User talk:Sitush

... or panic madly and freak out?

Have you come here to rant at me? It is water off a duck's back.

Manspreading

Mahar

Hi. When you recently reverted my changes to article Mahar, i missed to provide reference. I would suggest you to refer main article on "Marathi Christian" which is very specific and give exact information about Mahar Christian. You without having read the revised article, reverted it.. the suggested article gives information about dates whn christianity started in ahmednagar and number of worshipers... Few refenrence are quoted from - https://cultural.maharashtra.gov.in/english/gazetteer/Ahmadnagar/his_modern_period.html marshmir (talk) 10:13, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

User:Marshmir: we avoid government sources for caste articles - they tend to be politicised. And their gazetteers are often plagiarised from the Raj era gazetteers and thus not reliable. - Sitush (talk) 10:16, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Well you have not got my point. My main intention to change in article is to providing correct and specific information on Christian mahar where the existing one is not. I would suggest you to read main article of Marathi christian. The reference i provided you is just an example, you will get more refernce and Sources other than governemental on that article, i wonder Goverment sources you found bias. Where its a reliable source for international affairs. marshmir (talk) 10:27, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

If you cannot appreciate why caste is politicised in India, I suggest you stop editing caste-related articles. It is, the consensus on Wikipedia has long been thus and it is not a consensus that is likely to change. I will, however, review the Marathi Christian article, thanks - don't be too surprised if I rip into it because a lot of that sort of thing is equally poor. - Sitush (talk) 10:32, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Its really sad that you like to just delete paras in articles instead developing. For sure you get joy by just deleting someone's work to show your knowledge of Wikipedia.. i would still suggest you to first have approach to develop articles instead of being harsh with it. marshmir (talk) 15:06, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Marshmir I can assure you that I do not get joy from deleting someone's work and that I do indeed develop articles. You'll see some of that this very day here and a lot of it at featured and good articles such as James Tod and John Horsfield; also note my recent expansion of Banjara. - Sitush (talk) 15:33, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Well its fine until we have right motive. By devloping Wiki articles and bringing it to the good standard for its reader. You have changed whole article and thus the reason to create article is changed, you might not aware of local caste and its structure hence changed it without asking sources of information..marshmir (talk) 18:25, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Well done

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EruTheLord! There seems to be a bit of a backlog in the blocking and tagging, but I expect it'll happen soon. Maybe I could do it... but I don't know the best tags to use, nor how to move it correctly to the oldest account (turns out not to be EruTheLord), so I might as well leave it to the clerk. Bishonen | tålk 08:44, 20 July 2020 (UTC).

Bishonen I feel bad about it. Have just left another comment after you posted there. A complete mess. - Sitush (talk) 08:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

I could topic ban the one with the long name for tendentious editing, I suppose (having read your examples on their talk), but it's a bit of a pity that they got the DS alert so late in the game. I'll have to think about it. Bishonen | tålk 09:07, 20 July 2020 (UTC).

Yes, I didn't realise what was going on and I doubt many others could work it out if they tried because it needs some background knowledge about the politics of south India regarding caste etc. Complete mess and there are a year's worth of edits mostly on the same theme, which presumably ties in with when the university report appeared. I wasn't even active for a fair amount of that time, unfortunately. - Sitush (talk) 09:09, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

I've commented at the SPI again too, proposing that the master be left unblocked with a warning. However... the pattern of their edits rather suggests someone who has lost their password. Sigh. Bishonen | tålk 09:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC).

Yes, I thought that, too! - Sitush (talk) 09:18, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Bish, might there be scope for a "tell us which account you want to use and we will block the rest"? We do that sometimes for newbies. - Sitush (talk) 09:20, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, why not, but I have to eat something now, and go to the shops. You suggest it, or I can when I get the time. Bishonen | tålk 09:45, 20 July 2020 (UTC).

