Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:13, 21 July 2019

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Ethnic groups High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. India Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article was last assessed in April 2015.

Untitled

Welcome to the discussion page of the article "Saraswat Brahmins" Please organize your comments .. it makes the page much more readable .. Leningrad 07:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Misc

People. Done some basic seggregation and created two new articles on the data from this articles namely Cochin GSB's and Chitrapur Saraswats. The saraswat article here needs more of substance and writeups on various other articles. Work on it guys and dont have any hard feelings for each other.

And do we do something about the list of saraswats???

Yessrao a.k.a Sushanth 21:19, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

What I propose is that lets have a broad write up of only Saraswat Brahmins here...and all the other sub communities can have a main article for themselves. Ready to help out?? Coz I feel it doesnt make sense to have CSB, Chitrapur etc in the main articles in their entirity.

And about people adding cochi GSB articles, I guess he or she has a write to. And there shouldnt be any talk of 'being endogamous' cos the entire saraswat community consists of multiple sects and divisions

Yessrao a.k.a Sushanth 20:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Cheers. No problems...

Amogh 20:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The list of Saraswats is getting too large....we should be having a separate wiki page for it rather than crowding this one making the overall look UGLY Sushanth aka Yessrao 21:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Konkani Misplaced Pages

Dear Konknni friends,

Konkani Misplaced Pages has been started and been in test stage since August 2006.

Kindly contribute towards the Konkani wikipedia. We intend to make it a multiscript

Wikipeida. At least tri-script with Roman ,Devanangiri and Kannada scripts since these are the most popular ones.

We would like to get more articles/templates in place. We also need volunteers to do the thankless and boring job of transliterating it to different scripts .

As of now only two members are making active contributions. The more the merrier. Your contribution is vital to its success.

The url is given below:

http://incubator.wikimedia.org/Category:Konkani_Wikipedia

Dev boro dees deum! -Deepak D'Souza 07:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

"related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 17:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

funny tone

Somehow this artcle seems to have a funny tone .. It maybe due to incorrect grammer .. for example a sub heading which says "othe name of goddess ..." please fix the grammer and tone of this article . Leningrad 07:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

This article needs cleanup

A lot actually. This is one of the handful articles in WP which has text sections after external links. GDibyendu (talk) 14:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Aryan Invasion

When there are lots of proofs provided by eminent historian against the so called Aryan Invasion/ Migration Theory, how come this article use the same. Even Romila Thapar has accepted recently that AIT is not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.184.192.192 (talk) 05:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, this section needs significant overhaul. Opinions are presented as facts, and no citations are provided. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.252.5.244 (talk) 02:38, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I changed the intro para to correct this. AIT has been dead for a few years now, so the reference to "Russian immigrants" was ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohufish (talk • contribs) 03:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Added citations in order to improve the article

I have added citations and some text in the history section in order to improve the article and make it more credible. Was actually surprised that there is so little effort by contributors on this article. I have met so many people claiming to be Saraswat brahmins and so proud of their lineage. However, looking at the condition of this article it appears that not enough citations or credible sources of information are presently cited here. I am currently working on too many India & Kashmir related articles and for me to take this up right now would be a little difficult. However, if anyone has links to websites or information on Saraswat Brahmins that is credible, please do leave a message on my talk page. I promise to get back to this a little later. -Ambar wiki (talk) 15:40, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Removal of redundant data

Since sections like cuisine,food habit all has been covered in some other page .This section has been removed here.If any clash of data please let me know . Joshi punekar (talk) 13:49, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

It is not redundant. Ethnic articles can have a brief mention of traditional cuisine and food habits even if it has a separate article, for example Marathi people and Marathi cuisine - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:00, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

But here directly it has been mentioned with the above mentioned community name “saraswat cuisine “ it is not Konkani cuisine or any generalised words . Joshi punekar (talk) 15:13, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

@the same time all the citation mentioned above are primary sources like news paper.When wiki started accepting news paper? Joshi punekar (talk) 15:14, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

It is also affecting neutrality of page.Since any page should be in the limit of neutrality but here simply some redundant information is floating. Joshi punekar (talk) 15:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

