User talk:Sajaypal007

May 2020

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Talk:Prithviraj Chauhan. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 16:03, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad of Ghor

Please do not add off topic information to the article. Example:"Prithviraj occupied the fort of Sirhind and re-established Chauhan supremacy in the Punjab."

The topic of the article is Muhammad of Ghor, not Prithviraj. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:18, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Main point was Ghori army didnt retreat but after Ghori was rescued from the field his army fled. And Chauhan pursued the army. It's called a rout not a retreat. Also deemed victorious mean that Ghori army took a tactical retreat and Chauhan held the field so he was deemed victorious. In short I am saying that remove the part of Ghori army retreating and Chauhan deemded victorious, and in its stead add "Ghori got injured, saved by a warrior who took him to safety, his army fled in confusion and victorious chauhan army pursued the Ghurid army". Thats all. No Sirhind Fort or punjab held by Prithviraj. I can provide multiple sources if you wish which say that the forces of Ghori was routed and fled. Sajaypal007 (talk)

You added the sentence concerning Prithviraj. Are you saying you did not?

As for your continued comment of "I can provide multiple sources....", you changed referenced information, and did so again while ignoring what I stated on HistoryofIran's talk page. That is disruptive editing. If you wish to change referenced information, use the article talk page.

"I can provide multiple sources if you wish which say that the forces of Ghori was routed and fled."

I do not care. There are numerous sources that state the Ghorid army retreated, even more numerous sources that make no mention of the condition of the Muslim army after the first battle of Tarain.

"And Chauhan pursued the army."

And I have read sources that state the Chauhan army did not pursue Ghori's army. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:07, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying that I did not add that whole para again in which there was line concerning prithviraj too. I am comparatively new at wiki editing, I read the comment briefly and assumed that you are saying I didnt do something wrong but that guy HistoryofIran didnt change to what you suggested either. I understand I shouldnt add the whole para. I am just saying that the earlier citation was talking about the world history obviously it can be little ignorant about some small topic like Tarain battle. Almost all sources I read say that Ghurid army was routed and fled a tactical retreat I never read in any source, even earlier sources from British historians say the same thing. So did contemporary muslim sources, 15th century muslim historians and the Modern historians. Regarding pursuing you are right I cant find any more sources other than Rima Hooja that the Ghurid army was pursued but "rout of the army i.e. fleeing without any order in the army is what is given in almost all sources. Govind was wounded and fought in the next battle is not as related to Ghori's topic than his army fleeing. The fleeing of the army must be mentioned thats what i am saying maybe you can cite both sources one says retreated other says fled.Sajaypal007 (talk)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of institutions of higher education in Rajasthan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Churu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Check Battle of Maonda

There are many edits and removal of trusted sources with biased ones. Do check Battle of Maonda and Mandholi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:8100:387E:59A6:1:0:54A3:1926 (talk) 05:41, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Complaint about you at WP:AN3

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sajaypal007 reported by User:LukeEmily (Result: ). You can respond there if you wish. EdJohnston (talk) 16:30, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I gave my reply Sajaypal007 (talk) 09:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing came out of it as it was filed by a user to intimidate and didnt wish to listen. Sajaypal007 (talk) 15:49, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you are interested?

Let our case run there....if u can help. Prabhunath Singh he is a politician from Rajput community of Bihar.If you help clean it up.....it will be great help to wiki.TqHeba Aisha (talk) 00:27, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How many times, do I have to tell you that I am not interested in specific Rajput community articles. I am only interested in Rajasthan history and somewhat Indian history. I never heard this guy's name, how can I edit that wiki page. Sajaypal007 (talk) 09:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Add more about Sanga Militory career

Hello user Sayapal007 i have a request for U Please add More about Rana sanga military carrer Especially Seige Of Mandsaur Fort where he defend the fort against joint army,Also add About Why battle of khatoli take place as Sanga expand his Kingdom till Western Up,Please add more Details freind.And his Legacy section is also removed please re add it If possible please add his Photo too,Hopefully u will do on His page about what i requested u to do,Hopefull u will do it Paul white2013 (talk) 16:18, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the page and it looks okay to me. @Alivardi is doing great work to keep the page clean. As for Siege of Mandsaur is concerned I believe it was not a big affair to mention on his page. As for khatoli battle and Rana's territory is concerned it is already mentioned in war with Ibrahim Lodi. Legacy section was removed by @Alivardi giving reason that it was poorly written and had NPOV issues. I agree that you should write properly, what you want to convey and give reliable and good source to back it up. There were two accounts one named showbiz and other was AloneAngel who made many disruptive edits. If you want to edit the page please write it in proper language if not then discuss in talk page. Regarding Legacy section I will discuss that after sometime in talk page when I get some good sources regarding that, you can discuss the same in talk page before editing. For image you should do the same thing in talk page and get it verified by @Alivardi before adding. Sajaypal007 (talk) 21:31, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Important notices