First of all, hello to both of you. How's it going? Long time no see. That said, if I may volunteer an unsolicited opinion, you could try asking both editor (and, if they do not take your request to heart, you could try restricting them under WP:ARBIPA) to discuss the issue on the Noticeboard for India-related topics, so as to consolidate the discussion there... Salvio 10:48, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Salvio, I was thinking of adding you to WP:LTA, thinking it was "long term absent". I hope that I am resolving the issue directly at Pallar#Modern_social_standing. If Mamallarnarashimavarman (thank you, the inventor of copy/paste) wants to object to that then fair enough but I think they would struggle to deny that this is mainly a movement from within the caste communities. Most of their edits have either been anachronistic use of the relatively new name or have been quite simply POV based on a single politicised source. - Sitush (talk) 11:34, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Well, I've been pestering other wikipedians for so long that you, probably, could add me to LTA and some people would be in favour... Aside from that, I'm still semi-active, although I mainly deal with CU and OS requests. I keep trying to get back into the swing of things, but I never seem to find enough time to devote to Wikipedia... Concerning the Pallar issue, if you can solve it there, all the better I'd say! Salvio 13:33, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Jose Chacko Periappuram

Your edits on Jose Chacko Periappuram and the comment that went with it. Just wanted to inform you that I was reinstating an earlier portion edited out by me because it had no citation to support it. Thanks for your work here. --jojo@nthony (talk) 11:03, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

I didn't look too deeply, sorry. I tagged that article a couple of years ago and nothing seemed to have improved in the intervening time, so I've had a go at it. - Sitush (talk) 12:07, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Eyes please

Many of these contributions seem to me to be questionable with regard to Caste. Warned in this diff Fiddle Faddle 15:40, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

In the case of Urvashi Rautela, I have cited a You Tube address which describe her caste and in an interview over [[Padmavat[Film]]] when Swara Bhaskar wrote a letter on it she said that she is a Rajput.

Not every time I am wrong and you should watch that You Tube video first before deleting my information.

Thanks Hope you would understand and reply me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amrapahal Pahanswan (talk • contribs) 17:40, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Well, if you have, say, 100 edits and you got one right, it isn't much to applaud, sorry. You were doing circular references and your YouTube links are often dubious - minor Indian news channels not in English etc. Nothing against non-English sources but given that you are in any case a Rajput caste warrior, I'm not wading through full videos from poor outlets looking for the 10 seconds that verify what you claim. One of your other sources there was a circular reference to Rautela and I think you know that is not acceptable but, as with the self-identification example I have raised on your talk page, you pick the rules to suit your occasion. - Sitush (talk) 17:45, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

I am new to this so please help me how can I put someone caste, family and personal detail as many a time I have given citation from big sites such as The Economics Times and BBC News till it was deleted by users such as NitinMlk. I am also an Indian and you are such an honoured guy, so please help me how to give citation while describing someone's caste, race, personal life etc. Yours Truly Amrapahal Pahanswan (talk) 18:30, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Amrapahal Pahanswan, First the person must; self-identify as a member of that Caste. Second, the reference must show that they are self identifying. Third, the reference must be in WP:RS. Fourth, it must have direct relevance to the article, not just naming the caste for the sake of naming it.

It is far easier to give this caste warrior role of yours up. A great many editors watch out for caste warriors Fiddle Faddle 18:34, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

One question that if a caste of a politician is described by a link Up vidhansbha members information. Will it be considered valid as it is the official site of Uttar Pradesh government. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amrapahal Pahanswan (talk • contribs) 08:15, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Reverting article cleanup fixes

The article Urvashi Rautela was submitted to Wikipedia:Cleanup by Dtt1 on 13:23, 23 July 2020 (UTC). Editors from the Wikiproject Wikipedia:Cleanup, spend a considerable amount of their time applying constructive fixes to ameliorate articles on the English Wikipedia Project. The fixes applied to Urvashi Rautela were for References with bare URLs, References with missing titles, and References appropriately tagged as dead links to YouTube videos that no longer exist. The revert that you have done (diff) has been undone. Thank you! — WILDSTAR^talk 19:48, 24 July 2020 (UTC)Template:Z187

