my requests for direction as a subtle hint this article is doomed. Disappointing, but life goes on. Best wishes and credit for your efforts.--Canadiandy talk 07:20, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Regarding EN_15838

Dear Matthew Vanitas,

Thank you for your feedback on my first page created.

I see you are looking for sources or footnotes, instead of external links. It seems like a solution to your request would be to change the last two external links to footnotes?

Best regards, Emba7 EilertE (talk) 19:18, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Bingo. More importanly though, the article right now is more a definition, more a dictionary sort of thing. To be properly encyclopedic, we'd want to see some third-party coverage. Can you find online any books (on GoogleBooks) or news/journal articles discussing the significance of this standard? We're looking for societal/economic impact, something more than just quoting from policy documents. Do you track my angle here? MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:22, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

OK, I will do the proposed changes to the article, and also try to find some online sources discussing the significance. Emba7 EilertE (talk) 19:30, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi again Matthew. Ive updated the article as described. I have also found this webpage that might be a good source that shows the societal impact of the standard. Should this perhaps be included as a stand alone reference (if that is possible)? Emba7 EilertE (talk) 19:53, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Since you're already quoting enough policy documents directly, and if the site you link is the "official" site for the standard, I'd put in under "External links" as "Official site" with the URl tucked into that term, as is WP standard. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:55, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, Ive fine-tuned the article again based on your feedback. I hope the article is acceptable then, and that you can remove the "unclear sources" tag at the top. Thank you so much for very informative and good help! Emba7 EilertE (talk) 20:07, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

To remove the "primary sources" tag, you need to add footnotes from groups unaffiliated with the EN's people. I don't know international trade that well, but I'd imagine you want something like

• How EN 15838 Will Save the World. London Times, 14 January 2011
• New Euro-regs Stifle Shipping. Shipping Gazette, vol 14. Spring 2011

What we're looking for is specific footnotes from unaffiliated people discussing the legislation. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:13, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Correct the information on "kurmi" page

Hello Matthew please look at this link http://books.google.co.in/books?id=uEP-ceGYsnYC&pg=PA195 , It is clearly written that kurmi are kshtriya not shudra. please remove those words and correct the information, this book is "Peasants and monks in British India" By William R. Pinch. Also i want to say that wiki is for truthful information and you should give provide right information to world, you are part of wiki india project. In india caste system is very complicated so always be very careful. Right now wiki and you are getting lot of negative comments on kurmi groups and websites. Some body may also take legal action against wiki. So take this issue seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aditya gentle (talk • contribs) 06:44, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Correct the information on "kurmi" page

Hello Matthew please look at this link http://books.google.co.in/books?id=uEP-ceGYsnYC&pg=PA195 , It is clearly written that kurmi are kshtriya not shudra. please remove those words and correct the information, this book is "Peasants and monks in British India" By William R. Pinch. Also i want to say that wiki is for truthful information and you should give provide right information to world, you are part of wiki india project. In india caste system is very complicated so always be very careful. Right now wiki and you are getting lot of negative comments on kurmi groups and websites. Some body may also take legal action against wiki. So take this issue seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aditya gentle (talk • contribs) 06:46, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Grave error regarding "KURMI KHASTRIYA" caste from India, being wrongly placed under "SHUDRA"

Hello Mr. Matthew Vanitas , i would like to point out a grave error regarding description of "KURMI KHASTRIYA" caste from India, being wrongly placed under "SHUDRA" on the relevant Wikipedia page , which is putting up a question mark on the authenticity and correctness of data available on Wikipedia.

It is well known fact that Kurmis are Kshatriya, if Kurmis are not khsatriyas & they ae Shudras, then why isnt Kurmi as a caste is placed under the group Sheduled Caste(under which all Shudras are placed)by the Govt. of India with accompanying reservation facility to them.

Hence kindly review the matter at your end and purge this grave error at the earliest, so that a good site like Wikipedia doesnt loose its authenticity in the eyes of billions of KURMI KHASTRIYAS, whose sensibilities are being hurt by this grave error

Thanking you

Prasoon Sachan A Well wisher of Wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hawksachan (talk • contribs) 07:41, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Faculty of Sport and Tourism

Thank you very much for you help, I did my best to correct the omissions and the article looks much better now! I do have a question, as well. Would it not be better suited to leave "TIMS" in the title name, as it is the integral name of the Faculty? "Faculty of Sport and Tourism" looks somewhat generic to me. I am still struggling with where to post what, being new to all this. I hope this is the place. Anyway, thanks for your support, once again. Mladen.tomic (talk) 15:15, 12 May 2011

Speedy deletion nomination of J D Currie

A tag has been placed on J D Currie, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 23:00, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Robert Byrne, author

Hi Mathhew, I'm making some progress on your feedback. Thanks very much for that. When I'm done adding my citations, how do I resubmit to get the "citations needed" tags at the top removed? Russellbyrne (talk) 19:00, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Walt Disney's Riverfront Square

Hi Matthew, I just wanted to say thanks for giving User:AtionSong those pointers. S/he seems to have done a great job with the article, and I have listed Walt Disney's Riverfront Square at DYK. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:35, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Films about Iran

Category:Films about Iran, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:50, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

question

is an interview with the subject an acceptable source in a Wikipedia entry? Thank you22:18, 15 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyesofbabylon (talk • contribs)

Not unless it has been published in a reliable source. For instance, if you interviewed someone and you wanted to use that interview in a Wikipedia article *and* the interview has not been published?..you cannot use it as a source for a Wikipedia article (because using an unpublished interview would constitute original research and original research for a source isn't allowed on Wikipedia. Shearonink (talk) 04:50, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Olev Roomet

RE: [1]My impression from other articles is that he was basically directed to by some folk organisation in the USSR to keep the tradition alive.

FYI. during the Soviet occupation of Estonia music, especially folk music and especially keep the traditions alive were a part of civil resistance to Russification policies of the USSR. You know, they call it Singing revolution that brought the Soviet occupation to the end. Cheers!--Termer (talk) 05:57, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

RE:Pics of the Maakers. That's funny, I actually finished saving this pic and right after I got your message. I'll take care of it, at the moment I'm about to start an article about Juhan Maaker as he seems to be the most prominent Estonian bagpipe player in history. Even found his music on Amazon.--Termer (talk) 04:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Deaf Women United

A tag has been placed on Deaf Women United, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 06:00, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Hyomin (Park Sun Young)

A tag has been placed on Hyomin (Park Sun Young), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 12:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Esquire Dubstep

A tag has been placed on Esquire Dubstep, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 18:00, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Windsor Review

A very big thank-you to you, MatthewVanitas, for feedback in creation of the Windsor Review page (May 13)-- and then, in sorting out the 'kerfuffle' of the MovePage problem. I am greatly obliged. I'll try not to panic doing MovePage for article number 2! Vjhamilton (talk) 03:25, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Riserless Well Intervention

Thank you for your support MatthewVanitas.

One more question, should I for example explain what a well is in my article or should I link to a Wikipedia article? (Was “afraid” of writing about subjects that were covered elsewhere)

MatthewCanitas, I have updated the article, and I was hoping you could take another look and give me feedback.

Thanks in advance Heijacob (talk) 16:22, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

MatthewCanitas, I have posted the article, I appreciate your feedback and support. Heijacob (talk) 14:01, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Ready for posting?

Hello Matthew,

We had the following exchange a month ago. I have now corrected and re-submitted the article for publication. May I ask you to have a look and help me get it published? Not sure how "post back here" as you ask, so please forgive me if I'm not quite following protocol.

Thanks and regards,

-Kevin kevin@billinghurst.com

User:KevinBillinghurst/Jeppe_Wikström

First posting. Grateful for any feedback, plus instructions on moving from User draft to live page. Thanks

KevinBillinghurst (talk) 13:08, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Couple things you need to fix first: your footnotes are all WP:Bare URLs, you want them spelled out as full citations. Take a look at any well-established WP article to see how that's coded. You also need to add WP:Categories. Once those are taken care of, post back here and I'll move it for you. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:14, 19 April 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by KevinBillinghurst (talk • contribs)

Touchphonics page follow up

Hello Matthew,

Thanks for the advice on fixing some problems with this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touchphonics. I edited the things you suggested http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback/2011_May_15#Touchphonics. How am I looking now? I really appreciate your time! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esptoyou (talk • contribs) 08:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Infobox and Shudra issues

I can work on the Maratha infobox you were talking about at WT:IN. I will however have to develop it in a subpage at my user page. You can then pick it up from there and move it to template/article space. I cannot do this due to my ban. Just let me know the details of what you would like to have in the infobox. Zuggernaut (talk) 15:43, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Update: Also, I'm not too sure about this but adding Shudra to castes (even if it is factually correct) may be akin to using a politically incorrect term for African-Americans or any minorities anywhere. Maybe that explains why you keep on seeing removals of that term from caste articles. This is of course anecdotal information and I have no sources for it. Zuggernaut (talk) 15:48, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the infobox, probably the best way is to look at any of the articles under Category:Maratha clan system, hit "Edit" and see the "clan details" portions I've hidden. Probably the best bet would be to include rows for each of the terms used, but make them all "optional" so that they don't display unless they have actual data entered. Let me know if you have any trouble figuring out which ones would work well.

Regarding Shudra, I don't think it's so much a parallel for any racial insults. They're not denying that there is a Shudra varna, or that such is the proper name for it, they're just insisting, for socio-political reasons, that they come from a "superior" varna. A closer parallel, for example, might be noting that a given ethnic clan is Greece is largely genetically Turkish, albeit now Orthodox and Greek-speaking. Said clan would be extremely upset about such, because their popular belief insists that they're "pure Greeks" who battled off all the Turks and "defended their honour." Same thing with these Shudra folks: in the vast majority of these cases, these are clans who were from a "blue collar" background, and later as more of them made money, especially after the shakeups of the British invasions, they tried re-writing their histories to claim that they never came from a labouring background. The pushback I'm seeing isn't because "Shudra" is a dirty word (at least not in the literal sense), but because I'm confronting them with the fact that their legendary history (usually cited to "ourcasteisawesome.com" or similar) is completely contradicted by about every historian out there. I'm totally fine to include their legendary histories (provided they can be cited to an academic who recorded these beliefs), but it's horrible pseudo-history to let people re-write articles on their own ethnic groups to be as self-serving as possible. Makes sense?

Thanks for the offer of help on the infobox; I have to dash now, but if you aren't quite sure which items to include, I can help you make a list. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:29, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Nair

You say that you'll fix the Penny Cyclopedia reference "if you may". You do not need my permission. I have deliberately not responded to the earlier comment that everyone should desist from editing the article except me - it is ludicrous, puts all the pressure on me and is contrary to the ethos. - Sitush (talk) 17:57, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

ANI

See this: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Request_for_intervention_in_the_Nair_article Chandrakantha.Mannadiar (talk) 02:17, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Just a note to let you know that CM above has emailed me to apologise, saying that emotions got the better of him & that he would have struck his message on the Nair TP if he hadn't already committed himself to leaving. I am happy to accept this, although obviously it is not my place to strike the message for him (he can always come back and do that himself).

