User talk:No2WesternImperialism

My apologies, I reverted your edit on Siege of Chittorgarh (1303) by mistake. I've restored your edit. Sorry for that! Ravensfire (talk) 03:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem! No2WesternImperialism (talk) 03:48, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Brahmin Muslims indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:17, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Dl2000. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Morbi, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 21:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Amritpal Singh (activist), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Kautilya3 (talk) 23:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed content which was biased and opinionated. You cannot use the word "radical" to describe anyone on Wikipedia.

Thanks No2WesternImperialism (talk) 00:30, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently been editing India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated a contentious topic. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

follow editorial and behavioural best practice;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Kautilya3 (talk) 23:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Narendra Gupta (Indian actor) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one.  // Timothy :: talk  20:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Parinita Seth has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one.  // Timothy :: talk  20:54, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. A quick look at your contribution history shows you have been adding material to BLPs without any references. BLPs require references for content. See WP:BLP  // Timothy :: talk  20:59, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I'm concerned that you're simply re-adding information that others have removed without considering why. I know it can be tricky to get the gist of what people are talking about in edit summaries, so lets talk about it here.

In terms of the Stokes article, the detail you're adding probably doesn't belong in the lead of the article. It's already quite bloated there. In other cases where you've stated a brief fact in a short lead I have less of an issue with this, but in this case I think t's just too detailed in the wrong place - we have a whole article where we can add this sort of thing, it doesn't have to go in the lead.

There are some other issues that we should probably have a chat about, but let's start with this. Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:05, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

+1. Only really notable feats / key performances should go in the lead, as it is meant to be a summary of the rest of the article. Spike 'em (talk) 20:33, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Saw you don't like templates, so I'm typing it out. Please add citations when you make additions to articles, especially biographies of living people. I have undone your edit at Sachin Tendulkar. Thanks, Wracking ^💬 03:40, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page List of Gurjars, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 09:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indo-Turkic history has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 10:10, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Rajputisation, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. You cannot do your own research on topic to add it. Kurbanov no where uses word Badgurjar. Please read as per WP:ONUS, it is your task to seek inclusion through consensus. Akalanka820 (talk) 07:48, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So you're telling me that Kurbanov's research has nothing to do with the term Rajputisation?

The definition of Rajputiation itself comes from the concept where different communities coalesced into the Rajput community.

And I don't understand how you are saying it is my own research, it simply Kurbanov's. And he gave the Badgujar clan as an example. No2WesternImperialism (talk) 07:58, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are using KS Suresh Singh which is under WP:RSCASTE, why it is very difficult to understand? go through it. Kurbanov didn't used Badgurjar word, where does he ? In general he said Hepthalite plus Gujar formed Rajput population, a colonial era topic. I hope you know there is WP:RAJ, you need to quote him from secondary sources of writers on Badgurjar. Please read WP:SYNTH, we can't draw conclusions ourselves by combining A and B which neither of them says explicitly. Lastly, do read WP:ONUS, to achieve consensus is with those who want to seek its inclusion. Akalanka820 (talk) 08:10, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He used it, but the link to the source has been dismantled. I will try finding another link.

And what do you mean "ourselves"? It's my mistake No2WesternImperialism (talk) 22:49, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,I have moved the content in sequenced order. The topic has been mentioned, so what is the point in playing with the line ?

Secondly, you had raised on Jadeja. I think it was removed here-[[1]] by an Admin, the same lines have been added without addressing his objections. I would definitely look into it at some point of time. Happy Editing !!  Akalanka820 (talk) 13:39, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Badgujar( Bad_Gujar) is a common clan Among the Gurjars,Jats and Rajputs and Rajputs was a title Given in 16th century by Mughal emperors.

@No2WesternImperialism

@Akalanka820 TonnyJ (talk) 13:55, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mahmud of Ghaznavid. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker (♀) 17:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• [2] is a book written by Hongyin Wang, pen name Zhumo, is Professor and PhD supervisor in Department of English, Director of Translation Studies Center, and Director of the Postdoctoral Research Station at College of Foreign Languages, Nankai University. No specialization in this particular area or field

• [3] by Hamid Wahed Alikuzai, who is not an historian and has no specialization in this area or field.

