Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:17, 2 August 2012

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Re:

Thanks for the notification. Actually, I had renewed the link since Iranica has changed its webhost. The correct link is this one: http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/babor-zahir-al-din --Lysozym (talk)

TB

Autobiography of a Yogi

Hello Sitush - we just had major vandalism occur on this page and I undid the whole edit - you had cleaned it up and he completely changed the whole page - I thought it was best to let you know right away. Thanks RedRose13 Red Rose 13 (talk) 04:06, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I think that you both need to discuss the matter at Talk:Autobiography of a Yogi. Although the changes were considerable, I would also advise you to be very careful in using the word "vandalism": it has a specific meaning here and you can quickly get into trouble if you mis-use it. Take a look at our page on the subject.

I'll try to keep an eye on things but will most likely be away again this weekend. - Sitush (talk) 13:56, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Sitush, just thought you should know that as soon as you left, TatSat reverted back 3 years according to Nested Variables post - NV reverted it.Red Rose 13 (talk) 04:10, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Sitush - FYI Tat Sat crested an incident on Administrator Notice Board ]. Please take a look NestedVariable (talk) 18:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Good Morning Sitush - Hope you had an enjoyable weekend felling the trees. Please join us on the Dispute page - Your neutral editing and view are invaluable. Also, please see this conversation on Mr. Stradivarius page - http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Mr._Stradivarius - Did you see that I posted that someone deleted the photograph of Yogananda that Megog had found for me? I didn't know that I had to watch the media commons area as well and someone put a notice there on 7/8 and deleted it on 7/17. I just answered the source questions - didn't realize that they were not answered. Red Rose 13 (talk) 17:20, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Please see this discussion on Mr Stradivarius you were discussed there as well and thought you should know. http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Mr._Stradivarius#Your_help_at_Autobiography_of_a_Yogi_dispute Red Rose 13 (talk) 21:11, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Done, and added a comment at DRN. - Sitush (talk) 11:52, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello all, I have been following the discussion about the image in the infobox and would like to make the following suggestion: The infobox image of Yogananda does not necessarily have to be the image on the cover of the original book or the SRF version. However, the Indian postal authorities released a stamp in 1977 which has the same image as the one on the cover of the SRF edition. I have not seen the original 1946 edition but have the SRF edition, which has been printed several times. My edition was reprinted in 2005 and on page 577 the image of the stamp is reproduced, with his name and years of birth and death. Could we not have an image of the stamp in the infobox and stop bickering about copyright issues, real or imaginary i.e. compromise with this alternative solution? Have a look at the stamp here:http://www.indianpost.com/viewstamp.php/Color/Orange/PARAMAHANSA%20YOGANAND --Zananiri (talk) 21:45, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Self-Realization Fellowship

• Thank you Sitush, I always like your edits and I learn a lot. One questions - (1) when you say spamming of Yogananda's picture what do you mean? I only post this picture on pages that relate to him so how am I spamming? Thanks again.Red Rose 13 (talk) 17:53, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
• I just realized that you probably missed the part where the photo that Megog found in May (during our discussion remember?) and helped me put up was questioned on 7/8 and deleted about a week later or so. It took me a while to find the editor but mission accomplished - I filled out what was needed and it came back into commons. Then I had to add it back into the websites it was deleted from - perhaps that looked like spam to you? Also I realized I needed to add the picture to SRF because he is the Founder. ThanksRed Rose 13 (talk) 19:25, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Bhagavad Gita

Hi Sitush, your expertise is required in a discussion taking place at Talk:Bhagavad Gita#Dating Bhagavad Gita. If you are not busy, would you care to comment there. Thanks. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 05:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

 Done - Sitush (talk) 08:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Just one final question, to avoid OR, do the various dates and references the authors have examined need to be mentioned as well or just their conclusions? For instance, Fowler quotes variety of scholarly opinions which date the composition from 5th century BCE to 1st century BCE, but she herself picks 2nd century BCE as the latest date for composition of BG. Do the entire range of dates need to be quoted in the article as well? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 08:27, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on the Bhagavad Gita talk page. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 10:37, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Your help is required again with the decision making stuff on the BG talk page. When you find time, please have a look at it. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 15:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

TOI

I remember through some past discussion (can't remember which) that you don't have any good impression about TOI. And i sort of agree with you on that. (Did i then say i don't agree with you? Can't remember that either.) Although some articles in it might be reliable and not undue and hence worth using as source, it does not apply to the whole publication. Ofcourse no one is perfect. But recently in few AfDs people have thrown on my face TOI's article stating how media cares to write about subjects and thus they pass GNG. All trivial articles like someone went on honeymoon somewhere, someone fell down and broke their ankle, someone is learning to cook, etc. Also another such case can be found here where one TOI's trivial article is questioned.
But i wonder if you had done something on this issue in some official forum. And if yes, what was the result? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 07:37, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Personally, I feel TOI, of late, has lost its "stature" or whatever due to various issues and goof-ups. I don't think the reliability of the TOI sources are in question. Triviality is a different matter and is subject to opinion; turns out there are many people who do care about many of the things some of us consider trivial. For instance, I do not care in the least bit what the Duchess of Cambridge's sister wears, but apparently there are people who do. NDTV yesterday carried a two minute long piece (in primetime) on Justin Bieber's visit to Australia, and I don't care what the chap does and where he goes. Entertainment news caters to a different readership, and it may be so that we don't appreciate it. Sitush, can you throw some light on how sources like The Daily Star and The Sun are considered on WP? Some Englishmen I know consider them to carry largely trivial news. Lynch7 08:02, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Personally speaking, I've never found the Toiletpaper of India to be readable. Sometime last year they ran a front page promotional headline about a college and didn't disclose that they were monetarily involved in it. However, for a lot of things, especially those not written by "Staff correspondents", they could be used. —SpacemanSpiff 08:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I doubt very much that the Daily Star, The Sun, the Daily Mail, The Mirror or The Daily Express would usually qualify as reliable sources except for stuff about themselves. These UK papers all sensationalise and have dubious editorial practices etc that make them far too suspect. Do we use The National Enquirer much, I wonder?