I shall write him a reply to this effect. I think that when someone shows what appears to be genuine humility and remorse then it should be accepted with good grace. I have no idea if he has sent a similar email to you, nor am I trying to persuade you one way or the other regarding how you might choose to react if he has. - Sitush (talk) 19:25, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Haven't gotten any email from him, but if he writes me I'll write back. I don't bear him any ill-will; this is a common-enough issue that he's not unique in being sensitive to caste issues and maybe taking it more personally than WP culture would encourage. I hope that I've been even-handed enough in replying to him, just trying to stay on-message about the importance of presenting history "warts and all" rather than mince about the touchier areas. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:57, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Paravar

I see that you have just put another toe into the muddy waters that are the S Indian caste system! The wikilink fixes were excellent catches, by the way. An appropriate choice of wording for what was basically a fishing group. Much of the argument centred on Sangam literature, claims to be (you've guessed it) kshatriya and claims to be in other ways dominant.

Out of curiosity, and assuming that you actually read through the entire shebang, how did it look to you? I am at the point where I cannot see the wood for the trees and, as is common with articles where I contribute the majority of the content, it is voluminous.

I am wondering if it might at some point have potential to be a GA nomination. The cite requests which are in there are actually my own, being to highlight the (few) areas left where as a compromise I merely rephrased etc rather than actually removed content. I would be quite happy to remove those bits in, say, 3 or 4 months' time - by then they would have been there long enough for anyone to expect a resolution. There are some things that I would change, but not a lot.

No pressure! If you feel that it is outside your scope or would otherwise rather not comment then that is fine. - Sitush (talk) 23:16, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I actually just perused it, but since I expanded and categorised the article Turtling (hunting) I felt obliged to link-in. I'm a little bit swamped right now with both real-life things and covering Maratha issues, but if you ping me in, say, mid-late June I'd be happy to help. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:01, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

On Rajputs, Origins, Ahirs etc. [Section: Major cleanup underway at Yadav (merge with Ahir?)]

Hello, MatthewVanitas. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shivaji

Could you give me by email some of the sources for this claim that Shivaji/Marathas belonged to the Shudra community and later found social upliftment? This issue is a live one in Pune and violence over interpretation of aspects of Shivaji's past has happened before, in the case of the ransacking of Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute and ~tension has taken place over the issue of movement of statue of Dadoji Kondev from Lal Mahal, besides other incidents. AshLin (talk) 06:48, 26 May 2011 (UTC).

I wonder if you saw this message. AshLin (talk) 07:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

My recent post at WT:IN was not aimed at you or your recent work. It was a general note and it may or may not apply to other editors who may or may not have a tarnished editing history when it comes to India, Hinduism and caste topics. Zuggernaut (talk) 06:24, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Shudra or not ? I see a number of posts regarding this issue. The simple answer is brahmins over the centuries have tended to regard any non-brahmin caste as Shudra. However, if anyone from a particular caste rose in social hierachy , then obviously there were brahmins available who could bestow the higher status of Kshatriya on them ( I am sure a hefty fee or dakshina was charged for this "favor"!). Ghurye has written extensively on the fluidity of the caste system and is regarded as an authority on the subject. The colonial era census of 1901 or the one before that counted every caste and subcaste. Castes were also , I believe, at that time asked to self-describe themselves. This resulted in a scramble by artisan castes to obtain Sanskrit names their group. For example, the Gujarati mochi caste call themselves Gujarat arya samaj. The carpenters are Vishwakarma etc. Castes also tend to associate themselves with the rajputs or kshatriyas. For example, Gujarati barber caste have a story that when Parshuram went on a killing spree to annihilate the Kshtriyas, some of the Kshtriyas told him the the blade they had in their hand was for shaving and that's the origin of the caste.Jonathansammy (talk) 21:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

intersting theory; will be excellent in Kshatriya article, with adequate references. --CarTick (talk) 01:06, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Attingal

I think it may be the Attingal massacre of 1721 but haven't changed it yet. - Sitush (talk) 16:08, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Ahirs

you are deleting right information from article and supporting wrong.this is against the spirit of wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ancient indian historian (talk • contribs) 16:07, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Nair

Understand what you are doing - trying to maintain the peace etc - but it is repetition and undue weight. The ultimate aim is to rewrite the lead but that cannot be done until there is a decent article body on which to base it. The entire caste cruft needs to go from the lead, if only because it is a warrior magnet. Let it be considered in the body, with a lead that says something very bland. I'm just not sure how to explain it blandly! - Sitush (talk) 14:33, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thaheem

Thaheem is spelt Tahim, and is at page 452 Volume III

--WALTHAM2 (talk) 21:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I have also looked at the Multan Gazetteer the 1929 issue and the Jhang Gazetteer. Both refer to the community as Tahim. I think the Sindhis pronounce it as Thaheem, and the Seraiki as Taheem. Although if you do searches in Dawn for example, the tribe are always referred to as Thaheem.

--WALTHAM2 (talk) 17:21, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, MatthewVanitas. You have new messages at Benlisquare's talk page.
Message added 15:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 15:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I just realised, when you were talking about the edit box welcome message, were you talking about this? User talk:Benlisquare/Editnotice You can find out more about this feature at WP:EDITNOTICE. Happy editing, -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 15:59, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Don't test our patience

You had recently added in the etymology section that the meaning of the word Nayar is Dog (Naaya in Tamil). Works by SN Sadasivan are full of anti-Nair propaganda and even you will acknowledge this. If you are going to repeat this blatant caste hatred, I am going to ANI. So far we have remained more or less silent, even though you had added a lot of biased stuff. But this is going too far. If you repeat anything like this, then we are not going to remain silent. Shannon1488 (talk) 10:48, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

• I am having the book Jatinirnayam. Give me the page number for your claims. Shannon1488 (talk) 10:51, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Digging into primary sources yourself is OR, and further trying to "prove a negative" isn't terribly helpful, as since unless you read every single line in Jatinirnayam, and can ensure that you version is totally complete, you can't prove that Sadirnayam didn't find that quote in some version of the text. Further, for a centuries-old document "what page number" isn't a reasonable request. If you have objections to S.'s quote (again, not a personal statement of his beliefs, but a cite to an early text), bring up reasonable objections on Talk. "He's a Nazi" is not a reasonable objection. "He's a fraud/casteist/convert" is only an objection if you can provide articles from reputable researchers stating "S. is not a reputable researcher." Barring that, it's just your word against his, and he's a published academic. MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Nair citations

Hi, you filled out some more of those old citations a few hours ago. Could you actually see the pages for the GBooks ones, eg: cite # 98 ? I cannot over here in the UK as it is snippet view only (or even nothing at all, in some cases), but I know that sometimes peeps in the US can see more. I ask because there are some that I would like to check, and at least one where I enquired on the talk page for a copy/check but got nowhere.

I am a bit wary of these publications from 1903 etc but sometimes it is awkward to pursue other channels without some sort of decent hook line to search with. - Sitush (talk) 04:51, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries, can you see the following .png [2] taken as a screencap? Note at the end the two comments I couldn't manage to substantiate but left as hiddens in case anyone else had some good leads. I am finding myself being very careful about anything that could conceivably be construed as negative, given how much ire it provokes. I reckon we can knock out a lot of the less-controversial stuff early and save at least some of the fight for later. I haven't seen any pushback on my additions about military history (was bracing for upsetness about any mention of the Nair fighting for the Portuguese, Nair converts, etc.) Haven't seen any blowback on diet, or supernatural. I'll try to take a look at "attire" later, though not sure I'm going to find any good refs. I'm almost inclined to just mark it "cn" but not delete, since it's not particularly edgy material, but the format is a bit clumsy. I am rather vexed that the dozens of folks who've shown up to kvetch couldn't be bothered to expand or footnote the non-controversial sections like Diet, etc. But I suppose it is far easier to curse the darkness than to light a single candle... MatthewVanitas (talk) 05:38, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Last things first, if you look at the contribution histories for those who have not recently signed up then you will note that many if not all of them have extremely high talk page figures cf article page figures. That says it all, especially bearing in mind that they can actually write perfectly ok English & so they have no reason to be shy of contributing in a positive manner. We are not going to get any help from them now regarding sources on the Nair article: their ringleader has told us that, several times. But I will continue to ask, nonetheless. You have done some great stuff there of late; it is certainly much appreciated by me.

Screencap. Yes, I can see it. I also noticed that in this instance you had the option to download as a PDF, which means that it could be emailed or whatever. I'll have to sift through the stuff that needed checking, compile a list and put it up at WP:RX - see if anyone is prepared to grab what is available and dump it somewhere that I can collect from. Many of these old works (Travancore State Manual, Census etc) appear time and again in Indian articles & so if I can get the PDFs then that would be better still, since the PDF is the entire document & not merely a single page. Thanks for taking the time to prove a point.

I notice that you had previously appealed for some extra eyes at the INDIA project and, seemingly, got none. It does not bode well for trying again but as with my belief that I should continue to ask for copies of sources where I need them, so too I think that asking the project again is something that should be done. We are then at least continuing to demonstrate our willingness to collaborate etc. - Sitush (talk) 05:53, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

It is rather vexing, their complete unwillingness to just play this straight. I don't know if it's a cultural gap, or just partisan blindness, or what, but it's amazing that they can list out dozens of cites "proving" Nair are Kshatriya, when most of them (and the most reputable ones) say nothing of the sort in the exact bit they're quoting on the page. A lot of the ANI folks seemed, if implicitly, on "our" side in this, but they were vague enough that I think the POV-pushers will act like it's a "everyone is equally overstepping" as opposed to "a couple folks are occasionally a little snippy or blunt... and 25 others just keep being negative, not doing any work, and announcing their unwillingness to to allow any WP:IDONTLIKEIT in." I'll file a WPINDIA request later, and though I'll scrupulously avoid canvassing I will note how emotional this is getting, and how popular a page Nair is (even prior to this drama getting 15K hits a month). There's always the POV Noticeboard too; I would imagine that some editors specialising in POV-prevention could have a field day here if we can get their ears to perk up.