• Really, WildStar? That's ridiculous. Your post appears to constitute nonsense. Did you not read Sitush's edit summary? Bishonen | tålk 19:51, 24 July 2020 (UTC).
• WildStar, first of all, don't accuse editors who are in good standing of vandalism —see what vandalism is not— that is an aspersion, which is not allowed. Secondly, maybe avoid templating the regulars...? El_C 19:57, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
• Ok, I get it. Bad choice of template and way too harsh! My apologies Sitush! — WILDSTAR^talk 20:40, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Martial Races and Mahar regiment

Mahar classified as martial during world war I same as Maratha. They continued to serve as soldiers and they even demanded separate regiment for themselves and got the one in 1914. Recruitment only use to happen whey the cast is classified as martial and many bristish officers before world war I supported Mahars Martial claim British had to recognize it in 1914. Do some research before editing

In Mahar Regiment you are writing derogatory sentences against mahar regiment try to read the sources and regarding global security as source most of the mahar regiments content come from that source we had discussions with other administrators so stop your disruptive editing. Raje Ranveer (talk) 04:04, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

There is a difference between being classed as an "agricultural tribe" and a "martial race", although the two became de facto synonymous by the 1920s. Similarly, there is a difference between being recruited to the army and being a martial race. The sources you have shown show recruitment but not classification, and they make clear that the recruitment was for a very short period and in extremis because the Brits needed more soldiers to fight in the later stages of World War I. The Mahars were among those temporarily accepted into the army, then dropped after the war ended. It was not until around 1941 that they were successful in gaining official recognition as a part of the army when the Mahar Regiment was created - I am not sure that the "martial race" classification even existed by that point as I think the entire scientific racism corpus had largely fallen into disrepute. - Sitush (talk) 04:09, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Note to self: Here and here ... and loads of others. - Sitush (talk) 05:13, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	He is a good and Friendly user with good record on Wkipedia. Amrapahal Pahanswan (talk) 08:18, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

History of Pune#Early and medieval

Hi, i was wondering if you could help me edit a sentence that i'm struggling with. Is the sentence meant to imply that the later deccan sultanates revolted? It reads like the governor lived for 200+ years and created several sultanates.

"A governor of the Tughlaq for the Deccan revolted and created the independent Bahamani sultanate and later the various Deccan sultanates rulers between 1400 and early 1600s."

I'm asking you because i know you're good at these edits. Thanks Zindor (talk) 13:57, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

No idea, sorry. It is a very confusing statement and I cannot see the source. Would it be possible to locate an alternate source? The one used dates from 1945 and I imagine there is something much more recent, eg: John F. Richards wrote a volume on the Mughal Empire. - Sitush (talk) 15:24, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Just remembered that I have a copy of the Richards book here. I will look now. - Sitush (talk) 15:29, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Actually, no need to bother. Backtrack through the history and look at, say, this version. I think that makes sense. My suspicion is it became mangled subsequently, probably during edit wars. If you want me to dig around for better sources, I can try. - Sitush (talk) 15:47, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much, that makes sense now. I'll try and find a more accessible source, although i'm not much of an academic. Thank you again, Zindor (talk) 15:53, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Zindor I can also email you a pdf of a few pages from doi:10.1017/9781108680530 which sets the scene quite nicely. I think Richard Eaton's Social History of the Deccan probably covers things in more detail and may specifically mention Pune but I don't think I ever bought that one; if I did, it is buried in a box somewhere rather than on my shelves (far too many books here - hence, they're stacked up the treads of my staircase etc). - Sitush (talk) 15:57, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

I empathise about the collecting of books, but i can't say i've ever had them going down the stairs! I used to have a good amount, but after several international moves i've been left wondering where all my books have gone. The Richard Eaton book looked interesting so i've ordered a copy. I'll let you know what i find out. If you could email that pdf that would be very kind of you. Thank you, Zindor (talk) 19:48, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Use the "Email this user" in menu at left to drop me an email, then I can send the pdf. If you don't have an email address for Wikipedia use, you may want to set one up in your Preferences (top right of page) - that way you can abandon it if someone starts playing silly beggars. - Sitush (talk) 19:58, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