What newspaper? All are books except the Ravana reference. The section is "Diet and Culture" and the food habits of a specific community of Saraswats is mentioned along with its name. I don't see any problem here. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Please do recheck the citation,2 are news papers Joshi punekar (talk) 15:38, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Other sources are primarily,to avoid this new page was created.Don’t you see ambiguity there.Only 2 caste mentioned(Ambiguity there too) at the same time it is mentioning whole saraswat community. Joshi punekar (talk) 15:42, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

In articles like Kayastha, regional groups are also mentioned specifically depending on the context. The Diet section here doesn't say all Saraswats are fish eaters or something like that. It specifically mentions which regional groups eat what. And only one source in the section is a magazine, The Illustrated Weekly of India. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Kayastha have different origin but saraswat Brahmins don’t ,Here in the same region different Category works.Ex: Vaishanava doesn’t eat fish while smarta do but both are called saraswat Brahmins .At the same time in your talk page I have mentioned some list.This sentence is neither neutral nor particular. Joshi punekar (talk) 17:07, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

That’s why just search for saraswat Brahmin cuisine,there you will find all.If still want we can shift these primary stuffs to that page. Joshi punekar (talk) 17:08, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

The Saraswat cuisine article is largely unsourced. This article has more sources. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

But arrangement is more there and yeah I can provide reliable citation. we shift this content there to avoid conflict. Joshi punekar (talk) 17:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I already told you, ethnic articles can mention cuisines briefly. All the cuisine related things in this article is sourced.

@MRRaja001: The source that supports the following text put by you is in snippets and cannot be viewed properly.

Marriages between Saraswat and non-Saraswat Brahmins are on the increase though they were unheard of before, mainly because the Saraswats eat fish and occasionally meat, while all other Brahmins are vegetarians 

Can you provide a better source? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=QLTfAAAAMAAJ Joshi punekar (talk) 17:39, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Some more citations are not clear looks primary source .It is quite clear instead of having neutral article we are ending with blunder.There is no rules like briefing anything when we have whole page. Joshi punekar (talk) 17:42, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I told you books can be used as reference as well as news article. I don't understand what you meant by neutral article. All the text have inline citations. Some doubtful ones have better source templates on them. I've also requested MRRaja001 to clarify things here. Just don't be in a hurry to change the article as per your POV. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:58, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

All the citation for above mentioned paragraph are not redirecting at all so can it be justified? “Marriages between Saraswat and non-Saraswat Brahmins are on the increase though they were unheard of before, mainly because the Saraswats eat fish and occasionally meat, while all other Brahmins are vegetarians“ In one source they meant with some other contrast but here it has been used as per their POV.This is what we term it as page without neutrality. Joshi punekar (talk) 15:39, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Frederick J. Simoons (1994). Eat Not this Flesh: Food Avoidances from Prehistory to the Present. University of Wisconsin Press. p. 284. Some citation like this is neither redirecting properly . Joshi punekar (talk) 15:41, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• Saraswat Brahmins of North India eat fish(Citation is not redirecting)
• Goud Saraswat eat fish,
• Division of Madhwa Goud Saraswat are vegetarian and smartha Saraswat are fish eaters !!!!

Ambiguity at it’s level best . If I start adding some actual content then the content will not be neutral and mythological characters will come at once!

Joshi punekar (talk) 15:47, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

First decide what’s neutrality and what’s not. For example in Deshastha Brahmins page I added one paragraph of English officer terming them as “Intelligent,brave,short and dark complexion” .Here to avoid racism I deleted dark complexion from that sentence (Go through the history of the page).This is called as neutrality of page. Hope this is clear.Waiting for your response. Joshi punekar (talk) 15:51, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

• DBigXrayᗙ

Cross verify above statements then come to conclusion .It seems you want to pour your perception here. Joshi punekar (talk) 05:33, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

How it is mythology ?

The Saraswats are a sub-group of Hindu Brahmins of India who trace their ancestry to the banks of the Sarasvati River.Saraswat Brahmins are highest order brahmins with high literacy.The saraswat Brahmins are mentioned in vedas,Ramayana,Mahabharata,bhagawata and bhavishyat purana.They are descendants of great saraswata muni.