Oh, BTW, feel free to ping me for whatever caps/pdfs of stuff Americans can get on gBooks. It's no trouble, and you're putting in a ton of work. I'll try to round out Diet in the next few days, and take a stab at Attire. Then I'll wander back to MilHist, maybe do a little about religion, but I'm not as comfy covering general history, or varna issues, given that I'm not a SIndia guy. Speaking of which, one of my major "problematic but can be salvaged" Maratha editors just popped back up, so I need to work with him some. And, saints be praised, the single most hostile and "barracks lawyer"-y Maratha POV pusher hasn't been seen in weeks, for which I am infinitely grateful, as it's allowed me to get a ton done at Yadav. MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:03, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

The article comes off PP in a couple of hours but I'll be in bed by then, hopefully - not slept for nearly 24 hours. AN/I is an odd place, I find. Unfortunately, my name gets dragged in there quite frequently. However, the page-protecting admin did have this to say, and I know him to be of the "firm but fair" nature. He'll most likely be quite diligent in keeping an eye on things, real life permitting.

Our paths have crossed once or twice on Ezhava/Yadav etc & I would like to do a bit more there, but I have another big row looming at Tamil Kshatriya as the "common sense" contingent move towards deleting the entire article on the grounds that it is about a subject that does not exist! I did all the source mediation work for that dispute but I'll guarantee it will kick off again.

I got a barnstar a few hours ago, relating to another subcontinent "mess". I think that the wording in it says it all for people in our situation. It applies as much to you as to me (apart from perhaps the "booting the baddie" bit, which was a reference to a SPI I filed).

Will bear the pinging offer in mind, thank you very much. Off to bed. - Sitush (talk) 06:40, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

So far as WPINDIA, for me personally I have yet to get any negative results from asking for help there. I've had plenty of times I got some good advice/cites but no action on the page in question, plenty of times I got no response at all, but a few times that folks provided some great help. Also, though I can't attribute this precisely, after stating some of my troubles in caste articles I saw a sharp increase in watchlisters reverting POV pushing on Kunbi/Kurmi/Maratha articles. They could've been folks drawn to the page from other "edit war alert" listings, but at least a couple I recognised as WPINDIA folks. That's been a great help in blocking the kind of petty/clumsy POV-pushing (leaving all my cites in place but literally just changing "Shudra" to "Kshatriya" wholesale). It is interesting to me that, in almost all the caste articles I've messed with, despite vocal people demanding change nobody ever seems able to actually step in and prove their POV statements, and 90% of the time aren't capable of following the very basic "request change" on locked pages. No matter how many times you say "let me know what sentence you want changed, and what your citation is" most can't do any better than "XYZ is wrong! You must fix this! Check out www.mycasteisamazing.com and educate your ignorant self!" I do find it particularly amusing that you and I (admittedly not PhD Indiologists ourselves) are being told that we "know nothing about India" when we cite PhDs, and told that we "don't even understand the words Kshatriya and Shudra" when we refuse to accept apply OR to "this caste fought in some wars".

It'll be slow in coming, and I really am not up to that fight anytime in the next couple months, but someday I'd love to see Rajput tackled. It's inclusions actually aren't bad (I and a couple others did some basic cleanup of some poorly-sourced claims last fall), but it has some glaring omissions regarding the Rajput having been one of many out-caste groups that got pulled into varna in later centuries, and became ersatz Kshatriya simply because they made good troops and troops were needed. I also note that the Rajputs are well known for agriculture, and no mention of the sort appears in the article.

You may be amused by this American parallel: the joke is phrased in various ways, but goes something like "the reason we lost in Vietnam is because everybody's uncle who served there was either a sniper or a helicopter door gunner." The angle being that nobody's old veteran uncle ever sits around with a beer spinning yarns about being a truck driver, administrative clerk, or cook in the Army. A bit further off the mark, but I always liked the Irish joke about the 1916 Easter Rising: "Why did they build the General Post Office so big? So everyone's granddad could fit inside." MatthewVanitas (talk) 07:16, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Nair clothing

I've been doing some research into the upper cloth controversy (Nair women, bare above waist, then laws were introduced). There is an article specifically for it but it is not great. If you do not pick up on it during your "attire" work then I will add some bumpf about it. Still trawling through histories at the moment, and trying to work out how to avoid repetition between that and the Military section (which is much improved, thanks). - Sitush (talk) 20:44, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries; again, as an ex-mil guy and an ethnology guy, I'm far more comfortable covering milhist, superstition (which CarTick did admirably and has gone unchallenged), attire, food, etc. (I do wish I could find a better cite for the mice thing; it's certainly colourful!). I'm also wincing in anticipation of "OMG you can't say the Nair woman went topless!!!" as I expand the clothing section, or "it is shameful to discuss a proper lady's undergarments." I'm honestly not trying to find "derogatory" material, but a huge portion of what I find that is at all interesting/educational is stuff that I imagine folks are going to balk at. Aside from the Nair kicking tail in some wars, and being higher than some poor picked-on peasants (both of which I've added as applicable), most of their interesting stuff is "deviation" from norms, kind of like everybody else. You can only get so much cultural distinctness from "they like lentils." I expected more blowback on milhist, especially on their fighting alongside the Portuguese, having some converts, etc. Honestly, 90% of the whole kerfuffle revolves around a)Kshatriya/Shudra, b) incredibly well-documented polyandry c) the infamous "dog" cite. I'm pleasantly surprised that there hasn't been much flack about the rest of the article.

The article is just getting better and better (if a bit long); are you looking to put this in for some higher-echelon article rating once the dust settles? I could see this hitting GA-class if we can get a GOCE guy to drop in, maybe get some outside parties to smooth out transitions in the text that we overlook from screen-blindness but would be choppy to a new reader. I got an old B&W photo of the Nair Brigade I'll try and add (though it has someone's digital caption on it, but I don't think that adds any copyright claim since it's not a substantive addition), and I'll poke around for a few more historical images. I think this could end up being an awesome article that will really inform the 15,000 readers a month this gets. Kudos! MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:51, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I would like to think that any article that I contribute to significantly has the potential for GA but so far have only nominated three. It is long, but there is much to be said and the forks that exist are next to worthless. In fact, later on, I shall probably boldly redirect some of those forks. Unless I am losing the plot, the interesting stuff that you highlight is precisely why the story needs to be presented in one place. It seems to me to be rather difficult to treat it otherwise and still give the community (WP and the Nairs) the assembly that it deserves. But I could be wrong.

All my "significant" articles are long. I am a sourcing sort of guy & it tends to lead me into the byways. This one will actually lose a little of its original content to counter some of what we have added. I am crap at writing ledes, though.

It will need a fair amount of polishing and you are right about screen-blindess, although I usually resolve that by walking away for a couple of weeks. Not sure what GOCE means. For photo copyright issues, I have a very helpful contact at Commons but User:Moonriddengirl is excellent even though her primary interest is text copyright. Not sure how much time she has available at the mo because she has just started working for WMF, but there is no harm in asking. - Sitush (talk) 21:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Guild of copyeditors, they're real geeks for proofing. Unfortunately/naturally/fortunately, they don't even touch content, they just fine-tune existing text. I'm not sure if they do any continuity or de-chopping work, I think they just do fine details, but we should be able to work up some kind of labour exchange with a non-India-topic editor to get him to do a smooth-job in exchange for either of us doing a mission for him. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:11, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

... and off we go again

See this. I have reverted twice, so it would not be clever for me to do so again. They have not produced one shred of evidence to support the kshatriya claim. I have even reviewed the first 20-odd sources provided by Shannon. The article they are linking to has been in my sights for a while but, hey, I'd rather not spread my fire too widely in one burst. - Sitush (talk) 14:45, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

GBooks query

Can you see the article which includes page 22 of this journal on GBooks? Is it possible to grab a PDF? - Sitush (talk) 18:25, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Nope, I just have Snippet. What's the keyword? MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:11, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

It is from the lead - "The Samoothiri Raja was a Samanthan Nair and the kingdom of the Ali Rajas of Kannur, which was the only Muslim kingdom in the Kerala region, also had Nair origins". We need the context here, so snippet is no use. I am fed up of caste-ists taking things out of context by using that view, eg: it doesn't show the first part of a sentence beginning, say, "It is claimed that ..."

I am inclined to bin the entire paragraph in any event, as being undue weight/too POVvy for the lead. If something turns up then we can always find an appropriate place for it in the body. I doubt that it is necessary as the history & social organisation sections are gradually expanding to include the general arrangements. - Sitush (talk) 19:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I have no objections to canning the whole mini-para. I had likewise thought it seemed a bit "leading" to have it placed so prominently. And, of course, burden of proof is on the includer. The peanut gallery seems to have calmed down, and a few local folks with constructive opinions have shown up, so that's great. Sodabottle also linked me in to a good pic for the "Supernatural" section, so I'll add that. If I get a spare moment this weekend I'll aim to add some more anthropology pics to show attire, houses, temples, etc. Still really want a pic of a festival dinner-table, and now that a few locals are participating I'll see if any of them can grab a pic next time they're over at grandma's house. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

EDIT: I would however cut-paste the contested para verbatim into Talk, just in case someone later does stumble across a ref. Google is adding more books every hour; the pickup in gBooks hits I've seen even in just a year of leaning on that source has been impressive. BTW, do you use RefTag (http://reftag.appspot.com) to format your gBooks refs, or some other tool? MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:47, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I can code a book cite faster by hand than by using Reftag etc. And they're more likely to agree to WP:MOS guidelines. You might notice that I have started nitpicking on some stuff. This is primarily for consistency, without which it will be a real struggle to get GA at any point in the future. I have no idea if you have ever been through the GAN process before but in any event, no need to panic about it. - Sitush (talk) 20:04, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Khattak page

Hi Matthew,

About the Khattak page. The Contents are too long and I know how to fix it. A major part of its length is due to the tribal sub clans. It can easily be corrected by creating a table for the super-tribe>sub tribe and so on. However, this does not mean you should delete hard worked and well referenced research. You deleted major portions of some pains taking research material for which I had provided genuine references. It came from the work of not just myself but many researchers at the Peshawar University and in Afghanistan and the US. Please do not delete this. It was painful to watch it being deleted. You and I might not be Afghan historians or Ph.D scholars but the people who had worked on it are. Please respect their research about themselves backed by a multitude of scholars, western and otherwise. I feel, my words have not been very pleasant, I apologize. However, as I said, all this awkward content length can easily be corrected by creating a tribal table, like the one on the page Afghan Tribes under Afridi.

Thank you. Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan (talk) 05:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I think I understand

Hi matthew,

I was thinking about your deletions, and then I read this on your page: "Improving sourcing and academic accuracy of Indian articles on castes and social groups; the subject is woefully prone to puffery and pseudo-history"

My God, is this the reason why you just deleted a major chunk out of the page Khattak?? Well, I'll start by saying, I completely understand your line there. I have spent more than half of my time here sifting out useless and irrelevant pseudo history and claims. I actually give you credit for having the patience to do this, since I have tasted its bitterness myself.