The Gadgil's source presently cited at the article is available at the site of its publisher, i.e. GIPS: click at the link under "View/Open" of this page. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:16, 25 July 2020 (UTC)#

Thanks User:NitinMlk; unfortunately the cited page doesn't support the prose concerning us. Previously the text had a gazetteer citation but i'm not inclined to read or use that. Zindor (talk) 13:26, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Zindor, the content in question was added in the following edits by the same editor: [1] & [2]. So you can ask them about the source used by them. If they fail to provide any reliable source, feel free to remove the content. I am not pinging them here as it would be better to discuss it at the article's talk page. Note that they have already changed the content yesterday with this edit. - NitinMlk (talk) 19:45, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

One moment please.

Hi...I wrote an article called Triveni Sangh. ..as i saw it in red....in a number of articles.Also it is Bihar related and i had certain ideas about it so ....i explored and did it.But now it is resting in Afc for a long time and date for review is increasing day by day.....last time it was within 7 weeks and now it is within 8 weeks.When i talked to an administrator. ....he asked me to request any person who knows better in the area to which my article belongs.As you are involved in editing these sort of articles.....can you help ??? Also.....at that time my account was not autoconfirmed.......so can i move that article to Wikipedia mainspace now ....by myself.?....Must reply thanks Heba Aisha (talk) 20:30, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Heba Aisha:. I've moved the article to Triveni Sangh for you.--RegentsPark (comment) 22:46, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot.....I was hopeless after nearly half a month.....but because of u its finally in the mainspace.🙏🙏🙏 Heba Aisha (talk) 22:56, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

The Royal Nai caste

This is the caste of kings who upgraded their profession to the sacred art of haircutting. Ritually ranked the highest. VOT 2H1 (talk) 11:15, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

References

Thanks. I thought you had sorted it out but I see that Cluebot reverted you. I will look at it later today. - Sitush (talk) 11:39, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Can't tell from snippet view but, from experience, this sounds unlikely. You would have to provide me with copies of, say, pp 77-80 via email or Dropbox or whatever. - Sitush (talk) 04:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

The word Nai means nyaayi one who does justice that is the King himself. Nai also use the brahmin title sharma and thakur, so they are the highest now as per wikipedia. Haircutting is their sacred profession, like the barberians of Europe. Use your brain. VOT 2H1 (talk) 09:53, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

But due to propaganda and jealousy of lower castes who are not allowed the sacred profession of haircutting, society wrongly considers the Nai as shudra. If Nai are shudra in India then baberians are slaves in Europe. VOT 2H1 (talk) 16:02, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Someone said the same recently. Do you know them? - Sitush (talk) 16:03, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

It was Sam.Johnanderson (talk · contribs) who was pushing this ridiculous puffery back then. They were blocked for a month by Bishonen on 2 July. - Sitush (talk) 16:06, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

I dont remember which ancient book said that but the Nai are given the status of crow, one of the most reverend animals. It says, "chidiyo me nau-a, admiyo me kau-a", which means like the crow is the king of animals, the Nai is the king of humans. Do you need more proof. You can quote me. VOT 2H1 (talk) 16:20, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

"Sacred art of haircutting"? My dead was a hairdresser-- does that count?