I don't care what Justin "The Duchess" Bieber wears when he visits Cambridge either ... and it certainly is not encyclopedic. Not even if he tweets it ;) - Sitush (talk) 08:18, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Ofcourse triviality is a point of opinion. And it can be taken care through reaching consensus. If many editors believe it to be trivial, it should not go in encyclopedic articles. That would be the way to handle whether a certain content should be present in the article or not. But do trivial mentions in newspapers denote subject's notability? Especially when the article talks nothing else. Eg: Here the actress fainted!, This article says the subject misses home-made food and is hence learning to cook. In this next one they report that the actress will be seen in Bengali attire but don't even care to mention where and how and when. Editors have commented in AfDs that even if these reports seems trivial, when a newspaper; largest read English newspaper of India, one of the oldest newspaper; cares to report such trivial things, the subject must be considered as notable. I cannot say anything there on how TOI does note such genuinely trivial things as news as it sound like my personal opinion. But if many editors have similar opinions on TOI, which are established at some common forum maybe through some RfC or whatever fancy way you guys suggest, it might hold some water. Its impractical to get everyone weigh in every AfD or discussion. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 10:54, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Alas, I fear that we are losing that larger battle. Misplaced Pages is dumbing down, is moving a long way from being encyclopedic and is instead becoming a compendia of gossip, passing mentions, hype and fan cruft. It seems to be an inexorable process and I for one am thinking of just walking away from the whole thing. - Sitush (talk) 11:03, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

But we should voice this concern somewhere else also. Maybe the first time we won't be heard. But it might gather more similar thinking editors. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 12:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

We need to fight that inexorable dumbing down, and start helping readers to dumb up. Only today (don't you just love TFA day?) I was involved in a discussion in which the phrase "river navigation" was first of all suspected of being grammatically incorrect, and then of being jargon. Needless to say it's still there in the article though, and it's going to stay. Malleus Fatuorum 20:37, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey! You want to quit? I will give you another reason. WP:CHEAP says redirects are cheap. (I wasn't aware of this essay before.) Thus almost every article under AfD can be redirected. Even after all editors voted delete, closing admin has decided to redirect, well... because they are cheap and they could be searchable terms! §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 11:16, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Which discussion was it? I tend not to follow AfD stuff, even when I report something, so I've no idea what you are referring to. Yes, redirects are cheap but they are not always appropriate ... and the "D" in AfD is "discussion", not "deletion". Who ever closes has to judge consensus, which is based on policy arguments rather than a vote. - Sitush (talk) 11:33, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

No! Nothing in particular of your interest. These were all trivial song articles. See this if interested. Was just sharing some frustration. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 12:08, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Pranab Mukherjee

Hey Sitush I need your feedback on the Pranab Mukherjee article. I did substantial work on it and hopefully it is of encyclopedia quality now. Please take a look and suggest further changes before I submit it to an assessment. I wont pretend its of good article status but hopefully its good enough to get something better than its current C grade. Cliniic (talk) 17:35, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

just editing to let you know the article has been rated to B class regards! Cliniic (talk) 10:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Braj Kumar Nehru

I have improved and formatted the article Braj Kumar Nehru & also included some images from the JFK presidential archives. However, the link to the Indian Ambassador to the United Kingdom (category) doesn't seem to be working. Not sure how to make that happen. Do you mind taking a quick look and keying in a few words in its talk page. Any further inputs would be appreciated (not in a hurry) -Ambar wiki (talk) 18:00, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I just managed to fix this issue myself. However, could you take a quick look at the latest Kashmiri Pandit article draft in my Sandbox . Also see if you could do a quick review of -Ambar wiki (talk) 02:36, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I am not fully sure, but most probably Sitush is on a very brief (1–2 day(s)) wikibreak! --Tito Dutta ✉ 02:41, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Tibet scripts in caste article

Those are there to ease verification. The dictionary linked uses scripts, and a search by english words goes to complex disamb in the cited source - if I recall why I decided to put in there. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Stop Edit warring

Stop Edit warring at the page Dara Singh, because the things differ your personal likeness, we are here to contributed together, not for creating conflicts. Clarificationgiven (talk) 04:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I am not edit warring. Please see the article talk page, my explanation in the vandalism warning that I gave you, and my edit summaries on the article. Feel free to ask for clarification but not to reinstate this unsourced and faked balderdash. A read of WP:V, WP:RS and WP:FAKE might not go amiss. - Sitush (talk) 04:52, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Let's see. Clarificationgiven (talk) 05:12, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, here's the timeline.

