Misplaced Pages

User talk:Utcursch/archive/43

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:Utcursch | archive

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sharkslayer87 (talk | contribs) at 13:01, 1 May 2018 (→Question: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 13:01, 1 May 2018 by Sharkslayer87 (talk | contribs) (→Question: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Archives: 0 | 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 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46

Disambiguation link notification for March 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marathi language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Raigad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Advice

I've recently expanded and created 3 separate sections about Alauddin Khilji's religion including views on it, relationships with Hindus and Jains. I think the relationships should be separated from religion as they are not completely related. However, then again some of his actions are motivated to exploit religious purposes. What do you think? MonsterHunter32 (talk) 20:58, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Looks good to me, thanks. You might want to attribute Barani's statements to him -- most historians do not consider his religion-related information entirely reliable. utcursch | talk 19:24, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Actually the problem is in secondary sources. It's difficult to find one that is always detailing where it derived the info from. I used KS lal but he doesn't always mention Barani's information from Barani it seems. Wherever the source says, I add it however. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 07:48, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Khilji changes

Hi.

I've not made a mistake and citation is not required.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/khilji-the-first-afghan-dyansty-of-hindostan.307086/

My ancestors were the Malmuk Delhi Sultanate.

So I know for a fact that Khiljis are not Turks but Afghans. They had some Turk blood. But they adopted Afghan identity.

Furthermore in this article below read early life section. It clearly mentions that the Indian Turks considered them Afghans. Shah Rukh Khan is a Khilji. Shah means ruler Rukh means face and Khan is Afghan lord title.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Alauddin_Khalji

Kizznyc (talk) 15:03, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

A forum post is not a reliable source by Misplaced Pages standards. Neither is your statement as a claimed descendant of the Delhi Sultanate rulers. utcursch | talk 16:06, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Disruptive IPs

Hi, Utcursch. I blocked 182.70.189.109 and I see you blocked 182.70.182.195 a little later (obviously the same individual). After checking the range contributions from 182.70.176.0/20, I don't see anything other than disruption and harassment from it in the past few weeks, so I've blocked the entire range for a week. I suppose my block may possibly inconvenience a good editor, but that doesn't seem very likely. Anyway. I'm sure the person will pop right back up after the week, or maybe immediately from another range, but what can you do. Regards, Bishonen | talk 19:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC).

@Bishonen: I agree with your actions. The edit history suggests that this is User:JinSHOCK81 (the creator of now-deleted Arkavansham), but I don't have any concrete evidence yet. utcursch | talk 19:08, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

My edits on the page on Alp Khan

Sir I would like to tell you that Malik Kafur conspiring to kill Alp Khan is not mentioned in any of the texts. The only basis of this conspiracy theory is homophobia nothing else. Aahwan Singh (talk) 16:01, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

@Aahwan Singh: The statement that you are removing is backed by a reliable source (Peter Jackson's The Delhi Sultanate: A Political and Military History, page 176). If you have a reliable source (such as a history book or a journal article) that contradicts this statement, feel free to add it to the article. utcursch | talk 16:22, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Dogra dynasty

Hey, can you please have a look at sources of Dogra dynasty. It even includes Gyan publications. Thanks -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 17:14, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Added to watchlist -- will work on it when I get some time. utcursch | talk 17:16, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Authenticity

You mean Peter Jackson's Historical fiction? Indeed very reliable source. Aahwan Singh (talk) 07:57, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Peter Jackson's The Delhi Sultanate: A Political and Military History is not fiction. utcursch | talk 17:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Bhoja

Edits and additions on this page are based on Gazetteer , Government records , inscriptions found . I am trying to write the correct names . As I studied and found that Bhoja was of Pramar (प्रमार ) Dynasty .In all the sanskrit inscriptions and scriptures ( which is the source of History ) , Bhoja and his dynasty is called as Pramar . Continuous use Pramar word slowly became Panwar / parmara / Ponwar /powar /panwar/puar etc . Firista , Abu fazal use the word as Punwar or ponwar . Rasmala , bhats of Rajasthan use पँवार for Pramaras . It is required to specify it here in this page to avoid confusion . More precisely Ponwar or Panwar word need to be used as it is used in so many History books .If you ask any Parmar , they will say they are of Panwar race . I have edited after research on this topic HistoricalQuest (talk) 05:53, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

