User talk:Sitush - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rajarule (talk | contribs) at 16:02, 5 April 2017 (→Hello Sitush). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 16:02, 5 April 2017 by Rajarule (talk | contribs) (→Hello Sitush)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

An editor thinks something might be wrong with this page. They can't be arsed to fix it, but can rest assured that they've done their encyclopedic duty by sticking on a tag.
Please allow this tag to languish indefinitely at the top of the page, since nobody knows exactly what the tagging editor was worked up about.

Jag är Ikea.This user stands with Sweden.Je suis Ikea.

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.

New Misplaced Pages logo

See this. I wish it were CC-BY-SA etc. Frances D'Souza, Baroness D'Souza showed a beermat with this logo on TV this week and, of course, Stephen Fry has long since proudly displayed it. - Sitush (talk) 00:39, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) - Or you can get the tee-shirt - Arjayay (talk) 09:05, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Re-initiating INCOTM

It's been almost an year since "Indian collaboration of the month" was active. Firstly we need to restart this as soon as possible for development of India-related articles to greater heights. The members page was blanked, where many of them are inactive. This mass message is to all the members of WikiProject India, about this and interested editors interested will sign up. After this message gets delivered, we'll wait for 7 days before we start a discussion under a thread on the collaboration's talk page, among the members. The discussion will include what to clean-up of sub-pages, a new set of guidelines for smooth and uninterrupted functioning of the collaboration etc. Please keep all the discussions under this thread only, so that it will easier for future reference. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:19, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Re-initiating INCOTM

Invitation to join the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Military history/Incubator/Indian military history

You are invited to join the Indian military history work-group, an initiative of the Military history WikiProject. This group is to exclusively deal with the topics related to Indian military. If you're interested, please add you name to the participants list. Ignore if you are already a member. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:06, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Indian defence services

You are requested to participate in the discussion of Wiki Loves Indian defence services on the talk page of WikiProject India. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Needs rewriting

Hi. Thanks for all the help. These days I am little inactive. Help is needed in rewriting the Aricle Yogi Adityanath , where few editors donot allow smallest changes by other editors, thus defeating the very purpose of wikipedia. Also,I feel the article is written in violation of BLP. Can you kindly look into? Regards. Rayabhari (talk) 05:34, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Rayabhari, good to see you are not completely inactive. Like you, I'm not doing much at the moment but I will see if I can spare some time and gain some interest. - Sitush (talk) 11:16, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I am much engaged in real life activities. :) Rayabhari (talk) 17:17, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Happy to have you look in, Sitush, as always; but you should probably know that what happened here was the usual surge of fandrones objecting to language taken from RS, which necessitated EC protection on two occasions (and I think the article is still EC protected for this reason). Vanamonde (talk) 17:36, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I've noticed. I'm not going to be around long enough to get involved anyway. Already fed up of the place. - Sitush (talk) 17:37, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Vishwakarma isn't common in South India

In South India Vishwabrahmin is the most common name for Vishwakarma Descendants... And It's not just a community of 5 craft works.. it's also a community of Priests.... and there are many Notables not Just Veerabrahmedra swamy.. u have reverted all those edits.. You could have simply reverted the page name — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santhoshlee1 (talk • contribs) 09:49, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

You were acting contrary to WP:LEAD, WP:RS, WP:NPOV, WP:CIRCULAR, WP:RM and other policies and guidelines. Take it to the talk page, please. - Sitush (talk) 11:15, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for keeping watch over those darned Indian castes and subcastes. RileyBugz (p) | _Edits 17:32, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, although I am probably only back for the day. We need more experienced eyes - the core group is probably no more than 10 people, many of whom are absent for long periods. - Sitush (talk) 17:34, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

After I get back from my vacation I plan to put more than just Jangid on my watchlist. RileyBugz (p) | _Edits 17:37, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

That's good news. Although you may find yourself wanting to take more frequent vacations thereafter. - Sitush (talk) 17:41, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Sakaldwipiya

Hello. Ref to your revert Will not use Yagnavalkya Smriti the primary source. Instead of that, is this source acceptable -- "Kamal+Shankar+Srivastava"&dq=inauthor:"Kamal+Shankar+Srivastava"&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiAiaHs6P7SAhXLPo8KHdm_CroQ6AEILDAE Origin and development of class and caste in India (1998), by Kamal Shankar Srivastava.