Alas I am not a socket of Sam. If that is what you were suggestioning. VOT 2H1 (talk) 16:28, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

For the person whos dead was a hairdresser,yes it counts. You should continue the tradition. VOT 2H1 (talk) 16:32, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Please provide me modern sources for Baji Rao I

Please provide me modern sources for Baji Rao I, so that I can improve the article. Mahusha (talk) 03:56, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, it really isn't my subject area. - Sitush (talk) 03:59, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Soomra

Do you regard the following as a reliable source: "Encyclopaedia of Ismailism" by Mumtaz Ali Tajddin https://books.google.com/books/about/Encyclopaedia_of_Ismailism.html?id=-VswAAAAYAAJ

The full text is available at Ismaili.net 2600:1012:B047:2CE3:88AE:E10F:1526:8CF3 (talk) 05:12, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't know, sorry. There are a lot of niche encyclopaedia out there, often published by obscure outfits. I've never heard of this book, publisher or author/editor but then again I've never really delved into the detail of Ismailism (literally, I know it exists and that's about it!). As a rule, we should prefer secondary sources but perhaps ask at the article talk page and if you either get no response there or you cannot get consensus then there is always WP:RSN. - Sitush (talk) 05:31, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

I should add that the bigger problem with the Soomra dynasty article is I think people have been using snippet views from Google Books - if they cannot see the full page and surrounding pages, they should not be citing it. - Sitush (talk) 05:32, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks - there unfortunately are not many great sources for the Soomra since it is quite an obscure topic (lets be real), but I added some page numbers that were tagged. What is your opinion of the order of "History of India" and "History of Pakistan" infoboxes on the right hand side of the page? It previously just showed the Pakistan box, which I had added. A few months ago, the India box was added, but placed above the Pakistan one.

I personally don't think the order of boxes should be alphabetical, but instead should be determined by which areas were most influenced by the page topic. The Soomra were a dynasty in Sindh, and whose rules appear to have been largely limited to land in what is today's Pakistan. Further, the Soomra are not even listed in the History of India infobox - probably because they were of marginal importance. They are listed on the Pakistan box though.2600:1012:B047:2CE3:88AE:E10F:1526:8CF3 (talk) 05:44, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that is an example of the (often subtle) nationalism that infests ancient history articles etc for the subcontinent, and by extension many of the templates also. The arguments are varied:

• Pakistan did not exist as an entity, so the dynasty can't be part of Pakistan's history and should not even be in the template, let alone the template be in the article
• It clearly relates to a region that is now in Pakistan and likely to be of more interest to people with an interest in Pakistan
• India did not exist as an entity because the subcontinent back then was a mass of competing dynastic territories, there was no working concept of nationhood as such
• Alphabetical order in theory takes the heat out of things but, equally, there are situations when it can appear absurd. (Another example of this would be religion ordered as "Christianity, Islam" when 95% of whatever population it is are Muslim.)

Since WP:CONSENSUS is supposed to be based on policy, not "votes", there seems to be a distinct black hole in our policies relating to these matters and especially so when it comes to articles where nationalism is likely to be rife - assuming an equal proportion of active Wikipedians from two countries, and assuming that nationalism is rife (which it is), the country with a population of 1.2 billion is always going to "win" a straight vote against one with 210 million in the absence of some sort of policy.

Simply removing both templates solves the problem but arguably also does the reader a dis-service because they may want to trawl through related articles. Creating a new template for {{History of the Indian subcontinent}} just moves the problem because (a) that entity is ill-defined (Afghanistan? etc) and (b) people in Pakistan object to the weight implied by the word Indian.

There are days when I find all this fighting very tiresome but somehow we have to make a judgement. I will ping Utcursch and Doug Weller here because they may have thoughts. (The article is Soomra dynasty but, as I've just suggested, the issue is much broader.) - Sitush (talk) 06:11, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Heh. The nationalist issues are clearly evidenced at Template_talk:History_of_Pakistan. Quelle surprise! - Sitush (talk) 06:24, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, you really expressed what I was thinking (but in a much more concise and crystallized manner).