• On 13 July, I cleaned up the article soon after the announcement of Singh's death - the edit sequence is here and the process was necessary because, as is common with recent deaths involving Indian people, things were getting very silly
• I went away for a few days, came back and did a lot of stuff elsewhere until ...
• ... at 2:48 today I first revisited the article. I performed a block of successive edits, most of which were for material added since my previous clean up and generally different to that which had been removed then. This block included fixes for issues such as fake references, misrepresentation of sources, addition of unsourced content, undue weight per the talk page etc. All of them were described with edit summaries.
• You reverted me, breaching numerous policies just in that act.
• I reverted you on that basis. In particular, apparently wilful reinstatement of faked refs is vandalism. I warned you of this, using a template with an additional explanation.
• You reverted me again. Instead of perhaps considering WP:BRD, you just said "sourced information" and completely ignored the discussion that had already taken place on the talk page regarding the need for consensus in sorting out how to deal with tributes. A discussion that I had not been involved in, but which involved several others.
• We are now at 1 revert to me, 2 to you + a warning. I reverted again per the talk page discussion and also opened up there in order to deal with this specific example
• After all of this had happened and you had removed my warning on your talk page, you accuse me of edit warring above. You would be correct if you think that edit warring does not necessarily mean breaching the three revert rule. However, when you are acting in the face of discussions taking place on the article talk page and are wilfully inserting false statements etc, you do not really have a leg to stand on: in such situations, your editing is disruptive. - Sitush (talk) 05:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I did open an SPI case against Titodutta

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/TitoduttaBrahmanAdvaita (talk) 17:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I take offense to that. I should have been the main guy and Tito the Sockpuppet. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 17:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, my orange bar notification thing is playing up again - sometimes I see it, sometimes I do not. I'll take a look at the case that BA has linked & pass any comments that I see fit. Obviously, I am not involved in the SPI process in any capacity other than as a normal contributor here. I am slightly surprised that I have not been named: there was a spell last year when I was reported by all sorts of people for all sorts of reasons, and it all came to nought. - Sitush (talk) 17:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't being serious there. This is a first for me, so you can understand a bit of excitement at my end. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 17:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I realised that ;) Wait until you get reported at WP:ANI: my first couple of times there had me crapping myself really, really excited even though I knew I was in the right. Meanwhile, BA can hopefully still provide the discussion link that I requested. Indeed, they may already have done so. - Sitush (talk) 17:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Sitush, if you know any checkuser, can you ask to do the investigation as quickly as possible please? It will be really helpful. I have lots of pending works! --Tito Dutta ✉ 17:55, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I just keep playing the scenario in which I turn out to be Tito's Sockpuppet again and again in my head. If I was actually Tito, this would be the most elaborate and dexterously planned con on Misplaced Pages ever. So Tito, as CK, would intentionally insert OR in the Varna (Hinduism) page, so as to get involved in an edit conflict with you, so that you would always believe I and Tito were different (one of us was an experienced editor and the other an amateur). Then Tito would add 1500 edits before using me in a conflict. Finally, he would actively engage in a schizophrenic conversation for over 50 posts before finally using me (CK) in an edit war. Amazing stuff!! CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

CorrectKnowledge, just curious, where do you live? I live in Kolkata, India. Ignore it if it is too personal! --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Far from Kolkata, so no worries. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) x 2. Salvio Giuliano is a CU but I don't see any great urgency here and I'll be miffed if it turns out that my gut instinct regarding your two is wrong. Just carry on doing your stuff and don't sweat the report. A recent ("successful") SPI filed by me took the best part of a week to sort out because of the horrendous backlogs - we need more admins, although I'm pretty sure Jimbo was repored saying yesterday that we do not! The basis of the SPI report looks like a slip of the pen/memory lapse situation to me, rather than a Freudian slip. Nonetheless, I can sort of see why BA might have concerns if hey haven't really dug around your histories and so it is made in good faith. - Sitush (talk) 18:06, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I refer both of you to the big red sign at top right of this page ;) - Sitush (talk) 18:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I realize Tito has a lot more at stake here and I shouldn't be enjoying this. But, I agree with Sitush, BA had good reasons to file that report. Not only was there a slip (Freudian or not), we seemed to be cooperating exceedingly well on the BG article, almost too well for two different persons. Just look at our other conversations on the same page. And finally, BA would have noticed, both of us are on friendly terms with Sitush. :) CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:14, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Sitush, your page always has the funnest stuff on it. FWIW: I agree we need more admins. Have you considered an RFA run yourself? Kevin Gorman (talk) 18:12, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it's real fun when people post here telling me that I am the product of a relationship involving my mother and a dog etc! RfA was mooted a few months ago. The news report that I saw is here. - Sitush (talk) 18:41, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Caste system in India

I can't make sense of that lead at all. How do you square this circle? "The Jātis were grouped by the Brahminical texts under the four well-known caste categories ... various contemporary scholars have argued that the caste system was constructed by the British colonial regime." Maybe there's some background I'm missing, but the lead seems to me to be bordering on the incomprehensible. Malleus Fatuorum 20:30, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Don't know about the others, but "constructed by the British colonial regime" is definitely a misinterpretation of Nick Dirks. Dirks says that castes existed before the British but that, and I'm probably paraphrasing him poorly, the system became solidified during colonial rule. The text quoted by Malleus above seems to imply that the system did not exist at all prior to the arrival of the British. --regentspark (comment) 20:42, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Well, I used the phrase "complete mess" but we agree. As you have noted on the talk page, it is a touchy subject. Apostle appears to have an interest in sociology, perhaps even a professional one. They've done quite a lot of decent stuff regarding detail in the thing and they've found their way through a few talk page scraps, so I've pretty much let it drift for a while and just kept a watching brief over the talk page.

The problem is now one of internal contradictions, lack of clarity, bloatedness, overly-technical language/buzzwords etc. Basically, it has grown like Topsy and it needs some input from people who have competence in seeing the big picture. In a sense, knowledge of the detail does not matter too much right now: if the big picture throws issues, such as those you mention, then the talk page should be hit. I just need to find some time because I am getting pulled in all sorts of directions at the moment.