It states what the Yagnavalkya Smriti states. The content is also available from this cached link As foreigners like Scythian, Kushanas and Hunas were getting Indianised they needed priests. So the author Srivastava says in the context of Manu law giver:

"The people engaged in priestly duties with the invaders were incorporated as Vratya or low grade Brahmanas. Magas were one such people about whom we have already discussed. But, Magas gradually improved their position in the society as Brhatsamhita represents them as respectable Brahmanas. At a later date, they are even met with conducting matrimonial alliance with the native peoples. Indian rulers patronised them as astrologers and physicians. The traces of the Magas in Indian society are still visible. As Sevaka or Bhojaka in Jodhpur region, Pandas round about Delhi and Agra calls themselves as Sakadvipe and worship the Surya image...The Srimali Brahmanas are associated with the Kushinas. Gandhara Brahmanas of Mlecchavamsa acted as priests to the Mihiresvar — 54 temple, founded by Mihirakula the Huna ruler. The largest number of foreigners probably joined the Kshatriya fold as it suited most to their profession. The Manumriti, the Vayu Purana, the Epics and the Vishnu Purana, all report them in like manner"

If the above is acceptable, you can help add content from above to the article in your words. The only difference from above is the YagnaValkya Smriti is more direct in saying the devalaka (devalakan) are born to bhojaka mothers and brahmana fathers; while the bhojakas themselves are born to brahmana fathers and pushpa-sekhara mothers; but are neither anuloma nor pratiloma and to be considered true brahmanas though vratya.--Anon=us (talk) 18:26, 30 March 2017 (UTC)anon=us

To be honest, I don't know. I can't see the source here. Pinging @Kautilya3 and Utcursch: just on the off-chance that they can. - Sitush (talk) 23:32, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, can't view the source either. Seems like a decent source, though. utcursch | talk 23:55, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I can see the page, and the paragraph above seems to be an accurate rendering. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:12, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I shall work on the Sakaldwipiya article later. Was hoping to find historical links between the Sakaldwipiya vratyas who became shudras on account of taking to the sword and yet fully involved in ritualism in southern india. Unfortunately there are none. Anyways, will work with whatever sources are available or acceptable. This article needs sprucing anyways. Thanks. --Anon=us (talk) 00:51, 31 March 2017 (UTC)anon=us

Raj sources

I have mentioned you in the correct venue. Muvendar (talk) 19:23, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Update: Muvendar has been banhammered due to using another account under his wing. SportsLair (talk) 22:23, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Plus ca change, plus ca meme chose. - Sitush (talk) 23:33, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Korakkar

I reverted your edits to Korakkar . I admit that I don't know what has been going on with the editing history, or what you are referring to when you reverted because of socking. Removal of all sources completely seems a bit much though. --Ronz (talk) 16:04, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

@Ronz: Not when the sources are crap and/or when the contributor is known to misrepresent them. I've more or less undone your revert, leaving a couple of sources for the basic points. You'll see why from my edit summaries. - Sitush (talk) 16:27, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I was going over the sources, and the one that you left was the only one I thought should be kept. Has the socking been taken care of? --Ronz (talk) 16:34, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Muvendar (talk · contribs) and Jameskane82 (talk · contribs) were blocked. - Sitush (talk) 16:38, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Balija / Gavara

Hello. Ref to your revert. Are you saying this source of Subrahmanyam and Shulman is unacceptable? The source (p.74) says --- "These left-Sudra groups — often referred to by the cover-title 'Balija', but also including Boyas, left-hand Gollas, Gavaras, and others — were first mobilized politically by Krishnadevaraya in the Vijayanagara heyday" --- which obviously means the Gavaras became part of the Balija social group, is it not? Can you explain your revert? How is it possible to say all Balijas in Tamilnadu are from Gavara group? That is factually wrong. Please ask Rajakambalar Balija if they marry Gavara Balija. Obviously no.