It's pretty obvious that the Mound Builders were not part of the history of the United States of America. Or that Roman Britain wasn't part of the history of the United Kingdom of Great Britain. Having said that, I see we have Ancient India which is actually about " pre-1947 history of the Indian subcontinent." That really needs a rename, although I don't think that 1946 would qualify as ancient. Doug Weller talk 09:22, 29 July 2020 (UTC) Although I seem to be wrong, it looks as though that's the name many reliable sources use, I missed the rename discussion last month. Doug Weller talk 09:23, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

So, on that basis {{History of Pakistan}} should not be referring to much that happened before partition other than perhaps events that crossed over the period such as the independence movement itself. - Sitush (talk) 09:26, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

I'd say it all depends on whether you're talking about the the country itself, the people, the geographical entity. Is it political history, regional history, anthropological history, etc... I certainly think of British history as covering all of those aspects and more, and I guess I'd say the same about Pakistan. If I wanted to know about the history of Pakistan from an academic viewpoint, I'd certainly want to know about the history of its peoples and their origins before the state itself came into existence - about the history of the place that is now called Pakistan. Same regarding India - I'd certainly want to know what was there before the British arrived. I generally think "history" should be broadly construed, but it's especially hard when nationalism rears its ugly head. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:58, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

I agree. It's the nationalism bit that causes all of the aggravation. Without that, no-one would really care and, yes, "broadly construed" would work nicely. - Sitush (talk) 10:13, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

New article for eyes please

Please see Varya Rajput and Chaudharies of Ambota. I thnk this is one for your care. Fiddle Faddle 12:05, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

The most recent number one, pop pickers!

I'd really like to know what tune it's meant to follow. Any ideas? I tried, err, a couple, but am at a loss... ——Serial 13:06, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Master Jay

In the interest of keeping the peace, you might want to avoid 'em. Just sayin'. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:11, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

No intention of going back to that thread. Just shows how out of touch they are: don't understand CU, can't spot an obvious troll, don't understand the issues regarding throwing around sock accusations, seemingly cannot geolocate and, without wanting to blow my own trumpet, seem to be completely oblivious of what I've done for the last > decade or, indeed, just how many admins I regularly interact with. The attitude and blase-ness (?) regarding the role is a stain on the work that many decent admins do. - Sitush (talk) 15:33, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Generally I'm willing to cut colleagues some slack. We're only human. But the lack of awareness. As far as tool use goes, it's been said that even once a year is a net positive. In this case, even that is questionable. Gah, every time I get the shakes looking at backlogs, I'll think of him. FWIW, I'd support you, but RFA has become deplorable. In a way, we miss out on good new admins because users are leary because of admins like him Gah. Net negative. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:06, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Well, Deepfriedokra, the lack of awareness has just jumped to another level. - Sitush (talk) 21:30, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

He withdrew the canard. That's something. The screed-- sad. I could be him, but managed to stay active, return after off-wiki adversity, and adapt as things changed. (sigh) --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:32, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

No, he didn't. He withdrew the threat of an SPI because he was told by Salvio that CUs would not link usernames to IPs (as he should have known anyway). The actual accusation stands. - Sitush (talk) 21:34, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

And now I have been canvassing off-wiki? This is too much. ArbCom alert. - Sitush (talk) 21:36, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Scheisst! --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:42, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Just venting. Boing applied some fire retardant.This need not become a conflagration. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:46, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I suggest just leave him to let off steam - he was, after all, poked just a little. I don't think there's any need for any further escalation. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:52, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

The accusation is 100% withdrawn. I am moving on from this. Thank you. Jay(Talk) 22:24, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

You made several accusations, not just one, and even in the case of that one you withdrew it for technical reasons and then doubled-down on your belief that the IP was me nonetheless.

If you were around more, you might have realised, for example, that you have become a by-word for legacy admins (eg: you and the resysop situation have been mentioned quite a bit on User talk:Iridescent, often as piped links). You might also have realised that I have no need to call in support off-wiki and that I very rarely edit article about Hindu deities or indeed any aspect of Hindu theology. Similarly, I have no interest in sci-fi or superheroes and very little editing to US topics other than my considerable efforts at Crawford family of the White Mountains, which was a rescue job. To suggest that Special:Contributions/66.35.104.149 might be me was absurd.