However, coming from someone like myself, I assure you I dont accept things just as they are. I got research papers and articles from various professors I know on the subject, some forwarded it themself, I studied it and only accepted the references and material that I could myself verify in libraries or online. Do you know how seriously I take this, I took time out of my hospital duties and when I was free and spent months, (almost 6-7 months !!!) verifying it.

To further my point, just use one of the references and you'll know it checks out.

Dude, you just dont delete stuff, I literally cried when you just deleted hours upon hours of research. Research that has and is coming out in various academic journals and research papers.

Whereas, wiki is a free encyclopedia that everyone can edit, many put utter garbage, some pseudo material but there are genuine people who want wiki to be a genuine research oriented archive of human knowledge. That is why I contribute my time and energy to wiki. Please dont make me regret my choice.

Thank you, and no hard feelings. Wassalam. Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan (talk) 06:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

The Table

Hi Matthew, I have a suggestion, I have re arranged and shortened the said page (Khattak) without affecting the related content. There is one last thinf that needs to be settled. The table. Once made, it will further reduce the contents table by shortening the Super Tribe sub tribe and so on headings. I have tried but I cant make one. You are the senior editor here, and I trust in your ability, please make a table from the following figure accommodating all its data with one more additional detail. The figure is: [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Khattak_family_Tree.jpg ] and the additional detail are the areas given in the super tribe sub tribe section for each of these names from the figure. For example, Super tribe > Khattak, Division > Bolak, Clan > Yusufzai-Khattak, Area > Lund Khwar, Tabar > Awwal Khel (this much is from the figure) and now the detail about their areas --> Areas: Mardan, Sawabi, Malakand, Charsadda. City Centers: Lund Khwar, Jamal Garhi, Sher Garh, Katlang, Hatia'n (alternatively Hatiaan), Sakha Kot.

Thus, using both the figure and the area info from the main article, a table will be created which will then replace all the headings and sub headings that lengthens the contents box.!!

I hope you get it. If there is anything you would like to ask, please contact. Thanx. Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan (talk) 11:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Erroneous cats

Hey Matthew!!

I read your reply, I completely agree with you. Those cats are erroneous. I will leave you to decide and put whichever ones you deem right. In that instance you are clearly the senior and more experienced wiki. No hard feelings man!!

I am glad that deletion of material was just a mistake and not an intended one. You dont have to apologize or feel bad for anything. Now that I know more, it was a simple mis understanding. I am glad you cleared it out. Thank you.

Finally, I would like to "recruit" ;) your help on that table making (wiki tables are a chaos too!! hahaha, I just cant get one to work!!) and that contents box on the page Khattak is also awkward looking with no text on its right side. (Its right side is more like an empty lunar crater!!). Cant we do something about it?

Would love to hear back from you. Wassalam. Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan (talk) 15:25, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

The whackos have woken up over there, I think

Geez, it's like pissing to put out a forest fire. And now it is running on two articles. I am not looking forward to Saturday, when our friends come off their blocks. Can you lend me a short rope and a high beam before then? ;) - Sitush (talk) 18:30, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

On the bright side, they're not tampering with the article itself. And for our current friends, I think I'm fixing to post a "I will no longer respond to you until you follow any of the points of advice given by two experienced editors and an admin: either provide proposed changes with proper sourcing, or file a POV concern at the Noticeboard.". MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:47, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

• Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Some help over Nair regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

User Talk:Vikraantkaka

I've blocked Vikraantkaka for 48 hours for repeated removal of cited material without discussion. Whenever you revert things from these people, could you please issue some higher level warnings on their Talk pages if they've done it repeatedly - that way a subsequent block looks better supported should it need to be reviewed. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Ezhava and Keralone

Just to let you know that I have issued a 3RR warning to Keralone for repeated changes at Ezhava. I opened a discussion on the talk page last night but cannot change anything on the article as I'll be over 3RR. Keralone is actually way over, but until a minute ago I thought that I would give them another chance. - Sitush (talk) 11:39, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Ukulele Talk

You wrote on my page a few years ago asking me what brought me to the Ukulele talk page that was 3 years old. I'm not sure if you're saying that there should be a time frame that one should reply or not, but unfortunately I'm not one who obsessively uses Wiki as a means to exercise or assert some type of empowerment and for that I wasn't aware that you even left a message for me, so I apologize for that. I actually teaching English to Brazilians and as part of the history the topic of the ukulele came up and one of my students used this page as a source and that's how I stumbled across the discussion page. Sorry if i'm not adding these topics correctly either. I have a friend who is a moderator and hopefully he'll give me tips and to the dos & don'ts or wikis protocols. Mamoahina (talk) 05:36, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

SPI for Chekon

Could you please let me know your thoughts regarding this? You can reply on my TP if you want (I suspect that the IP is Shannon1488 and he will be watching my page). - Sitush (talk) 16:28, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Weird edits

Hi Matthew, As always, you are absolutely right in all instances. I will use the words you advised, and yes my tone indeed was excessive. It is just that, after trying so hard to maintain these pages from wanton vandalism and sometimes rightful but clumsy editors, it is difficult to remain calm. For instance, I have now spent more than a decade studying this particular subject i.e. Khattak and I know for a fact what the contributor added was not only incorrect, he used poor English, erroneous grammar, no references and worst of all, put it in Origins!! a description of battles that never happened in Origins!! whoah!! Sweet Jesus!!

Well, I will be careful and will definitely use your advice. Please, do provide me with your much wanted critical observations and advice in the future. Thank You Mathhew. :) Wassalam. Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan (talk) 15:42, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

forgot

Hey, I just forgot to mention that the said IP is banned in four different locations on the net (blacklisted). Take care :) Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan (talk) 15:43, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Reddy Imbroglio

Thanks for your information. As stated by me in Talk pages related to Telugu speaking social groups, Kammas belonged to Shudra caste but Kshatriya element got infused because of historical reasons. Of course, that does not make them Kshatriyas. The most illustrious Kamma of 14th century Musunuri Nayaks proudly and honestly claimed in their inscriptions that they belong to fourth caste. All social groups including Kamma, Velama, Telaga, Balija, Munnuru Kapu, Ontari belong the Kapu group whose basic profession was farming. The illustrious Prolaya Vema Reddy in his inscriptions claimed that he belonged to fourth caste and Panta vamsa (clan) a branch of Panta Kapus. Villge chiefs were given titles ssuch as Peda Kapu, Reddy, Choudary, Naidu etc., These titles are now confused and consolidated as "castes". Till fifty years back there was no separate social group like Reddy. Because of social and political reasons, Kapu gentry bearing the title "Reddy" started distinguishing themselves as a separate social group and Telugu society came to accept it. Too much should not be read into that.I can provide several references to cite that present day "Reddy" was kapu and that they are Shudras. However, I would not like to do that because I have other things to do. I leave it to Users like Foodie to improve his approach to Wiki and contribute more meaningfully.Kumarrao (talk) 16:19, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Editing Conflicts

Hi Matthew,

please help put in regard to the editing frenzy of this user AlimNaz, please look up the last deletions he has done and the comments he put as explanation. One go deletions without discussion or reasons cited, putting in his own views and beliefs contrary to all the references provided for the different articles and so on. His edits in question being on Pashtun people and Afghana articles. I am not going to engage him in vain conflict until your advice. Thank you. Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan (talk) 11:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Maybe he's concerned with the use of sources. A western historian mentioning Afghani traditions is not saying they are fact. I'm concerned about the Afghana article and have made some revisions. Dougweller (talk) 12:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm explaining to this guy over and over that this section "Afghan and Afghana" doesn't belong in the Pashtun people article but he is ignoring this and trying to divert the discussion else where. He says that he's done years of special researches but I don't believe that, I believe he is the retired User:Afghan Historian who typed the word "Afghana" at google book search and copied all the book references he found there into Wikipedia articles. Anyway, he may go ahead improve and expand the Afghana article but him putting the "Afghan and Afghana" section in Pashtun article creates a big problem because the "History and origins" section concludes that "According to most historians and experts, the true origin of the Pashtuns is unknown... the origin of the Afghans is so obscure, that no one, even among the oldest and most clever of the tribe, can give satisfactory information on this point."--AlimNaz (talk) 21:25, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

NAIR

I have not removed any sources just readded images which were removed and deleted one for which there is no consensus (see with Sitush).Rajkris (talk) 08:11, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

If I have removed a cited source, i'm sorry for this. It was not my intention.Rajkris (talk) 15:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem, it's a common enough mistake to select more text than mentioned; I accidentally wiped a whole chunk of a Pashtun article last week by editing an earlier version, so been there. We do still disagree on the photo issue though, but we're hashing it out in talk, and though you and I disagree on some things I do greatly appreciate your professionalism on these issues, as far too many other editors have been uncooperative. Will read through the photo discussion and comment later. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit war

Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Reddy . While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 17:19, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Fuse lit, flameproof suit on

Oh, bother! If I go offline some time soon it may well be a direct result of this. It really isn't the sort of territory that is likely to make me friends. I just hope that there are some sensible people among the readers of that article, who take my point at face value rather than think it is some sort of equivalent to "call my caste the son of a dog, you asshole?" - Sitush (talk) 13:50, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Were it me, I'd avoid the whole Jesus/Mohammed issue (which honestly isn't even that key to your post) and just focus on the fact that we can't accept everyone's personal histories at face value. Personally, I would change that if I were you to avoid any direct debate on actuality/fictionality of key religious figures, and instead focus on the general fact that people's claims about themselves, lacking outside critique, can't be accepted at face value. I don't see this as censoring WP, just finding the most productive angles of debate, given that there's no need to drag a largely unrelated secondary debate into a pretty minor issue of popular vice academic history. YMMV. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

You may be right but it will be a bit difficult to backtrack now. I think that a couple of admins have seen it, so cross everything. My point was to make it even-handed, so that people didn't think that it was some sort of attack on Muslim beliefs. You may be right but I am pretty sure that if I said that we cannot rely on what the Maqbara website says then, in no time at all, we'll be at a "you are smearing our religion" situation. Kicking off again at Nair now as well. Looks like it is going to be another of those weekends, although I notice that activity here generally seems to fall away on Sat/Suns. - Sitush (talk) 15:08, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

AiH

I HAVE respond you on ahir discussion page and waiting for your response.you have time for deleting article but not for healthy discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.242.47.37 (talk) 04:33, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

You may want to read up on WP:block evasion. - Sitush (talk) 07:34, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - Sitush (talk) 07:50, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Yadavs

Sir,i have given source of kashatriya status of yadavs in Rajasthan,Gujrat Northwestern india and south india.but you are ignoring my contribution and deleting it from article.this is not fare.you must respect others work also.i had edit the page with full refrence.i hope you will recognise it soon.115.240.62.56 (talk) 14:40, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Greetings, since you're using an IP, and are not specifying which edits you're referring to, I honestly can't tell exactly which contributions you're referring to. We've had a variety of suggested statements on the Talk:Yadav page, but I don't recall any particularly viable ones that we're not caught up on. More a lot of non-includable claims from Vedas, etc. which do not meet WP standards. Can you please be a bit more specific as to what you feel we're "ignoring" or deleting? MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:19, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