As to your query, well, there are numerous theories of origin because the entire concept of caste is itself a moving target. Some see it as being a socio-religious structure that can be traced to the ancient mythological texts that were composed and promoted by the groups that became known as brahmins; others see it as a more or less equally ancient stratification based on occupation, almost like a primitive division of labour (upper class, middle class, working class etc); some see it as basically an administrative construct, often ascribed to the Raj period when we Brits started counting people and courting favours etc (a theory particularly beloved by the Hindu nationalists, such as the BJP and RSS); and yet others see it as a more modern socio-occupational structure. Then there are those who see it as familial groupings, supporting the practise of endogamy for one reason or another. Issues such as sanskritisation arise and, of course, the entire concept has its own current contradiction because the Indian constitution made caste illegal in 1947 and yet the government even today relies on caste as a means of - for example - deploying its positive discrimination/social engineering policies. - Sitush (talk) 20:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

It is, as you suggest, a mess, so I suppose the article reflects that confusion quite accurately in being incomprehensible and contradictory. Malleus Fatuorum 21:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

The phrase "damned by faint praise" springs to mind! You are, of course, correct. And, honestly, this is one of those articles where input from people who lack knowledge would be a positive. We never have had that chat regarding how the heck I got involved in this stuff but it will happen and, believe me, it is bizarre. I knew little then and many will say that I still know little .... but the Misplaced Pages construct should at least bring some sort of order to things. It may well be the wrong construct and the WMF actions are certainly not making life any easier, but there we go. - Sitush (talk) 23:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I hope we will have that discussion one day; before I met you I'd imagined that you were an Indian yourself, rather than a Caucasian basketball player, judging by your height. But as you know, I'm on a very short leash here, only tolerated, not welcomed. Malleus Fatuorum 23:28, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Your leash is very long as far as I am concerned, and you are very welcome on this page. In the unlikely event that the community should think otherwise, you would still be more than welcome in my world. I have a life outside Misplaced Pages and would count you among those whose presence would bring light to it. And, yes, I played pro basketball ... but pro basketball in the UK back then was, well, amateur/semi-pro (expenses + £10, basically ... on a good night). I had a game against the Globetrotters in Edinburgh (woo-hoo) and I played agains Alton Byrd, who as a shortarse was phenomenally awkward to deal with, but hey, I was pretty crap then and am far more so now. In fact, there are days when I can barely get down the stairs due to the amount of metal in my body/broken bones etc. Beer helps! - Sitush (talk) 23:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I said above that "your leash is very long". Have you ever come across the concept of "infinity + 1"? That is pretty much how long it is. It would take a lot to piss me off. - Sitush (talk) 23:44, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I have, and the even stranger idea that 99.999 recurring equals 1. I had a conversation with a mathematician some time ago, who was rather surprised at my naivety in believing that there was only one infinity; I had to make my excuses and leave. Malleus Fatuorum 23:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

You, being an informed chap, will be aware of the claimed oxymoronic nature of "military intelligence" ... "conversation with a mathematician"? - Sitush (talk) 03:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

SPI and etc!

Thanks! It is a relief, it is a relief. I am amazed to see work in Russian Misplaced Pages on this issue, I have posted in Bhagavad Gita talk, will you please comment? --Tito Dutta ✉ 17:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Sudhan

You made a lot of changes to this page, citing COI, I am not sure what you object to can you be specific

Thanks

Trueblood (talk) 20:07, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I've just scanned the article history as far back as February. Maybe my concentration wandered but, although I can see a lot of edits by me, I can see nothing relating to COI concerns. Can you give me a diff please. - Sitush (talk) 16:39, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I had placed the references for the Sudhan history, about two years back, I dont know who has been editing, but I have visited this site for some time and see it completely messed up. Before making changes you are kindly asked to place your objections for each issue on the talk page for discussion prior to deleting references.

Trueblood (talk) 20:21, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Any opinions on the "Dopesheet"

Have been able to take a look at here, & what did you think of it. I did leave another link on the , which gives some examples of what dopesheets @ NDTV are. -Ambar (talk) 11:47, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I've been on and off wiki for a few days and am trying to catch up. I've got the feeling that I could be a bit erratic for a while longer. - Sitush (talk) 11:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I've been thinking about this one but still cannot make up my mind. In some ways, they look like fantastic potted biographies etc but I am so, so dubious of perhaps overusing content from an Indian media source that frequently gets things wrong and writes ambiguous text. I think that it needs input from WP:RSN - my gut feeling is that you would get support there even though I am wary. - Sitush (talk) 16:35, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Map changes

Hi. Thanks for your guidance. Shikarpur, Gujarat - You helped me to create this page. Now, one user named wantsallanger has changed the map, by inserting State map, instead of India map. I am of the contention that, in respect of IVC sites, India map is more appropriate, because, it will easily show the distribution of the IVC. Interestingly, that particular user has changed more than 170 maps from India to respective states on 23rd July 2012 itself! I have put a message on his talk page. But, such en-mass changing of maps from contry to state, may not be appropriate without considering the background in which the particular map is inserted in first place, to respective article? that user has changed more than 250 maps in last one week or so! will it be ok for any user to change en-mass the maps? Can you guide! Thank you.Rayabhari (talk) 11:54, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I think that you should raise the issue at WT:INB. You cannot possibly deal with discussions concerning the same general issue on 250 separate articles & so some views from the India project might be useful. If you do raise the issue there, I'd suggest that you also let wantsallanger know so that they can join in if they wish. - Sitush (talk) 12:01, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Rodiya