• [4] by Faegheh Shirazi whose research interests include textiles, dress, gender identity discourse, and material culture in the Middle East; the meanings of veiling; rituals and rites of passage as they relate to material culture. Hardly WP:RS in this case. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:29, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in South Asian social groups. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Re Pa©ker&Tra©ker (♀) 17:50, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding [5]/[6]: Please stop edit-warring about this and address the concerns raised here or [7]. Regards, HaeB (talk) 04:18, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have reverted my edit [[8]], it is cleared from page 87 that the paragraph deals with Silhadi soldiers. Please don't revert it like you did here -[[9]]. Akalanka820 (talk) 05:05, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have the same source as you have. You are simply misquoting information. Don't try to act like you're always right.

"These followers were Rajput or pseudo-Rajput migrant soldiers from Purab, a term usually meaning Awadh, Bihar, and the Varanasi region." No2WesternImperialism (talk) 20:17, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i am not misquoting! read the paragraph on page 87 first line here - What was the power of these Rajput leaders based on and what kind of men were Medini Rai and Silhadi?.. The first para talks about Silhadi and Medini Rai and their soldiers. Basically here he means the soldiers might have been Rajputs with some being others, but commanders were mainly Rajputs. He clearly explains this in next para by using word soldiers. You are trying to imply something like the writer is calling a community of a region with a term which is definitely not what he is saying. He is talking about soldiers. And please stop it, like what you did here- [[10]] without any proper explanations.Akalanka820 (talk) 04:28, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Chudasama dynasty into Rajputs in Gujarat. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 13:11, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate for the acknowledgement. Apologies from my side No2WesternImperialism (talk) 18:14, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You did it again, on Sodhas of Amarkot. I have added the required attribution — Diannaa (talk) 15:07, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You are adding so many minuscule details to the maps that they become completely unreadable, as in here, especially around the Rajputana region. Only the major polities should be mentionned, to maintain readability. If you want a more detailed map, please create your own, with the attached background for example. Thank you. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 17:15, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Thanks for the notificiation. But as a request, I believe Amarkot and Dungarpur should stay, along with Kangra because the Kangra kings had conflicts with the Delhi Sultans, and it was a notable kingdom. No2WesternImperialism (talk) 18:14, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Meo (ethnic group), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rana. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do not alter sourced content without also changing the source. Slatersteven (talk) 15:15, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, No2WesternImperialism. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bhavsinhji Takhtasinhji Gohil, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:03, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Muslim Kolis has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:42, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you are making a lot of very poor edits, eg at Jadaun Rajputs. Are you aware of the information at WP:RAJ? Are you aware of the special sanctions regime which applies to articles such as the Jadauns one? - Sitush (talk) 13:49, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide the examples of "poor edits" No2WesternImperialism (talk) 22:58, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Several articles make the claim that the Jadaun Rajputs belong to the Yaduvanshi Rajput group, who like the Yaduvanshi Ahirs, claim descent from Yadu. I included other Yaduvanshi tribes such as Jadejas, because historians also link the Sammas (ancestors of Jadejas) with the Yadavas. No2WesternImperialism (talk) 23:16, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KS Suresh Singh comes under WP:RSCASTE No2WesternImperialism (talk) 23:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw you recently reverted many new names that were added with proper citations on List of Rajputs without giving any correct reason. May I know the reason behind your removal of certain names like Khudadad Khan, Abdus Salam, Baba Shadi Shaheed, Shah Hussain, etc.

You have mentioned poorly sourced but thats absolutely incorrect as just like the other additions, they are also properly cited. It appears there is a pattern to the names you are removing. Kindly explain and talk before removing others edits. Kshatriya Yoddha (talk) 06:53, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your sources come under the sanctions of (please see) WP:RAJ, along with that Wikipedia has regulations for reliable sources. Please also see Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article.

Thanks No2WesternImperialism (talk) 06:58, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And you responded to my talk page right after I did to yours. Also please read read WP:RSCASTE. Also do read what is WP:ONUS and what is WP:SYNTH, instead of giving personal attacks.