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in South Asian social groups. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions - such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks - on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33 GeneralNotability (talk) 00:41, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Increasing Vandalism

There is increasing vandalism on many pages of historical figures like rana sanga and maharana pratap even abusive words have been used i think u are senior editor who created them please kept them in check from vandalism. Ministry of Darkness98 (talk) 16:57, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which page are you talking about, I don't see any such recent edits on both Rana Sanga and Maharana Pratap. Sajaypal007 (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There were edits on Battle pages involve Rana sanga and uncessary Ones thats why i informed although corrected by senior editors now thank u. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ministry of Darkness98 (talk • contribs) 08:03, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The half barnstar

		The Half Barnstar
		I decided to give it to you after your edits on Jawahar Singh.The description of this barnstar says that it should be awarded to those two editors half-half who hold opposite view but together improve an article. This actually fits for our case, as this is what we did on that particular article.Thanks for further improving.

Heba Aisha (talk) 15:06, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sajaypal007 go to this link [1] you will find different barnstars there you will find symbol like {{ subst :abcdxyz|1=message} like symbol.Just copy them and post on talk page of editors whom u want to give.Technically u tried to give me Right half barnstar you will find that one's symbol on barnstar list in that link.Now i have reverted ur changes at my page as u made mistake.Try the procedure i told.Heba Aisha (talk) 16:07, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You will have to clear the message and after 1=.... write the message you want to type. hope it workHeba Aisha (talk) 16:09, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
for simpler method try this [2]Heba Aisha (talk) 16:27, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sajaypal007 (talk) 20:16, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification

Hello I observe recently u tried to made edit on Prithviraj chauhan page about his Rajput identity or something like this where u were yet to gave a scholary source About that Particular identity well i advice u should edit that page now From a scholary source of Jadunath sarkar a renowned historian about Rajput identity which clearly state that it emerge during ghurid invasion In 12th century on pg 32 in first paragraph also there are more proofs in sarkar book that is A history of jaipur about kacchawa when they migrate to Rajpuatana in 12th century,If u want to clear it u can please edit that page along with many pages like Chauhan dynasty and Rajputana one here is the book its scholary and ur change will be accepted most probably,I will advice u to please wrote it clearly about his identity with scholary book i am giving the link Please Establish it clearly about Prithviraj instead of anarchronism whicb isnt the case atleast in 12th century Because sarkar clearly mention Rajput as a race emerge in social structure of india During Ghurid raids He also briefly wrote about the Dynasty i think as veteran editor u should clearly mention this because it is more excepted version even in basic book and with sarkar refrenece there is hardly one doubt a bit.If it helps u its my pleasure. Here is the ref to the scholary book of Renowned historian Jadunath Sarkar about Prithviraj identity

Pg no 32 shihabuddin Ghori vs Prithviraj first Paragraph clearly states about Emeregence of Rajput as a race in social structure of india.You can directly search by directing pecuilar race in preivew of this book for ur satisfaction.

Jadunath Sarkar (1960). Military History of India. Orient Longmans.

Also there is page about Rajasthan and Rajputana where it states that it was called rajputana after 18th century by british which is also wrong If exact time is unknown then it must be known as Rajputana from atleast 12th century when Kacchawa rajputs migrate there this is also in Sarkar diff book i.e A History of Jaipur,i will post it link too Kacchwa identity too as rajput became prominent in 12th century it also gave proof about Prithviraj identity with more nuance,Please edit this 2 changes in these 3 pages these are rather misguiding. Here's the link again to that page.

Jadunath Sarkar (1994). A History of Jaipur: C. 1503-1938. Orient Blackswan. ISBN 978-81-250-0333-5.