I've already mentioned this at Talk:Bhoja#Ponwar: British-era Gazetteers etc. are not acceptable sources. The inscriptions do not mention the dynasty as Ponwar/Pramar etc. utcursch | talk 13:45, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Project Tiger Writing Contest

In 2017 – 2018, the Wikimedia Foundation and Google working in close coordination with the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Wikimedia India Chapter (WMIN) and user groups from India, are piloting a program encouraging Misplaced Pages communities to create locally relevant and high-quality content in Indian languages. This program will (a) support active and experienced Misplaced Pages editors through the donation of laptops and stipends for internet access and (b) sponsor a language-based contest that aims to address existing Misplaced Pages content gaps.

Phase (a) has been completed, during which active contributors were awarded laptops and internet stipends. Phase (b) will be a contest in which editors will come together and develop a writing contest focused on content gaps. Each month three individual prizes will be awarded to each community based on their contribution for the month. The prizes worth 3,000 INR, 2000 INR, and 1,000 INR, will be awarded to the top contributors for each month. The contest started at March 1, 2018, 0:00, and will end at May 31, 2018, 23:59 (IST). Useful links are as follows:

Looking forward your participation, all the best. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) at 22:21, 21 March 2018 (UTC).

DYK nomination of Tail chasing

Hello! Your submission of Tail chasing at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Every morning (there's a halo...) 03:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ultrasonic vocalization, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cortex (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages page for Ravana Rajput community.

Hello, I think there is discrepancy about the history and origins of Ravana Rajputs between Hindi and English Misplaced Pages pages. The content in Hindi is more authentic , and I tried to remove this dissimilarity but the previous content was restored. Dschouhantoshina (talk) 08:34, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

@Dschouhantoshina: The content in Hindi Misplaced Pages is not more authentic -- it is unsourced. English Misplaced Pages enforces the verifiability policy more strict: you need to provide reliable sources for the content you're adding. Caste-affiliated websites and publications are not reliable sources by Misplaced Pages standards. utcursch | talk 16:45, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism on Bangladesh Article

Hello Utcursch, Please do something to stop Manipulateus (talk · contribs) from vandalizing Bangladesh article randomly. He is putting bullshit sources as well as modifying information randomly.--Vivaan65 (talk) 05:53, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

@Vivaan65: This looks like a content dispute rather than straightforward vandalism: you should try Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution to resolve it. Also consider dropping a note at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Bangladesh. For obvious vandalism, you can submit a report at WP:AIV. utcursch | talk 12:55, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Your reverts

Hi,

Sorry, its long, please reply when you have ample time. I want to cover several points with you. I have inserted my signature after each point, so that it is easier for you to reply point by point. In case you are too busy to entertain me, please point me to someone who might entertain all of this from me. Thanks 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

A. I noticed you reverted my edit on : prehistory of Australia with the comment "rv copy-paste across multiple articles, doesn't belong in lead" and Aboriginal Australians with the comment "rv content copy-pasted across multiple articles; repetition / Dikshitar isn't a reliable source etc". I had made a one sentence long same edit in both places, to provide the wider historical context and cross-linkages. Based on taking your another comment elsewhere on face value, I now understand your reasoning why Dikshitar is an outdated source. I want to further understand the following from you:

  1. If Dikshitar is taken out as a source, then all should be well with my edit? 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  2. It is permissible by wikipedia to apply same edit. Assuming all other things are correct, if the outdated source is taken out then it should be okay to repeat n 2 or 3 places, I can credit it to its original article (though its just one sentence). 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  3. Your first comment says it does not belong to the lede. That means, okay to include in the article elsewhere? That edit is summary itself, what makes you believe it is not worthy of lede (excluding Dikshitar and other points above)? 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  4. I do not recall, if I Have I ever hurt or wronged you in anyway. If so, let me know. I will sincerely fix it. I do not want anyone's experience being ruined on wikipedia because of me. If not, I felt your tone was bit negative. Please do not be upset, I have not done any wrong to you. Subsequent points are sub-points of this point. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  5. You mentioned other editors have reminded me of reliable sources. I did not know Dikshitar being reliable or not until you explained. Not possible for all the editors to know of such details of each source. Reason I used Dikshitar because it already exists in some of these articles. I simply re-used it. Not nice to imply as if U am deliberately introducing any such discredited sources. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  6. We all have been reminded of rules, you and me both. All of this is issue-specific and talkpage specific. Cherry picking and taking it out of the context mentioning it out of the context elsewhere is not the right way. Imagine, if I take others reminder to you and repeat it back to you on another unrelated talkpage. Specially you had never reminded me of anything on my talkpage, and I have not had any disputes of any kind with you. If anyone leaves me a message on my talkpage, I do not ignore it, I sincerely try to resolve each and every issue. So far I have been able to eventually resolve all the issues on my talkpage with the mutual consent. If you have anything, please leave me a nice explanation, and I surely will provide you a nice response with open heart. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  7. You mentioned I have used predatory journal, I have not used any such thing on these articles. You did not say so in your revert comments, and I am simply reusing combined pre-existing sources from these 2 or 4 Australia history related articles. If there is an objection to these sources, then should have been objected to when the original editor introduced it, unfair to single me out. I am not registered user (some times people treat me with less respect for that reason). I do not have any other registered account (less apps, notifications, etc means more real life). If you meant I used the used predatory journal as source elsewhere it was on another unrelated article then you please leave a message on the talkpage of that article with proper explanation (like you did for Tamil bell). I do not regularly revisit all the articles (helps me avoid edit wars and addiction to wikipedia), but whenever I visit the relevant article, I will surely respond to you. But you should not be generalising, cherry picking (I have been given accolades/kitten for the same edits), using it out of the context that undermines me. Sorry bhai, ye tune jaise comment kiya mujhey theek nhi laga, thoda pyar se cpmment kar deta bhai. I am not messing with people or wikipedia principals. Mei apne mei maast aur shant rehta hun. kisi ko bina wajah ungli nhi karta. Kisi ko mere se takleef hui toh mei us ke dil ki tasalli karne ki koshish karta hun. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  8. I do find few well entrenched objectionable practices on wikipedia. I do like to challenge those. I do it in a sensible manner, not to hurt people or create troubles. I have no ambitions of becoming admin, creating packing order, etc. If you come across me challenging those, please take take it with open mind. Help me by explaining your reasoning if you oppose, even if you agree with me then help by lending your support to the issue and by sharing additional wisdom for the benefit of the other editor who might be initially opposing it. Sab ke saath pyar se. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)


B. Unrelated to the all of above. I came across several issues, I am mildly starting to deal with some of these but have not gotten deep into those yet. I am taking it slow. Can you help/guide me where to take up these issues without getting into groupism I do not want to form any groups, or attack anyone, even those who might oppose me, yaar un ka bhi dil hai. Everyone can be brought around with love and explanation: 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