I saw your edits on the article, was wondering what do you think about the sexploitation picture in the article. These were taken of native women (always bare breasted) by colonial photographers and sold for cash as soft porn but now they are finding themselves in Misplaced Pages articles, only on "lower caste" articles, never the "higher caste". Thanks Kanatonian (talk) 16:03, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I think that "sexploitation" might be pushing it a bit. I have no idea if these things were once sold as soft porn. I do know that this form of (un)dress was normal attire and that there is a very good reason why you do not see such things in higher caste articles - see, for example, Upper cloth controversy. There have been various discussions regarding what type of image is suitable for such articles - including at WT:INB - and these historic images seem to be accepted. Montages of modern folk are much more contentious, per User:Sitush/Common#Montages. - Sitush (talk) 16:25, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Maratha

A number of Maratha warriors, including Shivaji's father Shahaji served the various Muslim kingdoms of the day. Shivaji's mother Jijabai was the daughter of Lakhuji Jadhav, a nobleman from Sindkhed Raja. The Maratha clans and their subdivisions were also involved in fighting amongst themselves, until Jijabai started a trend towards greater Maratha unity. They also took up various other professions like writers, poets, landowners, ministers, etc.

Do u have any doubt that Shahaji served various Muslim kingdoms like Bijapuri Sultanate and Ahmadnagar as already in the reference or Jijabai was not married to Shahaji or she was not daughter of Lakhuji Jadhav? What is the problem with these sources? 180.241.225.31 (talk) 07:08, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Wrong venue - this needs to be at the article talk page. - Sitush (talk) 07:10, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

UBC Faculty of Medicine

Last year you PRODded this, and I deleted it. It has now been re-created, and I have restored the history of the previous version - see User talk:JohnCD#Re: Deleted page - and am letting you know in case you want to consider AfD. JohnCD (talk) 10:15, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'll give them a bit of time to fettle it per WP:N etc. - Sitush (talk) 10:23, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Flag committee

If you don't get your way in one article, best is to create a POV fork! I think the flag article just ought to be stripped of its FA status and crap allowed to be added, then at least we might not have this going on in different places. —SpacemanSpiff 06:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

this what I expected from the User:SpacemanSpiff , you know you have no knowledge of what research is about. You are wasting my time and creating more obstacles on my way. --Dilpreet Singh (talk) 10:56, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

If you consider WP:CONSENSUS to be an obstacle to what you wish to do then perhaps Misplaced Pages is not the place for you. It is one of the fundamental concepts here because it ties in with our collaborative ethos. - Sitush (talk) 11:36, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I am not saying the WP:CONSENSUSis an obstacle --Dilpreet Singh (talk) 12:44, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, umpteen people - including some who are completely uninvolved - have told you that your arguments are contrary to a substantial and very recently ascertained consensus. There is therefore little to be gained by trying to overcome what ever it is that you consider to be an obstacle. I refer you once more to WP:IDHT - if you keep this up then you may find yourself in a rather more frustrating position than merely being on the "wrong side" of consensus.

It is already very evident that you have quite substantial problems with English language comprehension. These may be affecting your understanding both of our policies and (incorrectly) of the sources that you have given. I am sorry but there is not much I can do about that. Nor is there much I can do about your apparent support for a revisionist fringe theory, except to say that you are entitled to your opinion but not necessarily to state in in an article. - Sitush (talk) 12:51, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit dispute

Hey Situesh I am currently involved in an edit dispute on the Pranab Mukherjee talk page. can you please look into it when you have the time? Here is the relevant section http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Pranab_Mukherjee#Controversy. The user agreed that sources he presented were not reliable but now is presenting a Sunday Times article by Ram Jethmalani. Cliniic (talk) 15:08, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I see that a GA review has begun, so it is best that I let the reviewer do their stuff. To be honest, if it was me who was reviewing the thing then I would fail it right now on the grounds of stability. You are rushing at this thing, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 16:31, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh I did not nominate it for a review. It was someone else. btw can you please look into the edit dispute?? Cliniic (talk) 16:39, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I assumed that it was you who nominated. I've read the talk page section but am not willing to get involved until the reviewer has completed their stuff. Chopping and changing while a review is in progress makes life very difficult because the article is a moving target. Hopefully, the reviewer will speedily decline - they certainly should, IMO. - Sitush (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I am not requesting you to edit but just look into the controversy talk page. do you think any of the alleged "controversies" are notable enough to merit their own section? I dont think so. I had a discussion about this once with Lynch7 and he agreed, pointing out the L.K Advani article where he integrated the controversies into the main body. Also do you think Ram Jethmalani is a reliable source? not that what was written in the article supported some of the statements he made. I dont know why the user put it up..maybe he is arguing that the alleged controversies are notable to merit their own section?? Cliniic (talk) 16:52, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

btw the Rajiv Gandhi article is also a complete mess. many parts of the article cites a book that claims Sonia Gandhi is a KGB agent. Is that WP:RS?? I would have made the changes long ago but I dont feel comfortable taking on the issue. its very daunting. Also the article places many section which should be under the domestic and foreign policy section in the controversies section? Do you agree that is POV pushing? If people insist they be seen as controversies they inevitably will be seen as such. Cliniic (talk) 16:56, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, I am aware of the potential issues. The reviewer has said that they are going to fail the nomination & so I'll take a look at the detail later. The article needs quite a lot of work aside from the content dispute issue. - Sitush (talk) 16:58, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

allright thanks Sitush! Cliniic (talk) 17:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Talkback