FYI, the separate Gavara caste group exists till date; besides being part of other groups, one of which is Komati social group. Neither of these marry the other. Example, The Gavara-Komati (vegetarian) do not marry Gavara-Balija (meat eaters). In Tamilnadu, the majority Gavara are Gavara-Komati (like Vummidi Bangaru Chetty). Also, FYI, more than half, if not the whole, of Thirupati town is Balija (for majority of them Thirumala Srinivasa is their Kuladev), but none of those balijas are Gavara. Similarly, if you went to rajmundry, you will not meet one gavara-balija there. When something is documented as a "left-hand sudra group" gathering within their fold fighters mobilized from other castes, how are you going to say the source is unacceptable, considering these are documented by historians of repute?--Anon=us (talk) 23:34, 31 March 2017 (UTC)anon=us

BTW, every Kamma (whether andhra, karnataka or tamilnadu) knows the above. Therefore it is not possible to believe the pretensions of Madurai_nayak_vamsa with his pattern of edits. Such people are obviously not Kamma at all, but intent on something else (something which has been going on for quite long now). Hope you and Kautilya3 take that into consideration when changing content or reverting certain articles; because it seems Kautilya3 wrote balijas in tamilnadu are called kavara. His sources are not wrong. But they refer only to the Gavara-Balija subcaste; not to the whole balija social group. Thanks. --Anon=us (talk) 23:56, 31 March 2017 (UTC)anon=us

Yes, I think the Tamilians called them Kavarai just because it was a term they were used to. It doesn't mean that these people were Gavaras.

The Gavaras are quite a mysterious group. But they are a very small group, concentrated in the northeast of Andhra Pradesh. We shouldn't make them appear more prominent than they really are.

Anon=us had previously asked me for help in reviewing his content. I didn't have time, and I still don't. This small, marginal group shouldn't waste too much energey on our part. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:56, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: If you acknowledge so, can I put your one sentence from the intro into branches? Because there is a branch of Gavara-Balija in Tamilnadu. They are considered a subcaste of Balija; and marry within themselves (and not with other Balija sub-castes). It is like Vadama do not marry Vathima. Thanks.--Anon=us (talk) 11:39, 1 April 2017 (UTC)anon=us

My point was that just because a community bears the same name as one in another area does not mean the two are the same. Unless we have a source that says they are the same. There are definitely examples of completely different groups that use the same name. It looks like Kautilya3 agrees with me. - Sitush (talk) 11:46, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Then why do you both insist on having it in the intro? @Kautilya3: the Gavaras are not a mysterious group. The small group you mention in AP is the remnant which did not urbanize. The ones which moved into other social groups are well documented, including Gavara-Komatis (they are a fairly wealthy community in tamilnadu). There are enough sources on Gavara-Balijas and on Gavara-Komatis. Also, there is no need for tamilians to get used to a term like Kavarai (for what reason should they?) Again, would you say all Bengali Kayasthas in Bihar are Mathurs? Hope you get the difference. Either I can revert Sitush's change or you can revert it. Let me know. Thanks

This needs to be in the lead. The Balijas were a significant presence in Tamilnadu to the extent of ruling vast portions of it for almost a hundred years. But they were called by a different name. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:35, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

How do you know they were called by a different name?--Anon=us (talk) 12:42, 1 April 2017 (UTC)anon=us

your sources

(1) Mukund says merchant communities like Kavarai are mentioned in inscriptions after fifteenth century. Then writes in brackets (Kavarai is the Tamil word for Balija). His should be considered Primary Source. He gives no reference for his claim.
(2) Francis says "The Kavarai and the Balija are equivalent and occupied low positions" - did he say Balijas in Tamilnadu are called Gavara?

Many sources mention Gavara and Balijas as separate communities, including Sanjay Subrahmanyam. Yet, you both are insisting on something that is factually incorrect. Why?