An Invite to join the WikiProject Education in India

- - - - - - - - - - - - WikiProject Education in India - - - - - - - - - - - -
Hi, MatthewVanitas, you are graciously extended an invitation to join the Indian Education ! The WikiProject Indian Education is an evolving and expanding WikiProject. We are a group of editors who are dedicated to creating, revising, and expanding articles, lists, categories and Wikiprojects, to do with anything related to Indian Education System(Schools,Colleges and Universities).
As you have shown an interest in article related to Education in India we thought you might like to take an interest in this growing WikiProject.Thank you for your contributions.
We look forward to welcoming you to the project!

naveenpf (talk) 08:03, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For cleaning up the caste-related articles with great patience and diligence utcursch | talk 16:44, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sitush for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. The Tiger's Tail Caught By The Dog (talk) 03:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Khudabdi Script

Dear Mr. MatthewVanitas, greetings, I refer to your enquiry dated 28/05/2009 and inform you that I have printed form of Consonants of Khudabadi Script in alphabetical order. I can scan and send by e-mail to you so that you can edit the same in this article. Please give me your e-mail address Gespee (talk) 17:44, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Kurmi/Kunbi merger

Hello,Thanks for the link, I've checked it. I'm a Kurmi, I think it will be good for both Kurmis and Kunbis to come on same stage.Merger will bring both group on common stage and it will clear many confusions, it will improve the article. I can say it's both academic and political advantage.--Ajneesh Katiyar (talk) 04:36, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Topple the Tyrants for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Topple the Tyrants 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/Topple the Tyrants (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article.

Note that I did not create this AfD and only became involved in this to fix a broken nomination. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:23, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Any idea what purpose?

Any idea what purpose List of topics on the land and the people of “Jammu and Kashmir” achieves? I am not good with categories but this seems effectively to be a substitute for cats, and it includes a template that also seems to be a substitute. I am tempted to AfD the thing. - Sitush (talk) 15:56, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I also am not terribly fond of that format, as I think its redundant to the category trees. That said, there does appear to be a precedent for such things existing: Category:Indexes of articles. I would suggest a less-clunky title like List of Jammu and Kashmir topics, at the least. I'm just not sure an AfD would kill it, since there are (in a very inconsistent way) articles for similar topic lists. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:00, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:OSE may apply in any AfD discussion. Someone said "well there are other articles about shopping malls in other Indian cities" recently when one such was sent to AfD. The argument backfired: they were all deleted, and without even being proposed by name! - Sitush (talk) 16:25, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

As my yeahbutal, the "topics of" is more like an established format, so rather than pick and choose, you'd probably have to call into question the entire utility of "indexes of articles", which spills over a wide swath of WP. I don't know how many people out there are big fans of them (similarly, I'm mad for cats, but I've seen other experienced editors support eliminating categories entirely), but they'd probably come out of the woodwork at that point to argue that Indices aren't redundant. Overall, I'd say pick our fights and just rename it and move on. I'm far more concerned about the huge batches of POV caste articles than I am about organisational minutiae like Indices that almost nobody uses that don't take up much space (and will at least look clean in title with a rename). MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:29, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

James Tod

I am doing a little tidying up at James Tod and have also added a "Reputation" section. That section, which is incomplete, already makes interesting reading. Basically, it is likely to substantiate what I have suspected for a long time: we cannot rely on Tod here as a source for outright factual statements. When he is used as a source then we need a more recent supporting source (which kinda makes using him pointless in the first place), or we need to note in the text that it was Tod who said it and he is not exactly the most reliable of people. - Sitush (talk) 01:23, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Mentioned in Despatches

	Buddy, lend me a dime?
	Is your payment being drip-fed? Sitush (talk) 05:56, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Interest in the Nair caste blogpost

Dear sir,

I was perusing the ANI board and noticed your comment with regard to a rather angry fellow writing a blogpost on the topic of Nair caste members. As I am always on the lookout for (but have no interest in causing) humerous drama, I was wondering if you would be so kind as to link me to this blogpost where the rather angry gentleman accuses you and several other editors of having taken bribes for the purpose of slandering a caste in India. It would be appreciated, and depending on the inanity and paranoia exhibited in the post itself, might possibly make my day.

Your servant,
Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 19:00, 9 July 2011 (UTC) (Note, I don't normally write like this, but it's fun in this case. :p)

You can find it in the ANI history, or on my talk page. - Sitush (talk) 20:54, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

ThisThat2011

I am going to be ignoring ThisThat2011 for the foreseeable. Conversation is achieving nothing of value and is becoming tendentious. I have better things to do with my time here than to be "instructed" on what I need to do with it. - Sitush (talk) 20:53, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Shia Islam article

Dear Matthew, I made some cleaning on Shia Islam, and will continue it in the incoming days. The article contains lots of redundant sourced materials, and I am afraid of being accused in the next days. So please have a look now and then, and if you see any of my edit inappropriate, just revert it or rewrite as you prefer. Regards. --Aliwiki (talk) 14:59, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

SPI

You might be interested in what's being unearthed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shannon1488 -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:13, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Kurmi kshtriya

Thoughts welcome at User talk:Sitush#Kurmi kshtriya -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:50, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Religious seats section of Yadava article

After reading the subject section which you added, I found that it is most appropriate to include this section in Konar (caste) article. Please consider about moving the section, even though the article needs serious improvement. Joy1963^Talk 15:11, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

That section was actually written by someone else, but moved by me during a merge, I believe. It's rather confusingly written, so I wasn't sure what to do with it. By all means, modify it or move it as you like, just leave us a clear edit summary (we've had a lot of vandalism and are touchy, so a clear ES would let us know you're a proper editor). Thanks for touching base on it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:21, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Please dont take ownership of articles

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. However, please know that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors on Kurmi. If you create or edit an article, know that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Sitush and MatthewVanitas have assumed the ownership of the article as per the evidence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sitush#What.27s_the_deal_with_Humour.3F.

Yes, but probably best to wait until Humour has run out of steam because those threads near the top may yet be useful in plain view rather than in an archive. Now, how long will it take him to run out of steam?, you may ask. No idea, but I have just warned him for disruptive editing. - your post

That said, do you think that once things calm down at Talk:Kurmi we can archive just about everything on the dang page? - post by MatthewVanitas

Let's keep wiki an open community. Please be respectful towards other users.

80.84.55.196 (talk) 06:06, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

FYI: The version of this discussion that above user had on User Talk:Sitush has been copied to WP:NPOVN, in order to criticize the behavior of Boing! said Zebedee, SpacemanSpiff and myself (as "admins", even though I'm not one), as well as Sitush and yourself. It's at WP:NPOVN#One sided opinion of Admin and user Sitush and Matthews on the page Kurmi: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurmi if you feel like commenting. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:46, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Geez, I have just seen this (the original IP post here). Not only is it an unattributed copy/paste but it takes the conversation between myself and MV out of context in a big way. I despair.

I do not deny getting frustrated with TT2011. A lot of other people have been, across many articles, but what the IP should have done here is link to the conversation of my talk page, which is in full view for everyone to see. It should also be noted that when I did something wrong recently regarding a TT contribution, I apologised both in the edit summary and on his talk page. We are all human and mistakes happen.

I have an idea who the IP is but, well, until SPI are able to link usernames to IPs there is little point in pursuing it. Matthew, keep doing what you do. We sometimes disagree about sources etc but at least we work our way through those (rare) situations in an appropriate manner. You work in these really rather drama-laden articles is very much appeciated by me and, I suspect, many others. - Sitush (talk) 23:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Warning on term Shudra & repeated insistance on keeping it on prominant places in articles on Hindu communities

Hi,

A general warning is given here about terming Hindu communities as Shudra.

More legal info here details on discontinued use of the word Shudra and relevant punishments if 'insult or injury deliberately'.

This is regards to inclusion of word Shudra as also insistence on keeping it so, on pages such as Kurmi (edit examples 1, 2, 3 -- there are tens of edits on the page as can be clearly seen here), Yadav (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, there are tens of edits as can be seen in the history here).

Please desist from such a behavior. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 08:25, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

By the way, this is not a 'threat' of any kind, just a warning. The website pointed out is for understanding legal standing in India. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 08:51, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, apparently Indian laws don't carry a lot of weight on Wikipedia, so calling Indian Jatis as Shudra by standards of Wikipedia is not too offensive on Wikipedia. In any case, It is just a warning. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 09:19, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

!?!? You're not even reading you're own sources correctly. That site (a blog post, as far as I can tell), does not say that using the word "Shudra" is potentially illegal. It says that "There are many other offences causing insult or injury deliberately and details of punishment for such offences, and enhanced punishment for subsequent conviction." Note that that occurs in the paragraph about "causing injury or even insult to any SC or ST by forcibly removing his clothes or to parade him naked" (emphasis added). In other words, that law is talking about far more extreme things than using a particular word. Note, also, that the original claim that "they have not been called officially and academically Shudras or Dalits" is wrong. A search of gov.in sites shows over 200 mentions of "Shudra", with another 119 on nic.in sites. A search of Shudra on Google Scholar returns over 400 results--and that's searching for just articles published in the last 3 years (many/most of which are clearly published in India). I think, in fact, that this is the same problem that MV and Sitush have mentioned on both NPOVN and the article's talk page: you aren't reading critically. You see a term or phrase that has a sentence or two that matches up with your perception, but you fail to consider either the quality of the source or the actual entirety (the context) of the specific information you're quoting. Reading sources with a careful eye is absolutely critical when evaluating sources for inclusion in Wikipedia. It's fine if that's not your particular skill (we're all good at different things), but please don't keep rejecting the points made by those who are extremely good at analyzing sources.