Pg.22 about kacchwa when they migrates ti rajputaana in 12th century so atleast it is known as rajputana from 12th century it also provide more prooof about Rajput identity which emerge in 12th century of Prithviraj correct these 3 pages i provide a aceadmic work for u.Thank u please make this 4 changes.Thanks sajyapala. Ennis1849 (talk) 04:28, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

please don't write in such huge para, break it into small paras and maybe make some bullet points for better understanding in future. Anyway I will look into what you are saying when I get some free time. I hope its okay. Sajaypal007 (talk) 08:03, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I didnt wrote a book Lol, I just cover about 4 Topics which i think should mentioned as i give academic source for the same And i did detail version,Anyway cheers Ennis1849 (talk) 12:59, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Look, Origin of the term Rajput is a difficult topic and many scholars wrote differently. I myself will work on that when I get free time. Also I asked you to write in paras and all because in future it may be useful. Jadunath Sarkar primarily wrote abt late medieval to early modern period, so his work is good but we need all other aspects as well. Sajaypal007 (talk) 15:35, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

i didn't say anything about Origin i said About Rajput idenity which exist During Prithviraj chauhan reign Which sarkar clearly mention also In rajputana it is written that it was coined by British in 19th century which is false Sarkar wrote separate book about him on that I gave link Which states kacchwa rajputs migrate to rajputana in 12th century he give more detailed version,And sarkar work was classical and cover everything post ancient empires and no inferior to Tablot or sharma works thats why i ask to clearly wrote about Prithviraj that he was a rajput and idenity did exist during that time.This is stable and expected version Nearly agreed by all major scholars about Prithviraj can give more sources too but i give from best scholar whose work were classical.hope u will change these 3 things. Enclyopedia brittanica too goes with established version. Thank u hope u will change it.Cheers Ennis1849 (talk) 16:16, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello.., There is a guy named Ennis who left messages on ur talk page about Some topics if u want to edit those articles with those acaedmic refrences please do and i u don't u can remove this from ur Talk page anyway sources are indeed scholary and weren't just trash and points raised were also Genuine, if u want to have a good look please do. Thanks.Caliphates 727 (talk) 13:20, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Contacted by sockpuppet

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that the accounts that have been messaging you recently, Ennis1849 and Caliphates 727, are confirmed sockpuppets of User:Showbiz826, who had been blocked for edit warring and block evasion. Due to various page protections and IP blocks, Showbiz826 is unable to make edits themselves on many articles. Instead, they have made several sockpuppets which they use to try to pester other users into implementing their desired edits (see Caliphates 727, Dk Lillee 1949 and The String 20 among others). It is therefore likely that they will contact you again in the guise of a new account. I'll leave it up to you how you decide to deal with this, though I personally believe it is best to just ignore their messages. I hope you find this message useful.
Alivardi (talk) 18:14, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, for the advice. I too thought the same hence ignored the latest comment. 1-2 days old account and leaving same kind of message. Sajaypal007 (talk) 19:16, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some rules of WP:Rfc

This is a list of rules i found interesting.Also see the centralised ledger where our case is listed. [3]

An RfC should last until enough comment has been received that consensus is reached, or until it is apparent it won't be.

There is no required minimum or maximum duration; however, Legobot assumes an RfC has been forgotten and automatically ends it (removes the rfc template) 30 days after it begins, to avoid a buildup of stale discussions cluttering the lists and wasting commenters' time.

RfCs are a way to attract more attention to a discussion about making changes to pages or procedures, including articles, essays, guidelines, policies, and many other kinds of pages. It uses a system of centralized noticeboards and random, bot-delivered invitations to advertise discussions to uninvolved editors. The normal talk page guidelines apply to these discussions.

Try not to be confrontational. Be friendly and civil, and assume good faith of other editors' actions.

Edits to content under RfC discussion may be particularly controversial. Avoid making edits that others may view as unhelpful. Editing after others have raised objections may be viewed as disruptive editing or edit warring. Be patient; make your improvements in accord with consensus after the RfC is resolved. Heba Aisha (talk) 06:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have already read the RfC guidelines. Sajaypal007 (talk) 12:11, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just a Suggestion

Hello, Sajaypal007, U are expert in Rajasthan History topics and so do On Rajput page However in recent times the Rajput related Articles have been badly hijacked and Now Even Name of Famous Rajput Ruler Prithviraj Chauhan has been even removed from List of Rajputs page, A user Abhishek tried to Revert but in vain Removing a Well established figure of a Community from years clearly show their Agenda and they arent removing other rulers from same time saying We only remove Famous one Well everyone know Wikipedia is unreliable source and mostly drive on Agenda but so much Misinforamtion,Anyway u know better how to deal just inform u on Talk page.2401:4900:40A9:D0C0:5EE6:30A7:124:309 (talk) 05:56, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]