Engage with me on your talk page here - [[11]], not on multiple pages.

Thanks No2WesternImperialism (talk) 07:01, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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; read about 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 02:14, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Aman,

I appreciate the message, however, I am not trying to make the article the way I think it should be. The Jadaun Rajputs claim to be Yaduvanshi, and I wanted to add the sources which are properly backed and state they have Yaduvanshi ancestry, as well as connections with other Yaduvanshi descent groups such as Ahirs. I could have re-worded some words on my behalf.

However, apparently the user Kshatriya Yoddha didn't like the fact that I was keeping these statements in the main header and even questioned why I was using 'Yadavs' who he described as "backwards" in the title, despite when I said Yadavas. The previous day, I had another user who was informing me about the WP:RAJ policy as my sources I was using was coming from the Raj-era.

There are several sources which I have closely read calling Jadauns as Yadus or Yadavas. The user Kshatriya Yoddha mistook me trying to use Yadavs.

I have spoken to the user on the talk page, and apparently we had another issue where the user was using poor sources and even tried to seek help from another user, though that user did agree with the fact user Kshatriya Yoddha was using poor sources.

Thanks, No2WesternImperialism (talk) 05:12, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Jadaun Rajputs, along with other Yaduvanshi Kshatriya clans such as Yaduvanshi Ahirs are believed to be evolved from the Yadavas, who also claim descent from Yadu. Some historians referred to Jadauns as 'Yadu Rajput', or even 'Yadava Rajput', due to their Yaduvanshi lineage, and some theorize that the Jadauns evolved from the Ahirs.^[1][2][3][4]

The user accused me of using the word Yadavs in this, where I clearly used Yadavas. No2WesternImperialism (talk) 05:15, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this will be better, but will make a new section

===Origin===

The Jadaun Rajputs, along with other Yaduvanshi Kshatriya groups such as Yaduvanshi Ahirs and Bhati Rajputs^{[5] [6]} are believed to be evolved from the Yadavas, who also claim descent from Yadu^[7][8]. Some historians referred to Jadauns as 'Yadu Rajput', or even 'Yadava Rajput', due to their Yaduvanshi lineage^[9], and some theorize that the Jadauns evolved from the Ahirs.^[10][11] No2WesternImperialism (talk) 05:32, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, No2WesternImperialism. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Bhavsinhji Takhtasinhji Gohil".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:48, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I will like to have the article remain deleted.

Thanks, No2WesternImperialism (talk) 05:15, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Brahmin princely states has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Gotitbro (talk) 06:55, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I asked you a simple question, where is it written that Jadaun Rajputs are descended from Ahirs. You are making conclusions based on these observations:

1. Both claim descent from Yadu

2. Jadaun rajputs are called 'Yadu' / 'Yadava' rajputs

I also 100% agree, both these observations are correct.

Now, my simple question still remains, where is the mention that Jadauns descend from Ahirs. Just because 2 groups claim similar descent, one because they truly are and one because they want to move up the social ladder (read Rajputisation of Ahirs), how are you making this conclusion???

Jadauns are the direct descendants of Krishna and rulers of Mathura since time immemorial, and atleast for over a 1000 years historically. Ahirs are a nomadic non-elite cattle herding/pastoralist group and claims links with Krishna, there use of Yadav surname started in 20th century.

Kindly answer the question in bold and we can conclude this debate here itself... Kshatriya Yoddha (talk) 15:46, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bhattacharya (1995: 237) has written," The Rajput generally repudiate all connections with the Ahir, though it seems very probable that the Yadubansi Kshatriyas were originally Ahirs". Do you have Google Books? How are you not able to see it?

Jadubansi is a COGNATE of the Jadaun Rajputs.

And if you agree with the information, WHY did you remove the information in the first place?

To say "Jadauns are the direct descendants" is too biased. Their clan does claim descent from Yadu and Krishna, and you are adding original research with your statement: "Jadauns are the direct descendants of Krishna and rulers of Mathura since time immemorial, and atleast for over a 1000 years historically. Ahirs are a nomadic non-elite cattle herding/pastoralist group and claims links with Krishna, there use of Yadav surname started in 20th century."