Finally, please don't mention this issue of possible illegality any more. While I understand that you claim it's just information, not a threat, your purpose is still to "chill" discussion--that is, to influence us to not use the word out of fear of prosecution. That's the reason why we don't allow legal threats, and so, even if that's not your intention, why you need to stop. If you really think there is a legal risk to Wikipedia, please contact the Wikimedia Foundation directly. Qwyrxian (talk) 21:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually Quyrxian, it is about seemingly serious stuff like parading naked, and also about other seeming trivial things like insults. The text of the act is there at the bottom of the article Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Insult is about perception it is very subjective. My point is ...just as you missed the insult part, so did Thisthat something else, please AGF.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 06:05, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Can of worms

(1)I am giving one example of what even well sourced edits produce, a brown, tawny-coloured people, of average height, well-proportioned, rather lightly framed, and with a fair amount of good looks. They show well-shaped heads and high features, less refined than Brahmans, less martial than Rajputs, of humbler mien even than the Goalas; but, except when they have obviously intermixed with aborigines, they are unquestionably Aryan in looks. Grey eyes and brownish hair are sometimes met with amongst them. The women have usually small and well-formed hands and feet, this is of-course on the Kurmi page. You are quoting Dalton's ethnology of Bengal, which is perhaps considered a first class source. Would you quote from a Nazi Physiognomy manual? What value does such statements have? What do you mean by well-shaped heads or being less refined than Brahmans? Is it all not perverted? The point is you have opened a can of worms, I have looked at your talk page, and on Kurmi page, there are many registered and anon editors who have voiced their protest. Would you use Nazi sources to deal with Jew issues? Similarly British/Imperialist sources for Indians should be used with caution. (2)Your remark above in the edit ...ourcasteisawesome.com etc. is very interesting, I have read that some castes even arranged for Puranas to be written, and castes went up or down. So why use a dynamic lable when it is so pejorative and offensive?(3)One and two are suggestions take them or leave them.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:24, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

That quote has been there for years. It jars with me and I would be happy to see it go. However, when I looked into it the thing appeared to have been added by someone from India and so I thought that it might be one of those matters of pride. Regardless, this is a discussion for the article talk page, not here. - Sitush (talk) 11:32, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

To clarify, it was in a version of the WP article from 2006 that was erroneously used as a source yesterday (at bookrags). - Sitush (talk) 11:33, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Please explain the previous edit Sitush, if it was for me.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:47, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Sitush how do you know where a person is from? I thought you were Indian as your username looks like Satish, your userpage says you are in Japan but edit in English, doesn't tell me a lot about you, same with anyone else.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:52, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Geolocate IP address and hope that it is not a proxy; and note that umpteen other people subsequently, who have professed to be of the Kurmi class and have edited in what might be called a "pro Kurmi" manner have left it alone. Regardless, my point is that MV did not insert this information. It existed before he edited anywhere here & I would guess that since it has been unchallenged for so long he made the same assumption as me: it is sourced and so, even if it grates with me, leave it alone. The edit introducing the mirror is here and the quote existed way back (I am not going through it all again to find the exact date of introduction). You have me confused with someone else, by the way. - Sitush (talk) 12:00, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I never claimed that Matthew inserted that text, I just used it as an example of the pitfalls of the system of wp:RS etc.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 12:06, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Have I (my confusion)? I'm sorry.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 12:08, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

You said in your original message "you are quoting ..." There is no pitfall in the WP:RS system here: as I have explained, it has been left precisely because of RS. The fact that I am personally uncomfortable with it is not a reason for me to remove it.

I have used the name Sitush on what is now the web since before the web and PCs etc existed, back in the days of FIDO bulletin boards etc. According to a recent blog, I am in Liverpool although, if you look around you would see that I am in Manchester. I even said so in a message somewhere yesterday. - Sitush (talk) 12:19, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

(od)Oh I should have used the more formal Dalton is quoted. There is a term that comes to my mind, wp:RS is a necessary condition, but not a sufficient condition.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 13:35, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

As noted, I was not the originator of that text to the best of my recollection. I've certainly run across plenty of articles where antiquated-anthropological texts were quoted, and as Sitush notes generally it's been used as "look, even the British said Foo was beautiful and Aryan." Anachronistic? Highly. Useless? Not necessarily, it gives interesting insight as to the relationship between the British and the Foo caste. Not that the British are qualified to define a caste, but just that they were one of the greatest outside influences on India in the 1800-1947 period. I would be equally thrilled if we had access to Moghul descriptions, for example, so this isn't a "white people are right" issue so much as a reflection of our better access to British descriptions.

I wouldn't go out of my way to add it were it not there, but I don't see any major reason to remove it, provided it is clearly qualified as historical perspective vice historical fact. I also don't see it as a "pitfall of the RS system". Even if Dalton is agreed by consensus to be accurate on some issues, that does not make him RS for everything. A 19th century Norwegian may be RS for listing out the major shipping companies operating in Oslo in 1848 (since he can be presumed to be familiar with the topic and to have motive to coney the information accurately), but he is not an authority on oceanography worth of contradicting modern researches who have far better accesss and technology. Do you track my metaphor? MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:14, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

That is why I have quoted Pagdi on the Kurmi talk page, please bother to read if possible. I have had enough with the Kurmi talk page, for some time at least. No offence meant.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:02, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

And I see no reason to disagree with anything you have written last.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:04, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Whats this

at this link you will find probable vandalism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israr_Ahmed#New_Social_Engineering_Program_of_United_Nations_Organizations after checking whether the said author has said this, I found it to be completely false and baseless. I am waiting for references but even if provided, they too might be false or pseudo. Maybe you would like to clean it up in time!! Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan (talk) 12:59, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Ahirs as OBCs

you mentioned modern ahirs as shudra which is ancient concept and hardly relevent in modern period for modern community.this is also not useful for readers because you alredy deleted good amount of ancient history of this community.so much of tussle going on discussion page both side accusing each other.you as an administrator have responsibility to keep faith in wikipedia of other contributors.so sir ,i request you to use OBCs word instead of Shudra which more relevent today and useful for readers.i hope you will take it positively.Bill clinton history (talk) 13:31, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I am not at all an administrator, and any "ancient history" which has been removed has been so because it either was redundant to Abhira tribe and/or failed to demonstrate a linkage to the modern Ahir community. So far as OBC and Shudra, I'll take a look at the page again to ensure that the "Shudra" term is clearly labeled as historical, and the OBC as a modern concept. The Shudra term is hardly "ancient", as it appears the Ahirs were labeled Shudra well up to Independence, following which such official varna designations were phased out, though outside official channels they certainly maintain some vestigial relevance. Long/short, yes, we should ensure the term Shudra is put in proper context, but no, we will not whitewash it from the article to spare hurt feelings. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

ok I agree with you sir,keep shudra in article..but it is only one point of view of a controversial Topic ahir.there are other sources also mentioned them as OBCs, Cowherders,Nomads and Kshtriya.but these points have been completely deleted from article.we should have a comprehensive article for our readers with all relevent point of views from well cited information.it is very common in subject like history,sociology have different point of view of a topic.Bill clinton history (talk) 15:29, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

When were cited mentions of cowherds, OBC, and nomads removed? And nobody is objecting to mentioning Kshatriya claims by Ahirs (so long as properly cited), what we're objecting to is lengthy reams of mythology cited as conclusive fact, particularly when those passages are redundant to other articles. The easiest way to avoid edit-warring would be for you to put your suggested text on the Talk page, and ask for comment. If everything checks out, we'll have clear consensus, and it can easily be added and defended in the article by all parties involved. We definitely need to cover all significant sides of the story, but we need to avoid speculation, repetition, etc. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I have given some sources with refrence of coeherders and ancient kingdoms of ahirs on discussion page.Bill clinton history (talk) 15:45, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I have the Ahirs page watchlisted, as does Sitush. I suggest you keep all the discussion on that page rather than ping our Talks each time. I'll go check out that page now, but the last time I checked you weren't very clear on which refs you wanted to use, and also I still suggest you provide a sample of what you want to add vice try to gain consensus based on vague intent. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:58, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

(1)As was obvious on the Kurmi talk page, you and Sitush do not have any specialised knowledge about the subject - caste, on the other hand you seem to have fairly good working knowledge of Wikipedia, which would have worked fine if the subject had been objective, however caste isn't that easy. I suggest as Bill above has that the Indian and State government classification, should be all that the article should mention, as these are unambiguous, at a given moment. (2)Jews and others were given the lable untermensch, would you use that lable in an article on Jews as a classification? (3)See these lables were given to people, they weren't self-designations. X classified a Y caste as Shudra, what authority did X have to classify a caste thus? Also we have Z a reliable source, that says that Y caste has shrugged that lable, and now has declared itself as no longer Shudra, and is agitating with authorities and with society to be considered so, why do you still make statements like what we're objecting to is lengthy reams of mythology cited as conclusive fact, do you considered the Varna system science, or scientific facts? (4)India under British had sign boards like dogs and Indians not allowed, do articles about Indians and Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, and Myanmarese, and Sri Lankans, and Maldivians, quote fine sources that in certain circumstances these were considered as equivalent to canine? (5)I am using this page as it about your editing and not any particualr article.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 16:35, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Broken record, I think. - Sitush (talk) 16:38, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

The "uttermensch" comparison doesn't fly: that is one specific era in a long history, and German-Jewish relations do not define Jewish identity overall, though it's certainly significant. Kurmi-Brahmin relations, however, are far more fundamental to an understanding of who the Kurmi are, and given that jati/caste/varna identity play a vital role in how Kurmis have functioned in Indian society, they certainly are notable. Again, I'm just not seeing how all of this doesn't boil down to WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I have never seen anyone on Wiki apply a fraction of this critical mentality towards any "positive" descriptions; POV editors have for too long had free reign to indulge in glorification and puffery. I fear you are trying to guilt-trip us into feeling bad for using the term "Shudra", however I submit it would be far more shameful to whitewash away the discrimination that Kurmis have faced, and the socio-political mechanisms they use to address it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:42, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

(od)(1)Catholic Germany almost wiped out Jews, and you say they don't define Jewish identity, and then you complain that I am stuck in one rut. Gimme a break. (2)You can check my user page's history, it had a Sanskrit verse to the effect that one who is proud about his caste is retarded, I aint a caste chauvinist if that is what you wish to know.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 16:55, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

For starters the only relevance of caste in modern India of any importance is Government classification as it is related to affirmative action programmes. PoV, nationalist, Hindutva that is a broken record as Sitush would have put it, get out of that, what is important is wp:DUE, wp:FRINGE and wp:UNDUE, which is regardless of wp:RS.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 17:01, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

If the caste only existed at the time of "modern India" then you might have a point. Of course, it has existed for far longer than that. But we have gone through all this before. Something is clearly not sinking in. - Sitush (talk) 17:13, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I do agree that you are not a caste-chauvinist (unlike many others in these debates), and I do respect your concerns about the dangerous implications of caste-history in modern factional conflicts and social/economic discrimination. That said, my concern is that you are whitewashing history to avoid hurt feelings. If we're drawing metaphors, this is like asking all mention of slavery be stricken from African American "since it's degrading, and obsolete, and it was an imposed identity that the community itself didn't approve". A huge number of jatis were considered Shudra in the past, during the British era a large number of them tried to buck that designation, in the modern era many of those jatis articles are written by caste-promoters who are eager to jam in all sorts of Kshatriya superstition and pseudo-history (which, if citeable, is certainly notable) but then weep/wail/gnash-teeth when the full story of varna controversy is brought in. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:39, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