No-one is saying you have to be here - you can do an edit a decade if you want and it could still make a difference - but your ability to operate as an admin is clearly stretched by your lack of knowledge regarding procedures and you've actually proven that point over the last 24 hours or so. You may think I was discourteous but do bear in mind that I didn't criticise you in the BN thread, merely pointed out what difficulties the resysop caused for those having to make a decision. I let you know about that thread because it struck me that you might think people were talking behind your back and I think BN probably should be treated like ANI in terms of notifications - it is a central noticeboard, not some user's talk page. Sure, I did then add some criticism to your face but, well, QED. - Sitush (talk) 05:21, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Comment read. Jay(Talk) 05:47, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

.

Hope I have identified your caste correctly Praxidicae (talk) 20:27, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Ha! They're still evading their block. - Sitush (talk) 00:39, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Kesharwani page

Bhai jab tmhe Kesharwani ki history nhi pata hai toh use edit kyu krte ho. Bhai mai Kesharwani hu mujhe aoni history acche se pata hai ,ab dubara edit mt krna .smjhe . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zmnib (talk • contribs) 08:06, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Please see WP:V, as I said here. A read of WP:COI might be useful, too, because in my experience members of a caste are usually incapable of editing neutrally the article relating to their own community. - Sitush (talk) 08:13, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Kesarwanis are Kansal Gotra Agarwal. Sitush, Agarwal are aslo a bania caste and crème de la crème of the Vaisya varna. Also in most castes in India, sub-castes associated with Kashmir valley were regarded as one of the highest sub-caste of the related caste due to their Alpine origin, Aryan features and Fairer skin tone. Do the Kesarwanis some justice. VOT 2H1 (talk) 09:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Go away. Whether you are a sock or a meatpuppet or (unlikely) genuinely independent, it is obvious to me that you're spouting the same ridiculous POV as the recently sanctioned contributor. - Sitush (talk) 09:01, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

That one will trouble you no more. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:06, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. - Sitush (talk) 09:15, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Some cases are less clear and some caste pushers deserve degrees of warnings, but when it's such blatantly open racism... Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:18, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

For reference: Sam.Johnanderson (talk · contribs) - Sitush (talk) 09:04, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Any chance you an cut through the waffle, please?

Draft:Sri 1008 Jagadguru Dr.Chandrashekahara Shivacharya Mahaswamiji exists and confuses the heck out of me. Sri 1008 means so,ething, presumably. Looks like an honorific to me, as does everything except the chap's name. Even of all you do is move it to the correct name that would be excellent, though I think it is gong nowhere. You are my go to perosn for everything Indian! Fiddle Faddle 09:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

WP:NCIN has some useful guidance, although I really wouldn't worry about it here because, as you say, the draft is unlikely to go anywhere. There are thousands of cults in Hinduism, each with their own spiritual head. Whilst the cult leadership may pass from one person to another, each one seems to create a cult of personality also. I'm not great on the complexities of the religion but I know this much from years of reading gibberish here. It is noticeable that the people who seem to create these articles often seem also to lack much in the way of education, which probably makes them ripe material for charlatans etc. - Sitush (talk) 09:15, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look. I reckon it is dead n the water. Fiddle Faddle 09:45, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Don't remove unnecessary references

Please don't remove unnecessary references on the article, you think irvine was not a great source. I don't mind anything if you remove the good article status, but don't remove the information which is referenced from a good book Mahusha (talk) 09:22, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

See the article talk page, and your own. This stuff has been explained to you and others. Only you are objecting. - Sitush (talk) 10:58, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Raju

Other pages haves used the same source even though the particular caste is not mentioned. Also talks in general sense about South India. I think you can revert.EruTheLord (talk) 10:55, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

No, I cannot and if other pages have done a similar thing then they need fixing. We cannot make assumptions. I thought I had explained this on your talk page and, as I definitely said there, I am becoming very worried with what you have been doing recently - I've had to fix at least three articles so far today. - Sitush (talk) 11:05, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, fineEruTheLord (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:10, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Is Oldenburg relaible? Here after instead of taking direct action I will enquire about source if not sure EruTheLord (talk) 11:13, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Where is it used? Not sure I recognise the name, although Frykenberg is used quite a lot. - Sitush (talk) 11:15, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

This one ISBN:978-0-7656-0813-0 EruTheLord (talk) 11:21, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Can I remind you of WP:INDENT? That is something an admin recently brought to your attention also.

