Talk:Kalhora dynasty

Copyright problem

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) In this case, it can be verified that some of the content in this article duplicated that at [1]. Other text added by this contributor may have been taken from other non-free sources.

Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:07, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merged into Kalhora

Hello. I have merged Kalhora Dynsaty into Kalhora in order to improve both topics. I am happy to discuss. Regards to all, Myrtle G. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 05:49, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Myrtlegroggins Looks like someone split it again. You were right, they were wrong. It's ridiculous. - Sitush (talk) 14:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Kalhora Kingdom.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:09, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent reversions

@Sir Calculus can't you read edit summaries? You need to avoid Snippet views and instead link to any reference with (atleast) whole concerned page. Also, Wink doesn't claim Kalhoras to be Sindhis. Also, FYI, It was I who added Channa reference some months ago[2]. However, at that time I didn't know about its reliability. Sutyarashi (talk) 18:34, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did read the edit summary and didnt readd the raj source. The "whole page" isn't necessary when we get the reference and quotation for the sindhi origin.. They claimed Abbasi origin but were of Sindhi descent. Refs proved. Now how much do you want to drag this unnecessarily? Also read main kalhora article to clear your doubts about their "origins". Sir Calculus (talk) 18:41, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ WP:ONUS is upon you to prove that reference (The Temple of Sun God...) is reliable. If you can't, it would be removed. Sutyarashi (talk) 18:47, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush I don't think it is unreliable but we really need your expertise here. Sir Calculus (talk) 18:50, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir Calculus I tried to look at the book a couple of days ago & could only get a snippet view. I tried to search for the publisher & author but got nothing of much use. I did all of that because the Channa claim seems out of sync with other sources and, of course, if that is wrong then the Wink source is irrelevant.

I have no idea re reliability simply because my searches turned up nothing useful. Obscure authors & publishers aren't a great sign, though, so I was going to give it a few weeks then try again. - Sitush (talk) 07:12, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush Looks like Sir Calculus has been blocked for 48 hours due to bad faith assumption. It's not like that I'm surprised, but let's see if their mode (and language) of conduct changes after this period. Sutyarashi (talk) 07:31, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My gut says it isn't reliable - if you Google "temple of sun god" brohi, there are very few hits & even fewer ones which might be called useful. There are a couple of claims of him being a "renowned scholar" of Sindh etc but those are in the usual terrible local newspapers, blogs etc. There are a couple of obscure academic cites, too. I'd like to know more about him. - Sitush (talk) 08:06, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush The name of Book itself sounds more like a fiction work and not an academic source. Also, we can't see the preceding or succeeding lines, which means cited sentence maybe a part of wider quotation from some other (most probably colonial) author. Not a single other author calls Kalhoras as Sindhi Channa (except one British colonial official), which makes such claim even more doubtful. Sutyarashi (talk) 08:34, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sutyarashi It might be worth asking at WP:RX on the off-chance someone has access to a library which has a copy. Would need to provide as much info as possible because there is little chance of an isbn. Sangam Publications were in Karachi; I think it was published in 1998. If you gave the page number & asked for that, the page before & the page after, you might get a response. Same also on the Pakistan WikiProject page. - Sitush (talk) 08:50, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is the man. The National Library of Australia catalogue shows his book on tombstones. Brother of A. K. Brohi. Sindhi Adabi Board published at least one book by him. - Sitush (talk) 09:41, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]