You are using a long redundant terminology, I do not wish to ascribe motives to your actions. It is unfortunate that you have to mine.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:00, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

And giving that terminology too much weight. That is all my complaint is.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:01, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

(1)It would be wrong to single the British era as a period of social upheaval, on the other hand a view is that the British colonial administration made caste rigid[3], for example it is documented that Shivaji's army was not recruited on the basis of Caste[4]. (2)The subject cannot be dealt superficially and the present editors seem to lack the expertise.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:20, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

The rebuttal to "Sitush and MV lack expertise" would be "YK and TT2011 lack objectivity". Or we could flip the script and note the positive attributes both sides bring. It would be quite lovely if we could combine skillsets. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:24, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

• (1)Don't get it wrong. (2)Do you mean to say that you are an expert on caste? (3)All I charge is that the treatment is wp:UNDUE, why does that lack objectivity? I have suggested specific solutions, how does that make my treatment subjective? Below someone is trying to save poor Indian souls, is that objective? In all the long discussion have you offered or solicited any specific alterations? Would that not have been objective? (4)Is there a single line that describes how the Kurmis suffered because of their Shudra status, did I ask you to delete it, that would have been analogus to deleting mention of slavery. (5)Could you not have started from the Shudra article, adding it substance, and then used the word, so that the nomenclature would have been clear? You are using a non-English term whose meaning is not certain? Does it mean depressed classes? If not what is its English equivalent? Who then were the depressed classes?Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:07, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Terminology and context are integral parts of an encyclopedia article, and we do not write articles as if the past never happened and the hunky-dory present is all that exists. As MatthewVanitas says, that would be like excising all mention that Africans were once used as slaves, on the grounds that being a slave is degrading. Yes, the way many Indian people were treated because of their caste was degrading (and there are clearly a lot of related problems in India still to solve), but that no more degrades any modern Indian individual than describing slavery degrades a modern African American. Oh, and regarding "the present editors seem to lack the expertise", that's the whole point of Wikipedia - it isn't written from personal expertise, it's written from reliable sources, and it's the sources that count in making content decisions -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:28, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not saying I'm an expert on caste: I don't hold a PhD in the subject, and I would presume that you do not either. What I am is someone who is very accustomed to seeking and summarising reliable sources, which is fundamental skill on Wikipedia. I am still literally not clear exactly what you would like changed, do you want it taken out of the lede/infobox (I don't think we should even have an infobox), taken out of the varna and political sections or what? I dispute that it's at all UNDUE, as it's present in-context at each point, and varna politics is a prominent aspect of Kurmi (and many jati's) identity and social role. So far as Shurda, I say WP:OSE; whether that article needs fixing or not is no reason to delay dealing with Shudra issues in jati articles. Rather than go round and round and round, how about you go to Talk:Kurmi, start a new section and copy-paste-italicise the specific phrases you would like to see deleted/replaced and why? MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:13, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

And what's this "saving poor Indian souls" nonsense? I certainly never said anything of the sort - I'm simply saying that we *should* be objective and *should not* modify articles to avoid offence or to hide past context or past injustices -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:25, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)(1)You are in the dark because you never asked, I solicited to be asked and you are now offering it. (2)I have acknowledged your expertise about Wikipedia. No I am not even an under-graduate, but I have an emic perspective, that makes things easy for me, 35 years of input gives a person a little understanding (assuming I started to read at seven), things have been happening around me, I interact with people, that gives a person knowledge that would require an etic player exceptional effort to gain. (3)I feel the treatment is undue. (4)I disagree with the wp:OSE tag, you are using the term Shudra without clearly defining what it means, clearly we need to get the nomenclature in place before using it.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:38, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Yogesh, we have solicited suggestions time and again, but the problem has been mostly that the same suggestions have been put forward even when it has been explained that those particular ones simply will not fit in with how Wikipedia works. Please do not imply that MV or myself have been anything other than open to suggestions. On many occasions we have also asked for clarifications of what you want but, they generally did not appear. This is why I referred to the broken record thing above. - Sitush (talk) 19:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Yogesh, the issue is not about your or my expertise, it is about sources. I don't doubt your expertise in your field, and I expect your interpretations of old documents is very likely to be better than mine (and, in fact, I won't actually attempt any interpretation myself). The only problem is, your interpretation is no good as a source in Wikipedia, and wouldn't be even if you were the world's finest lexicographer equipped with the best dictionaries. We simply cannot accept your interpretation when you tell us what authors of sources really meant - not even if we think you're right. We have to have clear sources which require *no* interpretation -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:48, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

(od)(1)As I wrote on the talk page, what you (zebedee) write is ideal, no arguments regarding what the source should have said to have it to be acceptable. (2)Could we now have a definition of the word Shudra in the context of Kurmi, readers would like to know what Shudra is, what its implications were, once they know that Kurmi were sometime/onetime Shudra. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 20:07, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

This is utterly pointless. I am tempted to draft something up for ANI on the disruptive/tendentious grounds. - Sitush (talk) 20:16, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

No, we should not explain Shudra within Kurmi, that is why we have Shudra. If there are aspects of Shudra-ness which are specific to Kurmi _AND_ we have a citation specifically saying "the Kurmi version of Shudra was distinct in that...", yes, we could add that, but not otherwise. That is why we link the term Shudra. If you have problems with that article, fix that article, don't try to fix it indirectly via Kurmi. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:11, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

(1)Then don't link it to Shudra, as long as you are not sure that the two are the same. Let readers work it out. (2)In Kurmi Shudras have agricultural communities in brackets, another has Vaishya as agricultural communities, it is like walking on thin ice.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 22:31, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

The contradiction doesn't matter from the point of view that other stuff exists. However, I was aware of it and was going to fix the thing when the article got locked down. Now, why did it get fully protected? It will be sorted when we can get in there to edit - not worth bothering an admin to make a one-word fix. - Sitush (talk) 22:48, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

(1)You are sadly mistaken if you think I am using OSE, the example is used to illustrate that the terminology is vague and ambiguous, like Indian would be in the US, does Indian mean Bharatiya or Abya Yala you cannot provide misleading links.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 22:58, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

No. What you have shown is that some Wikipedia articles, when compared, are contradictory. Nothing more than that. - Sitush (talk) 23:03, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

(od)It takes courage to say I was wrong.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 07:01, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Madia Gond

I would like MV and Sitush to have a look at the article Madia Gond, which I created and have been a major contributor. It is also about a community.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 20:22, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

You can ask for it to be peer reviewed. I see little point in getting involved in it because I have enough on my plate dealing with you elsewhere at the moment. - Sitush (talk) 20:26, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh the purpose wasn't review, you are not happy with my talk page performance, I thought you might like to see one of my works, to establish my credetials either way. And also as an example of what I would like a community article to look like.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 20:31, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I can tell you now that it has at least one huge copyvio/plagiarism issue in it - the entire Dance section is a copy/paste from the source website. Back to the drawing board there, I think. - Sitush (talk) 20:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Gazette circa 1850s. Copyright has expired.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 20:35, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't matter. The advice remains that you should not plagiarise. Anyway, that's enough from me - the article clearly has quite a few problems even from a quick glance. Take it to another peer review if you are concerned about improving it etc. I simply do not want to get involved with it because the drama that will follow is something I do not relish. - Sitush (talk) 20:41, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

(od)See article talk.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 07:01, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Dear MathewVanitas How are you? Please have a look to the ariticle Swami Nigamananda for its improvement. I really appreciate, I can say you are the director of this article and you contibuted a lot to it. I have formatted this article to a beautiful readable formate and added maximum reliable references(ISBN). Apart from this article, Swami Nigamananda, I have created many more articles like Nilachala Kutir Durga Charan Mohanty Nilachala Saraswata Sangha . I am expecting you to see those and submit your feedback as and when you are free. Best Regards India Dcmpuri (talk) 04:11, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

RFC/N discussion of the username "I Jethrobot"

A request for comment has been filed concerning the username of I Jethrobot (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion here. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 16:57, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for the work on the article on the Marathas! Suneetk (talk) 02:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

WP Firearms in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Firearms for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Other editors will also have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 21:36, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, MatthewVanitas. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

- Sitush (talk) 06:55, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Ghulam Muhammad Vastanvi

Hello MatthewVanitas. I am just letting you know that I deleted Ghulam Muhammad Vastanvi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. —SpacemanSpiff 19:18, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Malaise

I never accused anyone of malaise. I have named no one. Perhaps I have a right to ask why I am named and accused of the same.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:34, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't at all recall using the word "malaise"; did I use it somewhere? I can't even think of why I would even apply that word to you. I'm more just baffled that you think its appropriate to bug top-ranking Wikipedia personnel with an absolutely ludicrous conspiracy theory off of an anonymous blog. I'm not upset, I actually think it's kind of hilarious, but I"m honestly baffled that you expect that somehow, if you keep pushing, someone is going to say that I'm wrong. I'm putting in a ton of work to improve caste articles, and now you go about spreading what is probably literally slander about me (though I emphasise I have zero interest in the legal aspects of this), and then you come here upset that I allegedly used the word "malaise"? This is simply ridiculous. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

It has been reported that the fellow who bombed Oslo has been preparing hard since 2009. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 17:06, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

What on earth does that mean? Are you drawing some kind of comparison between me and him? That's a terrible Personal Attack if it is. I suggest you either retract or explain. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:24, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

You wrote on user talk:Yogesh Khandke, Yogesh, just today you've compared me to the Oslo bomber and also keep, and keep, and keep dragging up an absolutely ludicrous assertion from some random blog. If you had brought it up once in an appropriate arbitration committee, fine, that'd be your right, but you and MW have attempted to spread these smears across every page you possibly can, and rather than follow formal proceses went running to the founder of WP. Jimbo, by the way, did not say "awesome call, this needs looking into", he basically said it seemed unlikely but that if anyone has actual evidence they should submit it. It is appropriate to question others editing practices, it is edgy but sometimes necessary to accuse others of documentable bias. It is inappropriate to speculate "I bet So-and-So did that because he's Catholic/Hindu/Inuit/Ainu", and it is completely, ludicrously inappropriate to compare someone to a terrorist, and to continually spread completely unsubstantiated accusations about another editor simply because you disagree with his editing. If you do this literally one more time, I'm putting a grievance against you for blatant personal attacks. Feel free to dislike and critique my editing, but your recent comments are totally out of line. Reply: You are jumping the gun and putting words in my mouth, please keep the thread in one place. All I want to say is this [5], which is also all that I have ever said. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:11, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