Not all Rajput clans are pure and properly descend from Kshatriyas. You are trying to believe that all Rajputs are Kshatriyas, while they CLAIM DESCENT from Kshatriyas! That is a big difference.

SO I REQUEST YOU TO PLEASE STOP DOING YOUR CASTE PRIDE AND LEARN TO STOP REMOVING SOURCES BASED ON THE WAY YOU VIEW THINGS.

If historians link the Jadus with the Ahirs since both are Yaduvanshi, there is nothing wrong in that. Also, please see the article Yaduvanshi Aheer.

And you again are not liking the idea that Ahirs are mentioned in the sentence because they are "cattle breeding/pastoralist communities". As I mentioned before, not all Rajput groups were rulers. You need to cite the information you said above for your sentences.

This is what most historians believe in Rajputisation: According to modern scholars, almost all Rajputs clans originated from peasant or pastoral communities.^{[12][13][14][15]} Rajputisation is the study of formation of the community over the centuries.

Last but not least, this 'Jadauns are the direct descendants of Krishna and rulers of Mathura since time immemorial, and atleast for over a 1000 years historically. Ahirs are a nomadic non-elite cattle herding/pastoralist group and claims links with Krishna, there use of Yadav surname started in 20th century.' is a biased and an original research statement.

You can't do that here. No2WesternImperialism (talk) 16:20, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Cattle_and_the_Stick/wT-BAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=The+Rajput+generally+repudiate+all+connections+with+the+Ahir,+though+it+seems+very+probable+that+the+Yadubansi+Kshatriyas+were+originally+Ahirs%22&dq=The+Rajput+generally+repudiate+all+connections+with+the+Ahir,+though+it+seems+very+probable+that+the+Yadubansi+Kshatriyas+were+originally+Ahirs%22&printsec=frontcover

this comes from the AnSI. No2WesternImperialism (talk) 16:23, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hello sir, please look at Ahir page.^[16]

2402:8100:2583:91ED:0:0:2BC0:A2A2 (talk) 22:04, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ahirs as Yadavas^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]} 2402:8100:2583:91ED:0:0:2BC0:A2A2 (talk) 22:14, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Krishna belonged to Abhira (Ahir) tribe^[8]

2409:4085:9C80:BA1F:F590:D5BE:8250:77CD (talk) 22:51, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please check the pending edit requests at Talk:List of Rajputs. MahabaliKhali (talk) 18:04, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of poor content has been added at Rajputs in Gujarat. A quick skim of this talk page has me concerned that you are not learning: for example, just because something is in a book does not male it suitable for Wikipedia. - Sitush (talk) 07:04, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Further to my recent note here, I now see you have been making very poor edits at Makwana (clan) also, and despite good advice not to do so. You had the sanctions warning in May and thus you are deemed to be aware that continued poor editing is likely to lead to such things as topic bans or even complete blocks from editing. Please be careful. - Sitush (talk) 20:54, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This edit is appalling and you should know better. Unless he self-identifies his caste, we don't show it ... and that specific source actually makes the point that umpteen different claims have been made about his caste without such identification. What on earth were you thinking? - Sitush (talk) 21:01, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Mulla Brahmins indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 12:50, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, No2WesternImperialism. Thank you for your work on Rajputs in Gujarat. User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for your work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 15:00, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, No2WesternImperialism. Thank you for your work on Rajputs in Himachal Pradesh. User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 18:13, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello No2WesternImperialism, you must be aware that you are not supposed to cite Raj era source in any caste article, as you did in the article on Yaduvanshi Rajput! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 17:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rathores has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:49, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Ratnahastin (talk) 12:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in South Asian social groups. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Ratnahastin (talk) 12:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce original research into a BLP article like you did here [12]. Do note that Caste claims requires self identification per WP:CASTEID. Ratnahastin (talk) 12:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:GujaratiHistoryinDNA per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GujaratiHistoryinDNA. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

– bradv 02:56, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]