Amy Winehouse

My sources are not dubious. I do not have a habit of writing inaccurate things on wikipedia, and my sources include the telegraph and websites that are trustworthy. Now I admit my link to the telgraph didn't work properly, sadly I am new at this posting links but TBH most of my links are not hard to find. There hundreds of news articles about her paying for the guy to have the life saving surgery you just have to type in the article amy winehouse saves man's life and you will find it.. At least one of my sources takes you to the article the one for the list of charities and her being a soft touch. --Zolfianyarvelling (talk) 20:36, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

The entire section was very poorly written, and the burden is on you to source things correctly. Treat it as a learning experience. - Sitush (talk) 20:39, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea how to source things correctly can you tell me how or at least tell me where I can learn. Also can you maybe tell me what was wrong with how it was written. Was it my punctuation and grammar or did I make it too personal, sorry to ask but I would like to know as it one of the first things I have written on wikipedia. --Zolfianyarvelling (talk) 17:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Pallava article

Please have a look at Pallava dynasty. This alteration by Lifebonzza is a small example - http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Pallava_dynasty&diff=503346879&oldid=503328871 Compare it with what i wrote and how Lifebonzza used the same sources (numismatics society, Gangoly, Alī Jāvīd and Tabassum Javeed) to misquote (am putting ref as REF to make references visible):

ORIGINAL (what i wrote):

The Pallavas gained prominence after the eclipse of the Satavahana dynasty, whom the Pallavas served as feudatories. REF: The journal of the Numismatic Society of India, Volume 51, p.109</ref>. REF: Alī Jāvīd and Tabassum Javeed. (2008). World heritage monuments and related edifices in India, p.107 http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=54XBlIF9LFgC&pg=PA107&dq=pallava+feudatory+satavahana&hl=en&ei=GdG3TvPDEITtrQfDuNjDAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAQ#v=snippet&q=feudatories&f=false

The Sangam literature epic Manimekhalai describes that the first Pallava king, Ilam Thiraiyan (or younger Thiraiyan), was born of a liaison between a Naga princess named Pilli Valai (Pilivalai) and a Chola king named Killi (Killivalavan). Ilam Tiriyan was lost in a ship-wreck and found washed ashore with a twig (pallava) of the Tondai creeper, Cephalandra indica, coiled around his ankle. Hence he derived the name Tondai-man from the Tondai creeper. He became an independent ruler and the territory ruled by him came to be known as Tondaimandalam, or 'Realm of the Tondai'.REF name="Gangoly" Ordhendra Coomar Gangoly. The art of the Pallavas, Volume 2 of Indian Sculpture Series. G. Wittenborn, 1957. p. 2.

ALTERED VERSION (content changed by Lifebonzza yet retaining my sources which imply or state no such thing as Lifebonzza writes):

In the inscriptions of the medieval Telugu Cholas, descended from the Sangam Chola emperor Karikala Chola who ruled in 180, the monarch's subordinate king Trinetra Pallava lost his third eye for refusing to carry out orders to construct the floodbanks of the Kaveri River. An ancient Chola-Nāka alliance at Nainativu and succeeding Pallava-Naka liaisons marked the dynasty's formative years. Of this lineage, Ilandiraiyan, a younger contemporary of King Karikala Chola became an independent ruler of Tondaimandalam around 200, stretching his Tondaiyar-Thiraiyar domain passed the Tirumala Venkateswara Temple, Tirupati whose construction he consecrated. REF Ordhendra Coomar Gangoly. The art of the Pallavas, Volume 2 of Indian Sculpture Series. G. Wittenborn, 1957. p. 2.</ref> Centering their authority in Tondai Nadu, Ilandiraiyan's descendants gained prominence as one Pallava line ruling Kanchi from 220. REF The journal of the Numismatic Society of India, Volume 51, p.109</ref>REF Alī Jāvīd and Tabassum Javeed. (2008). World heritage monuments and related edifices in India, p.107 http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=54XBlIF9LFgC&pg=PA107&dq=pallava+feudatory+satavahana&hl=en&ei=GdG3TvPDEITtrQfDuNjDAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAQ#v=snippet&q=feudatories&f=false

There are too many misquotes like this. He reverted my corrections. What do you suggest?

--= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 14:23, 26 July 2012 (UTC)Mayasutra

You do not appear to have tried to discuss the issue on the article talk page. - Sitush (talk) 14:29, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Quite clearly there is no point discussing stuff on talk page. Please take a look at past edits of Lifebonzza in other articles to see what i mean. Also, personally, not interested in arguing this out with Lifebonza. Just bringing this to your notice. Leave it to you and admin how you wish to handle this. Regards.--= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 14:39, 26 July 2012 (UTC)Mayasutra

If you have not tried to discuss then I am mystified as to how you can be so sure that it is pointless. While there is nothing wrong with bringing issues to the attention of others, simply dumping stuff on them is not really in accord with our ethos of collaboration. I've opened a thread and I've notified the other contributor of it. What you do is up to you. - Sitush (talk) 14:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Very sorry Sitush had no idea of dumping stuff on others. Just that i find the user's past edits following a certain pattern. Anyways, thanks for notifying him. Regards.--= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 15:02, 26 July 2012 (UTC)Mayasutra

Bene Israel

Hello, Sitush. RE: David Cheulkar's being a Bene Israel -

I am ethnically Marathi-speaking (Maharashtrian, denizen of Maharastra state in India): while I was born a Hindu, I knew numerous Bene-Israel families while growing up in Mumbai - though I'm currently in the USA. (My cousin is married to a Bene-Israel named Sholom Shahpurkar.) The Bene Israel community of Indian Jews supposedly emigrated to coastal Maharashtra two millenia or more ago, and adopted Marathi as their mother-tongue ,Marathi surnames and Indian dress (though they still used Hebrew first names and retained their religious customs).