With citation I am keeping the info ,May I know in which basis you reverted ? Joshi punekar (talk) 12:57, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

1. Kaw, M. K. (2001). Kashmiri Pandits: Looking to the Future. APH Publishing. p. 32. ISBN 9788176482363. Retrieved 9 April 2019.
2. last1=Tambs|first1=Herald|title=Business Brahmins: The Gauda Saraswat Brahmins of South Kanara|Date =2011|Publisher=Manohar|isbn=9788173049026

The following line added by you : Saraswat Brahmins are highest order brahmins with high literacy.The saraswat Brahmins are mentioned in vedas,Ramayana,Mahabharata,bhagawata and bhavishyat purana.They are descendants of great saraswata muni Is unacceptable since it is based on mythology this WP:FRINGE. Do you think the text He continued to recite the Vedic text by consuming the fish given to him by Goddess Saraswati is reliable in an encyclopedic article about a caste. Totally not. On a side note, well known books like Mein Kampf considers Germans to be most intelligent, pure, etc. Do you think these books can be referred in the Germans article? Totally not. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:48, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

You want citation rite that there .As per your logic only citation matters.Isn’t it?From day one I am telling the samething to maintain neutrality of article but it seems like someone targeting some group. Mentioning name of Saraswat Brahmins in vedas,Mahabharata, etc it’s an information not mythology .I accept may be saraswat muni may be mythological for wiki but higher order is not like with any comparison with other caste. Joshi punekar (talk) 17:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk I doubt your neutrality mr.Fylind.I know your are Indian but in wiki make sure that you be neutral.Still come to discussion and tell me how It mythology ? Joshi punekar (talk) 15:27, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Listen, you either keep the discussion in my talkpage or in this one. And for Almighty's sake use WP:INDENT. I've explained in my talk page with example that legendary stuffs get deleted from this page. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:30, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

FylindfotberserkFirst learn to mention the name if not how will I know about your message here? Joshi punekar (talk) 20:54, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk Pescatarians means strictly fish eater but have you ever hear someone calling vegetarians as vegetable eaters ?what’s your logic. Joshi punekar (talk) 20:55, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Learn first what is meant by WP:NOR. The sources say they "eat fish". Pescetarian article writes ..is the practice of adhering to a diet that incorporates seafood while abstaining from the consumption of food made from any other animal. The source doesn't pin point that Sarswats only eat "Marine fish" nor does it say they eat any other kind of "Seafood" (crustaceans, squids, etc.). Better to stick to the source. A vegetarian diet is a generalized term just like pescetarian here. It is always better to mention what kind of vegetables a group of vegetarians eat source provided. It is obvious that a Tamil vegetarian wouldn't eat the same type of items eaten by an Irish. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:24, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Regarding last info delete

Marriages between Saraswat and non-Saraswat Brahmins are on the increase though they were unheard of before, mainly because the Saraswats eat fish and occasionally meat, while all other Brahmins are vegetarians

What it means?How it is related to diet and culture. Thanks, Joshi punekar (talk) 15:21, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

• You appear to have a mania about the eating—or not—of fish by certain castes. This material is sourced to Oxford University Press, although the prose could doubtless be improved. ——SerialNumber54129 15:27, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

• This is by far the best comment, I have ever came across in these areas. Mania about the eating—or not—of fish by certain castes--. ∯WBG 15:43, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Deshastha and Chitpavan relations on a Saraswat Brahmin article