Are you saying Balija subcastes like Gollas, Gajulus, Mahendravaram, Kambalar are ALL called Gavara in Tamilnadu? Sorry, you are wrong. --Anon=us (talk) 12:57, 1 April 2017 (UTC)anon=us

I am becoming very confused regarding what it is you are objecting to. If various reliable sources say different things then we show them all. However, if a source is ambiguous or does not make a direct connection then it would be misleading to show it. I've not looked at Mukund for years but if that source is reliable and secondary then the comment is fine for inclusion. - Sitush (talk) 13:19, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

BTW, you probably should have raised this at the relevant article talk page, not here. - Sitush (talk) 13:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

If you are confused, perhaps you can stay out of this. Since you reverted, it is on your talk page. You could copy-paste this to the article talk page, to move this discussion there. The person who put in the sentence should explain his sources and take the call. Hence pinging Kautilya3 @Kautilya3: -- please take the call. You cannot say Balija subcastes like Gollas, Gajulus, Mahendravaram, Kambalar are ALL called Gavara in Tamilnadu. Delete it or revert it to branches.--Anon=us (talk) 13:32, 1 April 2017 (UTC)Mayasutra

Now you are being rude. You brought the bloody thing here; you got me involved in it. Go away. - Sitush (talk) 13:34, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

???? You said you are confused. Hence, suggested something. If not acceptable, that's fine. Why are you being rude? What do you mean Go away??? --Anon=us (talk) 13:39, 1 April 2017 (UTC)anon=us

I mean take it somewhere else and don't post about it here again. - Sitush (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Alright. Am taking it to Kautilya's page. Hope you will not revert again after he takes the call. Friendly suggestion for a brother - if you have not looked at mukund source for years, please do not suggest anything. When i say this, am not being rude. Please. Cheers bro, Thanks.--Anon=us (talk) 13:47, 1 April 2017 (UTC)anon=us

Please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Balija.23Kavarai

--Anon=us (talk) 07:42, 2 April 2017 (UTC)anon=us

Removal of ref

What does it mean? --Antan O 12:16, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

If you click on the link in my edit summary it takes you to User:Sitush/Common#Gyan, which summarises the consensus of the Misplaced Pages community regarding use of books published by Gyan Publishing. Basically, that company is known to produce books that, in various ways, are not acceptable as sources. And it does so on a scale that means we pretty much avoid using them entirely. There appears to be another source cited for the point anyway, so removal in this specific case doesn't create a problem. - Sitush (talk) 13:23, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

regarding Vishwakarma page

I have added the reliable sources which are documented and proofed not by adding some sort of my own imagination or others imagination. The sources are from texts from Hindu dharamagranthas (holy books of Hinduism) and the judgement given by courts nor the information provided is a imagination or unwanted phraces or sentences Ajeyarudra (talk) 10:30, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

regarding Vishwakarma page

The sources are not only reliable but also given consent. As proof by the previous honorable courts of India. And I think nothing stands above the judgement given by courts. And judgement. Am I correct sir. Ajeyarudra (talk) 10:35, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

regarding Vishwakarma page

The upagotra taken from Vishwakarma puranas Sanskrit written by suktha and Vishwabrahmama kulohtsaha and the additional information provided are the judgement of courts and letter of affirmation given by holy monetary. And adding up the reliable information to the page is a must and the ones to object the reliable information can lodge an issue on our community in honour of judgements given by consent. And the page needs right information give with proofs not a imagination. As I can see I have not depleted any added information. Ajeyarudra veerabhogavasantaraya. (From vss group leader of South India.) Please if you have any issues on the subject please feel free to share the issue sir. Ajeyarudra (talk) 10:48, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, puranas and court rulings are usually not acceptable as sources on Misplaced Pages. They are primary documents. - Sitush (talk) 10:58, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

so sir what proofs do you need sir to legaly proove the statements — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajeyarudra (talk • contribs) 17:05, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Anything that complies with the guidance given at WP:RS. However, since you seem to be associated with VSS, you probably should not be editing the article at all and should instead make proposals for changes at its talk page. See WP:COI for our attitude to conflicts of interest. - Sitush (talk) 09:57, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

regarding K. C. Yadav page

Necessary changes have been made regarding the page on Dr. K. C. Yadav to be without biases and with reliable citations. Please review the page for discrepancies. I apologize for the previous mistakes as I am still learning. https://en.wikipedia.org/K._C._Yadav#cite_note-4 User:Rishika Yadav - comment added 18:49, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, from a DR/N volunteer

This is a friendly reminder to involved parties that there is a current Dispute Resolution Noticeboard case still awaiting comments and replies. If this dispute has been resolved to the satisfaction of the filing editor and all involved parties, please take a moment to add a note about this at the discussion so that a volunteer may close the case as "Resolved". If the dispute is still ongoing, please add your input. Yashovardhan (talk) 03:45, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Additional comment : this is regarding the thread Talk:Balija#Kavarai. Your reply is being awaited.