Cheulkar is a Maharashtrian surname. When used in surnames, the Marathi suffix "-kar", means "-from the place", equivalent to "-sky/-ski" in Eastern Europe/Russia. (Hence "Mumbaikar", "hailing from Mumbai". The last names of the Maharashtrian-Indian cricketers Sunil Gavaskar and Sachin Tendulkar have similar origins.) Cheul, also spelled "Chaul" (phonetically, "Chowl", with the "ch" being pronounced like "ts") is a town that is the remnant of a 16th century city founded by the Portuguese that lies 40 miles south of Bombay/Mumbai (the capital of Maharashtra) on India's west coast.

We don't dispute that David was Jewish: insisting on a citation that he was Bene-Israeli, given the evidence of his last name (apart from the fact that he spoke Marathi flawlessly and without a non-native accent, though that might also be attributed to his long years of residence in Mumbai), is like insisting on a citation for proof that Abraham Lincoln had English ancestors, given the existence of Lincolnshire county and Lincoln, England. Prakash Nadkarni (talk) July 26,2012. —Preceding undated comment added 15:38, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Please read User:Sitush/Common#Castelists and WP:V - the same principle applies here. I know at least three people called Cohen, by the way, who are not Jewish even though many would consider it a Jewish name. - Sitush (talk) 16:21, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

RS?

Is this website Oneindia.in considered as RS? It doesn't feel so. Also the subject article is from some UNI source. What news agency is that? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 14:54, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

I've had some doubts about it and I have on occasion found it to be mirroring stuff from here. Alas, I never kept notes of those instances. UNI = United News of India. - Sitush (talk) 14:59, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Bhagavad Gita (Peer Review)

I have listed the Bhagavad Gita article for peer review here. Your suggestions would be extremely helpful. So take a look at it when you find the time. Thanks. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 17:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

List of Gurjars

Whoa! You flooded my watchlist. Thanks for contributing to this unnoticed list and cleaning it up periodically. Btw don't you think an edit notice will be helpful to stop non-notable additions? --SMS 19:21, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Not in my experience. I ended up creating User:Sitush/Common#Castelists and referring people to it ... but even this has had little effect. - Sitush (talk) 19:25, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Afghanistan

http://en.wikipedia.org/Afghanistan#Afghan_nation-state

hey its me again Sitush. Just saw the Afghanistan page..seems blatant POV pushing by the banned user ABDEVILLIERS0007 managed to avoid being reverted yet! Any suggestions? The tone and content of his edits seem out of place in an otherwise encyclopediac entry. Cliniic (talk) 17:38, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I am keeping well away from that one, sorry. My experience of Afghan geography-related articles is zero and the arbitrators, in their wisdom (?), have recently imposed some nasty sanctions regarding the subject matter. Hopefully, someone else will pick up the slack. - Sitush (talk) 05:21, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

oh it was nothing related to geography. just plain pov pushing regarding the contents of the history section "Hotaki dynasty and the Durrani Empire".Cliniic (talk) 10:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

btw I think this guy "ARIHANT SUB" is a sock puppet for ABDEVILLIERS0007. He is currently involved in the 2002 Gujarat violence page! can you please look in it? Cliniic (talk) 10:32, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution IRC office hours.

Hello there. As you expressed interest in hearing updates to my research in the dispute resolution survey that was done a few months ago, I just wanted to let you know that I am hosting an IRC office hours session this coming Saturday, 28th July at 19:00 UTC (approximately 12 hours from now). This will be located in the #wikimedia-office IRC channel - if you have not participated in an IRC discussion before you can connect to IRC here.

Regards, User:Szhang (WMF) (talk) 07:06, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Autobiography of a Yogi". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 4 August 2012.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 16:38, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello Sitush, I have added my thoughts about the image in the infobox on the 'Autobiography of a Yogi' article page on your own page above with the same heading. I was going to copy this on the mediation page itself but perhaps you could consider this as a compromise solution, if you think it is viable. I notice the link I inserted does not seem to work. Perhaps you know what has gone wrong there! --Zananiri (talk) 22:15, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Modern postage stamps are most likely copyrighted images. There is no need for compromise here: the dispute is bloody ridiculous and seems to be driven by ideologies/conflicts of interest, myself and Mr Stradivarius aside. The reasons why it has ended up as a mediation proposal are beyond me, nor am I looking right now as I have more important things to catch up on. - Sitush (talk) 20:43, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Nair Article Edit

hi Sitush, I HAVE CHECKED THEIR WIKIPEDIA PROFILES AND THEIR PERSONAL WEBSITES ,MOREOVER IF YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE ,PLEASE CHECK THE WEBSITE www.nairs.in..thank you 05:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC)anandjayakrishnank

Paravar Page

Dear Sitush,

This is Raj,I am new user from India.I wish to speak regarding the edit works of you in the paravar page. The "Velir" term has been removed despite providing the apt source.The article says "Ilanji Vel,Son of Mapparavan",here "Vel" means Velir,Velir is a Cheiftain position and Vel is the possessor of the position.I think you are not a tamil native,hence I would like to help you in this.

Actually,lot of tamil works speak about the history of paravars in a good manner.Unfortunately,those who were proficient in tamil language are not good at history,and those who know both lack in english skill and those who are good at the three are not into the work of constructive editing.I am really worried about the caste warring at wiki.To be frank and true,I wish to help you in the constructive editing of caste pages.Being a south Indian,a tamil native,interested in history and a better language,i hope...I would like to join you in the constructive editing of few caste pages like paravar,mukkulathor,nadar,vanniyar,pallar etc,as i know the history from tamil literature and works.May be they cant be a source to be supported with english wiki,but i can support you with few correct translations of certain tamil works.