I think talking about relations between Deshastha and Chitpavan is totally irrelevant on this article. Yes, let us mention disputes between Saraswats and the Chitpavans during Peshwa rule but please keep out Deshastha, Karhade, CKP etc. out of this discussion. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 18:09, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm rather neutral here. My edits (or rather reverts) were in response to this as explained here. Disputes between other groups is not relevant here I agree, but my point is whether only Chitpavans looked Saraswats down upon or Deshasthas and Karhades also looked Saraswats down. Pinging Acharya63 for suggestions. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:22, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Also this page is about the broader Saraswat community which, in addition to Gaud Saraswats, also includes Kashmiri Pandits, sections of Bengali brahmin communities etc.The dispute with the chitpavan can be briefly mentioned here but it surely belong to the Gaud Saraswat Brahmin page.thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 19:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I am also quite neutral to this now. I agree with both of you. I agree that Deshastha/Chitpawan relation is not relevant. But if mentioned it should be specific- that is why I agree with Fylindfotberserk's latest edit that makes it more specific. If it is not made specific, it gives the wrong impression that the Chitpawans took revenge on Saraswats for their mistreatment by them earlier - when the fact is that only Deshasthas and Karhades looked down upon Chitpawans. All the Gramanya literature I have read between Chitpawans and other castes have a common point - it was politically motivated due to rivalry/jealousy at that particular time from educated castes(like Saraswats and others) to the Chitpawans. Otherwise, had it been due to revenge alone, the Chitpawans would have gone against Karhades - which they did not. My main concern was WP:SYNTH. The reason is that the source "Goa Indica: A Critical Portrait of Postcolonial Goa"(Sinha) is specifically mentioning relationships of post-colonial Goa and not Peshwa rule. So I think we are combining three sources that are referring to three different eras to arrive at a new conclusion. Gokhale's(The Chitpawans) is talking about the Peshwa era gramanyas and Sinha is talking about post-colonial Goa (post 1961) and the court case(not sure which source has it) is during the British rule. That is why I am a bit confused about this section. Perhaps someone who is more knowledgeable about this can clarify. IMHO, ideally we should not mention previous status of Chitpawans in the eyes of Deshasthas at all because that is not relevant in post colonial Goa. But if we do, then we should be specific and at least not combine different eras and different communities. Currently, it is still WP:OR as it is combining eras. I have the book "Chitpawans(Gokhale) and Marathas(Gordon) and can give any quotes from those if needed but unless the other references are giving the information mentioned, the section is still WP:OR IMHO. Perhaps Acchuta Sharma may know more about the other references and might be able to clarify the doubts. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 05:22, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

@Jonathansammy:@Acharya63: I've removed the part about Deshastha and Karhade as per your suggestions. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:35, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Also 90% of social status content applies to the Gaud Saraswat brahmins only.Surely it should be either removed from here and placed in the GSB article, or kept in both places.Any thoughts?Jonathansammy (talk) 15:21, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Probably both places if others also agree. It is only 3-4 sentences. If it were 20-30 sentences, we could mainly have it on GSB and then a summary here pointing to the main section in GSB. Readers might refer to either page. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 16:27, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Keep in both the articles IMO. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:37, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Let me clear one point here,Maharashtra saraswat doesn’t mean it’s Gaud saraswat Brahmins.It contains Rajapur saraswat Brahmins ,Citrapur saraswat and Saraswat from konkan .So be clear in your statement. Acchuta Sharma (talk) 04:33, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

When coming to saraswat and citpavan dispute, is related to politics(I have given reference for this).To avoid them towards administrator position,Saraswat superiority claim from Skandapurana and citpavana low origin made them to target saraswat.Not only saraswat citpavan considered CKP as SUDRAS to avoid their move towards administration.They stopped recruiting Deshatha for administration post,hope you have studied that reference properly. Gramanya is the best possible source for this if you want I can give reference. Acchuta Sharma (talk) 04:40, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you. All Gramanyas were related to politics and jealousy. For saraswats, the issue got resolved by the Bombay court. If you have any material for saraswats, please feel free to mention the "jealousy/politics"part for Saraswats for Gramanyas if you like. All these specific details should probably be on the Gramanya page. We should only mention a bit here and only list the end results otherwise it gets confusing to readers. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 05:12, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Till 17th century saraswat had strong hold over konkan While citpavan where treated as low origin by saraswat (Check our the history or I’ll give you reference).In konkan Desastha were not there instead saraswat(With sub communities were termed as Bommans).I can give references for above mentioned statements . Regards, Acchuta Sharma (talk) 04:50, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Acchuta Sharma, Please feel free add directly to the saraswat page or GSB page(wherever it is applicable). Thanks for your contribution to wikipedia. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 05:14, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Acchuta Sharma, The quote about merger is on page 50 of the book. You can verify it yourself. If you cannot see it on google books let me know, I will quote it here. Some times google books hides some pages based on location/time of access.Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 05:45, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

The merger is there but reason is something else it’s like saraswat wanted to take over politics that’s it!!!!.That’s not related to citpavan and saraswat. Secondly in my previous reference it has clearly mentioned as “Traditionally saraswat and Deshatha has been administrators in Deccan “..But saraswat brahmin Claim was based on skandapurana .They just wanted to destroy this book but Deshatha took it as advance and started called them mallecha Brahmins.These created competition for Pune authorities posts,(Reference available about gramanya) Acchuta Sharma (talk) 06:24, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