  1. A "generic" blanket excuse given as "Colonial sources are not unreliable" to keep out the inconvenient edits. What is the basis of this argument and where to find out the original discussion thread on this, so that I can first understand and if need be challenge or give suggestions later. Sure, this can not be misused as a blanket weapon. Whereas, simultaneously on the same article, low quality sources or unsourced text being preserved. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  2. Inconsistent criteria: People objecting to new inconvenient edits, while retaining lower quality sources within their current article. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  3. Knee-jerk reverts without making an attempt to inform the original editor, worse revert of large edit without even spending enough time to read it, worst of all is to revert large effort without giving goodfaith and without making an attempt to collaboratively improve it but rather act like a boss/Phd-reviewer to trash it all. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  4. Throwing 4 or 5 generic wikipedia tags on the editor to block their edit, without giving any specifics to substantiate it. It usually works 99.99% cases on IP and may be 95% cases even on the registered editors I presume. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  5. I find there is source bias towards exclusivist, toll-gated journals, western sources/journals. There is no attempt to have a more pragmatic inclusive approach to find alternate means of "horses for courses" sources, e.g. Indians are notorious for not documenting their history, or even modern scientist are happy to publish within Indian journals. They might be given a blanket label of unreliable soruces because the Indian/Asian/Non-western journals are seen as shit (just like IP editors are sometimes treated as shit). Archaeological Survey of India published uses research reports for its own use but they never publish in any journals. In short, need to create awareness of rising about the bias for the western tollgated sources, need to define alternative pragmatic criteria for the inclusion of what is reliable source. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  6. For example, about the predatory journals, some of the author-pays journals might be mislabeled as predatory without proving it with scholarly rigor. There is the different model of publication, they are basically free source publication for the consumer where author pays. Misplaced Pages is freesource where readers read free and authors pay in terms of investing their time. In that sense wikipedia and so called predatory journals have no difference. A blanket labeling those as predatory without proving it, is not right. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  7. Also, I came across one incidence, where I have disagreement with someone on it, where the person used dubious pretext without showing intention to collaborate and to revert it to unsourced skeleton text. I have not revisited that article yet as I like to give few days/weeks gap to gain more understanding and to let things cool down (sanity prevails form both sides) but this is still a open issue on my mental checklist. Eventually, I will deal with all. That is why i do not register an account. Free wanderer, revisit articles only when I am in the mood. But, I want to start challenging such biases and assumptions. I do not want to hurt and be the cause of these editors being punished or hurt because they might have spent years working on wikipedia and gaining their tools, access rights, etc. I need to find a way to take them all along. I am going slow, but I have started to probe and push a little here and little there without creating animosity. So far, I have resolved every issue with mutual consent without the involvement of third parties. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  8. Quick to issue warnings (warning templates have unkind words too), without making an to leave a friendly message on the editors page for first 2 or 3 times, warning should be 3rd or 4th option. This takes much longer, but it makes wikipedia more inclusive and kinder. Helps recruit, retain, train and onboard more editors. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Which groups I can read more. I also want to raise these issues to create awareness about these, so that all admins/editors start being more fair, consistent, kinder. I worry people might mistake it for pushing an agenda, diluting quality, etc etc and pounce of me, because some of it will shake up their deep rooted biases, disrupt the chain of "packing order" (wikipedia is egalitarian only in the name) and their personal feudal hold over the particular set of articles they may have created. Established editors and admins are in a better position to be "key influencers" than me, but initially they may see me as threat to their norms, practices, regime, etc. 202.156.182.84 (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, if I made you fall asleep. Reply slowly when you have ample time and good mood to discuss. Please thoda effort kar ke acche se reply kar dena. Good night bhai. Khana kha le, soo ja. PS: typo etc and other stuff I will clean up in later round, hope its okay with you even if its after your reply to me. Thanks. 202.156.182.84 (talk)

(talk page stalker) @ 202.156.182.84, you need to read WP:WALLOFTEXT first ...Adamstraw99 (talk) 18:17, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  • About Australia-related edits: Feel free to add relevant content that is reliably sourced, and is actually supported by the sources -- I've no problem with that. You added the claim that the DNA of the Indian Tamil sea-farers is found in Austrlian Aborigines to 4 different articles, which doesn't meet these criteria.
  • If you're simply "re-using" sources by copying them from exisitng articles, and pasting them into multiple articles within a short period, without analyzing them, you're not doing it right. 'Other crap exists' is not a valid argument here -- if other articles have poor sources, those articles should be fixed.
  • I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "colonial sources". But if you're referring to catalogues of castes and tribes written by British civil servants, this topic has been discussed at WP:RSN in the past -- books that stereotype entire groups of people and classify many of them as criminal tribes are not at all acceptable sources.
  • Personally, I've never encountered opposition for using Indian authors/journals/books as sources (and I use them a lot). "Indian/Asian/Non-western journals" are not seen as "shit" -- shitty journals, whether Indian or "Western" are seen as shit. It may be possible though, that because of its sheer size, India has a large number of poor-quality journals (just like a large number of poor-quality engineering and medical colleges -- just because these colleges don't appear in "World's Top 100 Universities" list doesn't mean that the compilers of those lists are biased against India).
  • For content disputes, see Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution. For general discussions and suggestions about how Misplaced Pages operates, try Misplaced Pages:Village pump.
utcursch | talk 00:40, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Reference editing