Await your reply in talk page.

Raj. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.241.88.0 (talk) 15:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Replied to identical msg at Talk:Paravar. - Sitush (talk) 05:18, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Periyar River Source

Hi Sitush. Just wanted to let you know that I've put some new material in the Periyar river talk page. Have a look - Ashinpt (talk) 19:56, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I noticed it on my watchlist. I'll take a look but it may not be today, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 05:18, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem, Sitush. - Ashinpt (talk) 07:38, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Query

Thanx for guidance sir,But how would i know from which website i use material for wikipedia and i will provided with licence to use them.Zeeyanketu (talk) 05:13, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Your source was acceptable but the way that you included the info was not. You need to write content using your own words, not by copying the words used in a newspaper. Some of the blue links in the notice that I placed on your talk page explain this. I would fix this particular problem myself but do not have much time today, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 05:17, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)You can see User:SpacemanSpiff/CopyingFAQ for info on how to incorporate text from a source. —SpacemanSpiff 05:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok sir,its difficult for me to understand the guidelines by reading because of my lack of good english and time, then if any video link about editing would be anywhere ,plz send me the link whenever you are free or can i remove my warnings myself from my talkpage ,Thanx.Zeeyanketu (talk) 05:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

enjoy! Zeeyanketu (talk) 05:19, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

For guiding my way in WP. My apologies, if I frustrated you. See the talk with Drmies AshLey 13:57, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Sudhan

i am not sure what you meant by Rawalpindi, it was not even listed when I made the revision. The references are all there, so I am not sure why you are so concerned about Sudhans, in fact the area itself is called Sudnuti by the Govt of AJK, All it says is that in AJK Rawalakot is the capital of the sudhan tribe. So if you have any issues please list them in the talk section so we can discuss this in a reasonable way.

Trueblood (talk)

August 2012

Hello, I'm Sitush. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Varghese Payapilly Palakkappilly, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Sitush (talk) 08:42, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I have given the source. It was due to some confusion regarding the sources. It is resolved now. Thanks PalakkappillyAchayan 10:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Improvement of article proposed for deletion

Hi. GM Benoy K Behl article was proposed for deletion (reason Advertisement, Self-promotion, Spam, Non Notable) ; I found that Benoy K Behl is a photographer who has taken more than 35000 photo and made several documentaries on Indian history, art, sculpture and written two or more books, and I tried to improve the article with citations (mainly from online newspaper editions). Can you have a look at it (particularly as it is article about a living person) and the tag proposed for deletion - can it be removed? thank you.Rayabhari (talk) 10:49, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Urgently need your help.

Hi, hope this finds you well. I would like to turn your attention to, and seek your help in serving what I believe would be justice in the Kerala article.

User:Ashley_thomas80 had tried to change the section name titled "Kerala in religious traditions" to "Kerala and Hindu Mythology" or something to that effect a couple of times in the past but was reverted by Admins. He has now caught hold of user User:Drmies who is working hand-in-glove with him whilst completely ignorant of the topic under debate. I would like to keep to myself as to what feelings motivate User:Drmies to do so.

Now coming to the point, for several months, the order in the aforementioned section was "chronological". I am not against the section being renamed as it has been. ButI thought the chronology issue was thrashed out months back between myself and a few other users - South Indian, non-South Indian Indian, American etc. We arrived, I thought then, at a consensus that the order could be chronological. The mention of the Malaya Mountains in the Matsya Purana was put first; the Mahabali legend second; and the Parasurama story third. That is the order that they occur in according all traditions in Hinduism.

Ashley (for reasons I believe know) wants to see the Parasurama legend mentioned first. Please kindly visit the revision history of the article and also read what I had written up on this in the Talk page for the same at - ].

I would still re-list what I believe are wrong with the section :-

1) As I mentioned already, the order should be chronological.

2) There are vague/weasel wordings like The oldest of the surviving Puranas, the Matsya Purana, has a mention of Malaya Mountains of Kerala while it sets the story of Matsya

3) There is a rather illogical statement (more a geoscientific one) made by a conventional historian like Sreedhara Menon, that parts of Kerala were actually under the sea according to scholars, when any such thing is far from the truth according to modern science. In ANY event why should such a statement be included in a section devoted purely to mythology/legends/traditions?

Ashley has made a blasphemous comment that the Parasurama legend is more linked with Kerala than the Mahabali one. But to any non-Mallu/non-Keralite, can Kerala be without Onam, Onam without Mahabali, or Kerala without Mahabali. OTOH, I can vouch for that 90% of non-Mallus and non-Keralites would be totally ignorant of the Parasurama story. And then Drmies speaks of "consensus" when the only two people who have commented and are against me in this are AT and himself the latter being completely ignorant of the substance.

I hope I make sense to you and that you find my reasoning right. In any event I think the Mahabali story would be put before the Parasurama one at least. Please step in and help me here. SumerianPrince (talk) 18:20, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

Thank you for help, advise, removing prd tag of benoy k behl Rayabhari (talk) 03:17, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

1. Mahrattas, Sikhs and Southern Sultans of India: Their Fight Against Foreign
2. ^ [http://books.google.co.in/books?id=zKAM-KNmZm8C&pg=PA1584&dq=jijabai+daughter+of+lakhuji+jadhav&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mv0LUJuNMsKHrAeWpLzICA&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=jijabai%20daughter%20of%20lakhuji%20jadhav&f=false Mata Jijabai By Priya Ghatwai]
3. Worldmark encyclopedia of cultures and daily life