But I can prove anywhere like Deshatha had a very good relation with saraswats.But Chitpavan had very bad relation with saraswat.The Reason for this is But historically saraswat and Deshatha worked together in Deccan kingdoms. Acchuta Sharma (talk) 06:30, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Before Deccan kingdoms era saraswats were administrators in Shilahara kingdoms,Yadav of konkan ,mauryas of konkan etc But show me one citation which gives account of citpavans being mentioned in konkan before Maratha empire ? Acchuta Sharma (talk) 06:32, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

One thing I have doubt here ,Why we are mentioning everything in the perception of citpavans.Saraswat even today don’t consider citpavans as Brahmins mentioning their origin in skandapurana.So as per this logic should we write these things in chitpavan page?!!!!.Does it look odd to mention others perspectives here? I agree if you mention Shankaracharyas or Madhwa Peeetha rejected but they didn’t.Infact grand guru of Adi Shankaracharya was a saraswat brahmin named Guru gowdapadacharya and first proponent of Advaitha siddhanta(Source:Shankara Vijaya authentic book). Acchuta Sharma (talk) 06:41, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Acchuta Sharma, Please do not discuss any other communities on this page any further. It is distracting and takes focus away from the real topic. If you want to reply to this post, and discuss communities other than Saraswats, please take it to my talk page. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 11:47, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

See how you take it’s left to you.Even I can ask why citpavans caste name is mentioned here in this page?Secondly what’s detorating statement here,I just mentioned the perspective of saraswats on chitpavan(@ the same time chitpvans have some other perspective).

In Goa temple priests/ Mahajans are only from castes like saraswats,padyes and Karhade.

Hope you have heard of sharada peetha(Kashmir) where Adi shakaracharya went for debate with pandits.That pandits are none other than saraswat Brahmins. Nothing is detorating statement here I am just specifying perspectives errors in this article.

Still any debate please come to my talk page I appreciate debate with valid references.But keep caste away stay neutral then come to discussion.

Regards, Acchuta Sharma (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Acchuta Sharma, you cannot discuss and denigrate Chitpawans or Karhades by calling them low on this saraswat page - not because of censorship or "hurt feelings" but because their discussion is irrelevant on this page. Same for other non-Brahmin castes as well. Most importantly, you should think from the point of view of someone who is reading this talk page. He/She will get completely distracted by discussions about other communities here. That is why I requested you to limit the discussion to saraswats and discuss about other communities elsewhere. I have edited this talk to remove all discussion (including my own) not related to saraswats. Hope that is Ok. I will give quote about merger also that ou requested. BTW, all editors agree that the relation of Deshasthas/Karhades and how they looked at Chitpawans is irrelevant to Saraswats. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 18:55, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Here is the quote from Goa Indica: A critical portrait of postcolonial Goa, page 50 (you should be able to the see page on googlebooks at least partially). Quote about Chitpawan-Saraswat relations:...Saraswats were considered inferior in the caste hierarchy by Chitpawan brahmans, who were at the top of the scale in Maharashtra. Dogmatic vegetarians, the Chitpawans looked down upon the Saraswats as a polluted subcaste because they ate fish. The Saraswats knew it for sure that in the event of Goa's merger with Maharashtra,they would be reduced to the status of second class brahmans - neglected and suppressed I am not trying to elevate Chitpawans or hurt the feelings of Saraswats. But just wanted to show that this has nothing to do with 200 old gramanyas and that this was not resolved in British rule. That is why we need to order things chronologically. I am only quoting because you asked for the quote. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 19:13, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Saraswats from other regions

We need to expand on saraswats from other regions of India such as Punjab, Jammu, Rajasthan and Bengal.I am searching for information on these communities and will add content later.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 15:25, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your diligence as always, Jonathansammy. Regards, Acharya63 (talk) 16:28, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages articles that use Indian English
• All unassessed articles
• Stub-Class Ethnic groups articles
• High-importance Ethnic groups articles
• WikiProject Ethnic groups articles
• Stub-Class India articles
• Low-importance India articles
• Stub-Class India articles of Low-importance
• WikiProject India articles