You are free to do whatever you wish/can do. Though I know it is easy to take action against some, I can't however be coerced. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Any way something completely tangential to the discussion, the bloke is described as militant by the Times of India, the world's largest circulating English newspaper. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:19, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, explain it to me like I'm a four year old: how on earth is "No MV you do a reassessment. You are mis-handling to whole issue" related to the Oslo bombing? Not a riddle, you're the one drawing a comparison. And you failed to respond to my asking where I accused you of malaise, and then insist I'm putting words in your mouth? How can I possibly read your above without assuming you're comparing me to the Oslo bomber? Regarding "keep it on one page", no these are different issues: I'm telling you I will take you to ANI if you attempt to smear anyone using that silly blog again. You have no reason to link to ludicrous accusations off-site except to attack others credibility. And you can quit your silly attempts to defend as "I don't support the blog, I just think it's interesting", especially as you've deflated those yourself with your implications that "it's just a matter of time" until Jimbo investigates and bans us over an unsourced blog. These are blatant personal attacks, and you're not backing off from them in the slightest. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:17, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

ton of work improve, well you can't be your own judge. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:21, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)::Does anyone think that people are retarded and think it is about money? (I said the same thing to Zeebedee, four days ago[6]) Or is a lot of noise being made to divert attention, also check this[7]. There is another editor with whom I won't interact, not atleast unless I see a paradigm shift in his behaviour, (he even reverted talk page edits [8]), if you think I am a pain in your neck, I won't let my shadow fall on you, I am wasting your time because you came across as reasonable to me. Please let me know. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:40, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

This is not a mature way to handle this, all these vague jabs and "you figure it out"s. This is ridiculous. Are you saying "MV, you think you're improving things, but the Oslo bomber thought he was improving things too, so clearly you are both incorrect and doing more harm than good in your attempts to improve things." If so, why not be an adult and just say that? Or be even more adult, and express your concerns without comparing me to a terrorist? MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

You used a simile, I used sarcasm, if you can use a figure of speech I too can, or are some people disallowed?? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:42, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

BTW, I am that other editor. I reverted some crap that Yogesh kept putting on my page, simply because it was distracting me from something rather more important. He has never yet succeeded in any of his numerous complaints to admins about me but has been warned for his own behaviour towards me. Go figure. - Sitush (talk) 18:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

YK, again: if you don't believe the blog is accurate, why did you just today say: Such an attitude was the reason for my bringing the blog to the notice of the founder. Every one should remember that he has promised to look at the issue, it is only a matter of months. You are blatantly using this blog (whether you personally believe it or no) to imply that I/Sitush/CT/BsZ are under investigation and will be booted when the "truth" comes out, which is ludicrous. You're playing coy little games, but clearly talking out of both sides of your mouth to avoid committing to any stance and thus being hit for personal attacks, but you've established quite a clear pattern of those. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:48, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Incompetent handling of a subject, and incompetent admin role. wp:COMPETENCE. Anyways if you want to hang me, try, I've had enough of bluster.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:54, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

• I was shocked to see CarTick, we had a few punches thrown at each other over the time, but I don't have a grudge against him, or anybody for that matter, CarTick I've mentioned because I am sorry that he is not around and I miss him. We (u n me) have had a limited interaction, I am sorry for that talk page reverter, I wondered then, "What on the earth does a person do this for" (I am not saying this sarcastically, believe me I am saying this from my heart)? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 18:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

• • Well it is almost 1.00 am, I and I'll be taking the bails off, in a few minutes. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:06, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I spoke with CarTick recently. He is fine, although glad not to have to deal with all the POV pushing going on at present. He is ok with how the articles look & a little concerned about the socks and the attacks. Does that help you? - Sitush (talk) 19:09, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Take us and BsZ to ANI, then. You have been told this umpteen times. Oh, I forgot, you did that and got nowhere. When will you learn? - Sitush (talk) 18:56, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Yogesh, I had forgotten about that revert which you have now sneakily inserted into your earlier post. Were you aware that the other person in that discussion is an admin? She saw those reverts. Did she take any action against me? No, she pretty just told you to shut up, but more politely than that. Subsequently, she complained about you at ANI. - Sitush (talk) 18:55, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

MV, If I weren't involved, and I'd seen the above Oslo bomber quote, and then the fact that xe refused to retract the statement, I'd have immediately blocked for NPA. Don't worry about taking it to ANI; I'll do it myself, right now, on the basis of that comment alone. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:45, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, and wow. Catching up from the sidelines, where I've been vaguely watching some of the battles, I'm regretting my comments from a mere two weeks ago, [9]. My optimism has largely vanished. Amazed that you and others have not walked away, been driven away. I know I would have. Pfly (talk) 18:35, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Nameisnotyaddayaddayadda

FFS! - Sitush (talk) 07:42, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For sub-categorization of the items in Category:Rajputs. Bogdan Nagachop (talk) 10:08, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit requests

One small note about edit requests. Those who are "readers" (i.e., not really editors) may not actually even know about the talk page's existence. If a page is semi-protected, there's a button that a user can push that says something like "Suggest a change to this article". That gives the user a pop-up box to fill in what they think needs to be change; when they submit it, it automatically goes onto the article talk page. So the IP who asked about kshatriya may be genuinely unaware of the massive conversation. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:30, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Wow. I didn't know that either. The code needs rewriting! - Sitush (talk) 23:43, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Rajput

is this source of any use to you? - Sitush (talk) 08:14, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

The problem is, esteemed Sitush, that you aren't Indian and simply can't understand India. The "rigid" social structures are actually quite fluid and it's impossible to define any group concretely as... oh, wait. Nevermind.  ;) . MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:28, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

You may not have noticed in all of the recent kerfuffle, but Qwryxian stripped the 36 races out of Rajput clans earlier today on the basis that Tod is not RS. He has commented on the talk page. Surprisingly, there has not been a nuclear incident yet. The plan is to take it straight to WP:RSN if there should be any dissenting viewpoints, and then apply the outcome from RSN across all articles (ie: if RSN agree that it is unreliable then strip Tod from the lot). It is a bold move and he has more guts than I have, but it is based on sound argument. I shall be putting James Tod up for WP:GAN in the next three days, having had three different admins look over it in the last 24 hours or so precisely because I wanted an opinion regarding whether, given what the article says, Tod is RS. - Sitush (talk) 19:41, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

? - Oh, okay, out of Rajput clans, not out of 36 royal races. FWIW, I do think that there should be mention of Tod on 36 royal races purely on a historiographical basis. I'm still just pleased with myself for having put up a tamper-proof page-cap that both provides "the list" and also keeps IPs from mucking with it. Though I'm still annoyed that there technically is an RS that says "Tod says Ahirs are one of the 36 royal races" when Tod's actual list says no such thing. If an otherwise RS says something verifiably untrue (such as misquoting someone) can that be removed by common sense, or is that OR? Or, is that subject to endless wikilawyering with "well, maybe Dr Smith read Tod's 1832 version and not the 1834 version you're using... maybe-possibly-theoretically..." MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:17, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

What is the wayward RS? - Sitush (talk) 20:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Varna discussion

Greetings. There is a discussion in Talk:Kamma_(caste). Please can you give your response there. thank you.Foodie 377 (talk) 10:36, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

To MatthewVanitas

I have left a message for you in the Kamma Discussion Page. Thanks. --= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 02:25, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Mayasutra

Infoboxes and varna

I assume you watch User Talk:Sitush, but just to clarify your input would help on Varna infoboxes. Of course, we eventually need to take this to a wider audience, but easier to start with fewer. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:49, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

ANI

As I said above, I've taken Yogesh to ANI, in the course of which I mentioned your name; you can see and respond to the discussion at WP:ANI#Personal attacks by Yogesh Khandke. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:29, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Bill

Thanks Matthewvanitas for your guidance.Bill clinton history (talk) 07:25, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:AN

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#How_to_deal_with_tendentious_editing.3F. You are not named: this is just so you know, given your heavy involvement. - Sitush (talk) 16:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - moved from WP:AN per request of Fowler&fowler. - Sitush (talk) 19:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

It really has been going on for a long time. - Sitush (talk) 22:25, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Invite to WikiConference India 2011

Hi MatthewVanitas, The First WikiConference India is being organized in Mumbai and will take place on 18-20 November 2011. You can see our Official website, the Facebook event and our Scholarship form. But the activities start now with the 100 day long WikiOutreach. As you are part of WikiProject India community we invite you to be there for conference and share your experience. Thank you for your contributions. We look forward to see you at Mumbai on 18-20 November 2011

3rd opinion needed

Hi Mathew. When you have time, can you please go over the following edit @ Kunduz Province. The IP has added percentages and used a source which cannot be verified. According to all the sources, Pashtuns are in majority in Kunduz. Discussion page, [this source and Kunduz_Province#Districts might help as well. This IP clearly has an anti-Pashtun POV agenda based on his current contribution. I really don't know why admins consider his edits as content dispute rather than disruptive editing and vandalism. Thank you (Ketabtoon (talk) 05:41, 1 August 2011 (UTC))

the caste template

In which pages has the Caste template been used? Is there a list? Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:26, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Use the "What links here" on the template page; for the caste page, that gives us [10], which shows around 70 inclusions (rough estimate), a few of which are talk pages. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:41, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Source check

If you can see it, please could you have a look around page 277 of this. I am expecting it to say something about a Muslim ruler's tolerance towards Hindus in Kashmir c. 15th C. - Sitush (talk) 16:01, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Says "No Preview" - can't get anything. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:27, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for trying. - Sitush (talk) 16:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Tain Museum

In May you commented about this proto-article; thank you very much for those comments.

Some work has subsequently done with the result now at Tain Museum.

Please cast your eye over this again and let us know your assessment.

Thanks - MrDuthac (talk) 09:39, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

reply

I invite you to this discussion [11] Pass a Method talk 01:40, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

did you know anything about indian history

do you know who was Khafi khan and who was jayram, khafi khan was mughal historian and jayaram was poet of shivaji court in 17th century , the claims made by dalits is just a way to motivate the low esteem dalit people, plz provide one evidence of shivaji belonging to non-rajput origin which dates back to shivaji era(not books by historians) just because Einstein is einstein it dont mean we will believe anything similarly untill not evidence is given to prove shivaji non-rajput origin nothing can be said or written, i guess shivaji know more about himself than jadunath sarkar and he was sure about his rajput origin and untill no evidence is provided i will not let any non-rajput origin came in the way because history is made by evidences and not by historians.115.240.7.109 (talk) 07:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

give evidences

if you are on wikipedia for so much time then plz give me one single piece of evidence from shivaji era(not now) which gives the fact that shivaji was not a rajput, so first give the evidence just as i have did, the letter of shahji(siivaji father) is still in ghorpade museum which he writes in 1643 in which he calls himself a rajput and the link is already provided, historians with vested interests specially dalits are trying to claim shivaji in order to show their bravery but first give evidence then their will be additional origin of shivaji but untill then only rajput origin because historians no matter how much famous they are dont create any evidence you need evidence from that era.115.240.7.109 (talk) 08:02, 7 August 2011 (UTC)