I have already replied. Since I don't have an understanding of what the problem may be, I can't comment further. I literally cannot make sense of it. - Sitush (talk) 09:28, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@Yashovardhan Dhanania: - see my reply above. - Sitush (talk) 09:30, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I'll consider this as a sign that you wish to withdraw from this DRN. No problem! It would've been better had you written this at the DRN but I'll mention this and continue with the discussion. Regards, Yashovardhan (talk) 09:37, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

regarding Vishwakarma info edit

Sir do you work for Misplaced Pages. Ajeyarudra (talk) 11:47, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

No, and nor does anyone else. The Wikimedia Foundation employs people in various roles (technical, legal etc) but contributors to this Misplaced Pages project (and to others) are all volunteers. - Sitush (talk) 11:48, 3 April 2017 (UTC)e

Ezhava

Dear Sitush, in ezhava, I have been editing the legend part of the Origin of ezhavas and it is to be considered as legends only. It is not biased on unidirectional and I have cited sources to substantiate it. I would soon add historical aspect of it with absolute quotes from Texts. --Challiyan (talk) 14:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

So do it using modern sources. Raj sources are useless for this, as I said on your talk page. They often misidentified people and they were misguided by biassed Brahmin advisers etc. We don't use them, period. - Sitush (talk) 14:04, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

I am sorry. but I dont' get how wikipedia should be edited. My knowledge in english is limited and I may not be able to entirely rewrite a sentence i read. I was thinking that I was doing a reasonably good job on where there has been no adequate information available for online references. . Thanks --Challiyan (talk) 15:43, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

I understand the difficulties but if you are uncomfortable with writing in English then there are Misplaced Pages projects in many other languages, including Tamil, Malayalam etc. You can't just copy stuff into Misplaced Pages from elsewhere because there are legal issues. - Sitush (talk) 18:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

SPI input

Hi Sitush, would you have any comments for this SPI case? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:28, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Bal Bahadur KC

Please change the name to Bal Bahadur KC or Bal Bahadur Khatri Chhetri because there are many Bal Bahadurs like Minister Bal Bahadur Rai. K.C. was his official surname which is alternatively used as Khatri Chhetri in Nepal Government purposes. Locally, people also search KC and Khatri Chhetri alternatively. Airkeeper (talk) 12:20, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Ah, my mistake - I assumed it was a post-nominal. But what is he commonly called? See WP:COMMONNAME. We have disambiguation pages that handle situations where several people bear the same name. - Sitush (talk) 12:24, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

He is commonly called KC and all the leaders like Arjun Narasingha KC and Chitra Bahadur KC with KC surname please change their articles to KC. Airkeeper (talk) 12:39, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

They are officially and commonly known as KC and should be changed to KC. Airkeeper (talk) 12:41, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Really? Then the article should be titled "KC". Have you read WP:COMMONNAME yet? - Sitush (talk) 12:44, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

I am copying this to Talk:Bal Bahadur for further input. Best to continue the discussion there. - Sitush (talk) 12:49, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Bahun

Why did you remove sourced content?? Why don't you just delete the article ?? There are no more sources in Google now I can collect. Airkeeper (talk) 01:41, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

The way in which you cited those sources led me to believe that you may have copied the material from some other article. In addition, we do not usually bother with lists of surnames in caste-related articles. - Sitush (talk) 07:18, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

You appear to be misrepresenting sources across a variety of articles anyway. The latest example I've just noticed is using this to support the statement Khas Thapas are Aryan Chhetri people of Kshatriya varna whose origin lies in Karnali region of Khas Kingdom. They were powerful and prominent family at Jumla of Karnali Khas Kingdom at Bagale Thapa. - Sitush (talk) 07:34, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, that was casual at Bagale Thapa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Airkeeper (talk • contribs) 10:15, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Ezhava