I am a Research Scholar at a University. And in the University, the Internet connection is through the proxy server. Therefore I am blocked for editing on wikipedia. I don't know why and how that reference section edited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brijendra Pratap Singh Janwaar (talk • contribs) 08:37, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

advice

thanks bro
thanks bro PANJABI21 (talk) 15:52, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Ghirth

Ghirth Bahti Chang are jats . Ronak bains (talk) 15:44, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

@Ronak bains: You need a reliable source (e.g. a scholarly book or a journal article) to support that claim. Please see Misplaced Pages:Verifiability. utcursch | talk 15:47, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Dont .. miss guide people about ghirth Ronak bains (talk) 16:02, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Jat Mahasabha ..had mentioned ghirth bahti chang are jats .. better you change the history ..its is not true that you have edited Ronak bains (talk) 16:04, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

@Ronak bains: Do you have a reliable source (e.g. a news article, a scholarly book, or an academic journal) which states that the Jat Mahasabha has classified Ghirths as Jats? If so, you can add that statement to the article. utcursch | talk 16:06, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

I have photos of documents Ronak bains (talk) 16:07, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

If you're talking about photos of documents released by a caste association, that's not good enough. Lots of Hindi/regional newspapers have news websites - can you present any of those news articles? See Misplaced Pages:Citing sources. utcursch | talk 16:11, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

And your reference are also ..not clear about ghirth ... Better you update the information ..which you have updated earlier Ronak bains (talk) 16:14, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

The Indian Institute of Advanced Study is a well-established academic organization, and its publications are reliable. If you have another reliable sources that contradicts its publications, feel free to add them to the article. utcursch | talk 16:16, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

If you want proof then .. go to jatland.com This website is for welfare of jats in india. You will get reliable references Ronak bains (talk) 16:17, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Jatland.com is a user-contributed wiki, and not an acceptable source by Misplaced Pages standards. utcursch | talk 16:22, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Ghirth ar jats of Himachal because people living in Punjab and border ares during 1940-50 period are even considered themselves as jats ! they are jatts in punjab ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ds324658 (talk • contribs) 09:20, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Are you mad or what you are saying that ...jatland.com registered govt organisation .. is useless Ronak bains (talk) 16:25, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

If you want proof come himachal ..then research ...dont give rise to strikes in himachal.. our govt. Know that we are High caste Ronak bains (talk) 16:38, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Being a registered organization doesn't make one a reliable source. Anyone can register an organization and a domain name. If you still haven't gone through WP:TUTORIAL, please do. utcursch | talk 16:50, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

And mahesh sharma reference is also not a realiable source ..better you stay away from this Ronak bains (talk) 03:32, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Actually, it is. If you haven't gone through WP:TUTORIAL, please do. utcursch | talk 13:27, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Tail chasing

Updated DYK queryOn 26 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tail chasing, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that tail chasing in dogs is a compulsion similar to those seen in humans suffering from OCD? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tail chasing. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Question

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/Kanumuri-Bapiraju-faces-uphill-task-in-Narsapuram/articleshow/33795850.cms https://books.google.com/books?id=oQOF7tkWXjIC&pg=PA98&dq=kshatriyas+rajus&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiD-s67t4PaAhWGxFkKHcyxBUY4FBDoAQhUMAk#v=onepage&q=kshatriyas%20rajus&f=false.

The first source says "Rajus (Kshatriya)" and the second source clearly says "The rajus are a small, close-knit community of the Kshatriya caste". May I know why neither of them mean Raju is a synonym of Kshatriya? Sharkslayer87 (talk) 13:01, 1 May 2018 (UTC)