Google Books screws up that isbn and presents a completely irrelevant book about China by someone else. I think you're referring to something called India Briefing even though I can't see it. The title doesn't sound promising for caste articles - what is it you want to use it for? - Sitush (talk) 11:27, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

yes, That one (Ayres, Alyssa; Oldenburg, Philip (2002). India briefing: quickening the pace of change ). I am not going to use. A page already has it. Want to make sure before engaging in talk page EruTheLord (talk) 11:37, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Which article already uses it? - Sitush (talk) 11:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Kamma This page. EruTheLord (talk) 11:54, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Well, it just is not needed there, is it? We have a perfectly good alternate source to support the statement. That article appears to have become bloated with overcites recently but I simply do not have the time to sort it all out, especially given that it is now using a lot of obscure books. The entire citation schema has become a mess also. - Sitush (talk) 12:53, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

I am going to ask them to remove it is just superfluous. EruTheLord (talk) 13:03, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Something is happening here

A sock is on his way, seems[[3]] like Kalangot and Othayoth shankaran.Outlander^07@talk 13:52, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Mmm, certainly a similar vein but I'm not sure about the style. I missed the edit because the article had dropped off my watchlist. I'm guessing I misclicked the page some previous time. - Sitush (talk) 14:55, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Thakur Keshri Singh Makwana

Hey, looks like you stripped this article last year on the basis of the sources being unreliable. Do you have any opinion on the notability or even verifiability of the claim in the article that this dude was the ruler of Katosan State? I couldn't find anything on a search, but of course I'm limited to searching in English, and there's no indication of what his name would be not in English (nor what language to search in). I can take care of PROD/AfD if it's suspect information, I just wanted to check with someone who might know. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:45, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I can't be sure, sorry. The difficulty is likely because Katosan was such a trivial thing: around 10 sq miles, fourth-rank etc. I searched Sage Journals, Cambridge Core, Oxford Journals, Oxford Scholarship, Project Muse, JSTOR, Taylor & Francis and a bunch of other places - none even mention the state, let alone the ruling family. I ofund one useful source for the state article at GBooks but nothing about the person. As for language, Gujarati is the obvious one but there are hundreds of languages in India so that is a bit too much like hard work for me and would involve a lot of dodgy Google Translating.

My gut feeling is, yes, the person existed and "ruled" the place (he would have not really had any independent power, being a vassal of whichever regional power applied at the time). I base that on the Raj sources which, although unreliable for many things, should surely get the name right for someone who was in power during the time of compiling those sources.

Thakur, by the way, is a title. There was a very active Koli-related sockfarm operating when I last edited that article, trying to boost the image of their community. - Sitush (talk) 04:51, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I appreciate you taking the time to check for me. I'm going to cheat and turn it into a redirect to the state, since you couldn't verify enough info to retain a separate article. Cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:56, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

That's fine. It has been around long enough for people to attempt sourcing. - Sitush (talk) 05:03, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Premeditated Chaos any chance of semi at Bania (caste). Anons & new-ish accounts have been disruptive for days and I can't revert again. I did leave a note on the article talk page re: the Assam claims that they keep (very poorly) inserting but I have the feeling they may not even realise that talk page exists. - Sitush (talk) 05:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, I reverted the most recent edit and have semi'd the page for a week. If you run into any more issues after it expires (or if you need it increased) just let me know. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

You have wrongly inverted my added information on page Rangar

You have wrongly inverted my added information on page Rangar Page Representative (talk) 09:48, 3 August 2020 (UTC)