Regarding my Ezhava edits, you are warning me of blocking me without proper reason. You have reverted a sourced content from Edgar thurston and an image from 1906, while similar images are shown in many other articles. I would be thankful if you point out the policies that govern your reasoning behind warning me and reverting my last edits. thank you. --Challiyan (talk) 07:12, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

You have been told that Raj sources should be avoided. - Sitush (talk) 07:18, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Dear Sitush, Its not a Raj Sources. At least Edgar Thurston who wrote the text book. wasnt a raja. (hope you had checked the sources cited along with the content) And what about the image? is that also a raja related content? --Challiyan (talk) 07:27, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

British Raj, not Rajah - Sitush (talk) 07:31, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Can you show me the policies that says British Raj references should not be quoted in an ethnographic article like Ezhavas ? --Challiyan (talk) 12:47, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Right Information

Sir I have added detailed information , if u really think that I'm adding inappropriate or useless information than please read the history of Rajputs again and if u really think I'm wrong than you have all right the right to block me infinitely and please don't try to black mail me I'm a Chalukya Solanki Rajput . I'm from a lineage that defeated Kings like Ghori and Ghaznavi . Kunal Singh Solanki Nathawat (talk) 11:57, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

And I come from a lineage well-known for their skill at conkers. Honestly, if your stuff is reliably sourced and complies, if appropriate, with WP:BLP then there is no problem. The difficulty has been that it wasn't. And I suspect it still isn't. - Sitush (talk) 12:06, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Umerkot is a Jagir not a princely state

http://www.indianrajputs.com/view/amarkot http://www.royalfamilyofindia.com/amarkot/ http://www.chiefacoins.com/Database/Countries/Umerkot.htm Umerkot is Jagir not a princely state sir and if you don't know the difference between a Jagir and princely state than please read about it ; Umerkot was a princely state (riyasat/rajya) once but it lost it's independence to Jaisalmer princely state somewhere around in 1700s and it was made a Jagir with some autonomy by Maharaval of Jaisalmer and it remained as a Jagir in Jaisalmer province till independence of India Kunal Singh Solanki Nathawat (talk) 12:13, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea if it was or was not. I merely reverted your unsourced addition. I doubt that the sources you give above would suffice but I'll look into it. - Sitush (talk) 13:53, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Few books seem to mention it at all, whether as Umerkot, Umarkot or Amarkot. Does this help? I really don't care, so long as whatever you add is reliably sourced. - Sitush (talk) 14:02, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Sitush

I forget the name of that 17th Century chap (Irish land deal shenanegans, sharp practice, arguably his dad's fault) whose article I had a little go at helping with, a considerable number of moons ago..whatever became of it? Did it achieve G.A? Regards, Simon. Irondome (talk) 14:59, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I did mean to tell you. Erasmus Smith and, yes, it sailed through. - Sitush (talk) 15:04, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Oh good! Can I put one of those "assisted with" thingys on "my" page? Just indicates that I am not a complete loafer. Vanity, vanity..Simon Irondome (talk) 15:15, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Sure you can. That's why I meant to drop you a line. - Sitush (talk) 15:32, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Appreciated Sitush, and great to work with you, albeit briefly! Regards, Irondome (talk) 15:36, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Sanction

I am quite confused by your constant editing of articles and deleting sources by simply mentioning Raj era. Kindly assist me how can I put you on edit watch as seems like you have personal grudges against any research work done in that era which makes you quite biased. Kindly do not take anything personal and lets have a constructive talk mate.

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajarule (talk • contribs) 15:09, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

The conversation was already happening on your talk page. And yet still you reverted again. You're the problem, not me. - Sitush (talk) 15:35, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Dear, I already mentioned that I’m not as experienced on Wiki tools as it seems you are. Accept my apologies but I found it quite disturbing when you tag any of the book published before 1947 as Raj source. Plus you haven’t answered my concerns. It did not leave me with any option but to request for arbitration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajarule (talk • contribs) 15:58, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Kulala

How can I add previous contents as like itwas before.will the page get deleted in few days ? Or ll it remain same with small information as now? Bunt56 (talk) 16:02, 5 April 2017 (UTC)