This is an archive of past discussions with User:Adamantine123. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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.
Hello, Admantine123. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Belchhi massacre, 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.
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.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?17:27, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Replaceable fair use File:Ajay Kumar Kushwaha Bibhutipur.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Ajay Kumar Kushwaha Bibhutipur.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 20:20, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Whpq, the image is taken from a source which says the following things:- "All copyrights are reserved with the Bihar Vidhan Sabha Secretariat. The material listed may be reproduced without formal permission for the purposes of non-commercial research, private study and for criticism, review and news reporting provided that the material is appropriately attributed. For any other re-use of the material you are required to seek permission from this secretariat."
Commons only accepts freely licensed images, and the the English Wikipedia only accept images which are freely licensed or meets all of the non-free content criteria. This is a copyrighted image of a living person so it cannot be uploaded to Commons, nor does it qualify for use as non-free content. In short, you cannot use this image. -- Whpq (talk) 20:31, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Whpq, The material listed may be reproduced without formal permission for the purposes of non-commercial research, private study and for criticism, review and news reporting provided that the material is appropriately attributed. What does this mean.? Admantine123 (talk) 20:34, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
It means it is copyrighted, and is not sufficiently free for Commons or enwiki. Images must be licensed such that derivative works are allowed, and commercial use is allowed. -- Whpq (talk) 20:36, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Whpq Ok, there is another website of Government of Bihar[1], the copyright policy of theirs says following things:- Material featured on this website may be reproduced free of charge. However,the material has to be reproduced accurately and not to be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. Wherever the material is being published or issued to others,the source must be prominently acknowledged. However,the permission to reproduce this material shall not extend to any material which is identified as being copyright of a third party. Authorization to reproduce such material must be obtained from the department/copyright holder concerned. There are set of free licences called Attribution only licence on Wikimedia commons . Are images from this particular website allowed here too or there. On commons a patroller told me that the images from this particular website are free. 20:40, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
You should upload on Commons, and communicate with that editor on Commons on the exact license to use. I expect it would be GODL-India. -- Whpq (talk) 23:56, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Replaceable fair use File:Bima Bharti Rupauli MLA.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Bima Bharti Rupauli MLA.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Image source problem with File:Jagdeo Jayanti By RJD.jpg
This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.
While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.
After seeing what you posted on Whpq's user talk page about this file, I'm going to respond here. Are you able to find out anything other than Rashtriya Janata Dal about the provenance of the poster you photographed? Unless there's some reason under Indian copyright law that works created by political parties are considered to be within the public domain, I think it has to be assumed that the poster itself is protected by copyright unless it can clearly be shown otherwise. When you photograph a copyrighted work created by someone else, your photograph is considered to be a WP:Derivative work (see also c:COM:DW). So, while you own the copyright of the photo you take, someone else owns the copyright on whatever you photographed. In order for Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons to keep files like this, it needs to be clearly shown the not only the photo but also the photographed work is either within the public domain or released under a copyright license acceptable for Wikipedia or Commons. The copyright license you release your photo under doesn't apply to the photograph work because that would mean that you're also claiming that you created the poster. Things are even a bit more trickier with respect to this poster since it also seems to be a derivative work itself because it looks like it's combining photos/drawings of party candidates with other graphical creative elements: therefore, the copyright status of each of the photos used in the poster may also need to be assessed. Since there's no freedom of panorama for 2D graphic works under Indian Copyright law per c:COM:FOP India, it's going to really hard to keep this photo without at least getting the WP:CONSENT from whomever created it. If you can find out who created the poster and get them to email their consent to Wikimedia VRT for verification purposes, the file can most likely be kept. If you can't find out any more information about the poster, a discussion about it can be started at WP:FFD; however, I think it's going to be really hard to establish a consensus in favor of keeping it for the reasons I stated above. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Replaceable fair use File:Bhagvan Singh Kushwaha Kheragarh.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Bhagvan Singh Kushwaha Kheragarh.jpeg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
please add the appropriate infobox and a couple of more references
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Amarjeetkushwaha8, on Wikipedia, we can create any article or pages only if it is a notable subject. As for example, we can create pages of politicians who are in news everyday and we have sources to write about them in the form of newspaper articles. We can't create the page of individuals, who are not notable and those for whom, we don't have secondary sources (newspaper, books) covering the details about them. Admantine123 (talk) 20:03, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
File:Jagdeo Jayanti By RJD.jpg listed for discussion
Done, although it seems you already did some work to remove the {{Tone}} tag. I have a couple of questions about the article's name:
1. All the sources seem to use a spelling of "Ramsevak", not "Ramsewak" -- should it be changed?
2. "Kushwaha" does not appear anywhere in the article nor in the sources as part of his name; furthermore, some of the sources draw a distinction between this man and others who do wear the surname Kushwaha; so is it actually correct?
Baffle gab1978 and Garrettw87, there are other politician with similar names like one i have mentioned above article while creating it. In many cases, i noticed that there are 5-6 politicians with same name and in order to distinguish between them, editors make slight difference in their names, like adding their state or date of birth in the title of article. Here, i have added surname for the same purpose as there are many sources which tells us about the caste of this politician. Spelling is not an issue, both are correct, whether we use "w" or "v".- Admantine123 (talk) 20:44, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
The newly appointed Ministers are Ashok Coudhary, Shyam Rajak, Narendra Narayan Yadav, Sanjay Jha, Ramsewak Singh, Lakshmeshwar Rai, Neeraj Kumar and Bima Bharti. Bima Bharti is the only woman.
See, in one of the English source, they have used Ramsewak. So, it's perfectly okay. Also, most of the sources are in Hindi language, which tells about his caste. Admantine123 (talk) 20:52, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your input, as I am not well-versed on Indian culture. I had a hunch that the "v" and "w" might be interchangeable, but it seems I overlooked a source that used "w". I did look through the Hindi sources using Google Translate but there again, it seems I must have missed mentions of "Kushwaha" in conjunction with him. — Garrett W. {☎✍}21:13, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 8
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Upendra Nath Verma, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gaya.
please add the appropriate infobox and a few ECI refs
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nilkamal Singh until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
While reverting something please be much more careful, because your last revert also reverted a full reference into a bare reference. So instead of reverting the whole just put effort to protect the good ones. Egeymi (talk) 14:06, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for engaging in discussions on the talk page for the article Bhumihar and recusing yourself from it. I think that is a constructive move. I will reply in details to your comments there when I have more time but I will note two things: Mr Simon T., a British editor, may be "well-versed in caste related matters" but he is not the only one allowed to edit caste articles. Moreover, he is not an academic. Dr KS Singh was the Director General of Anthropological Survey of India who wrote many books published by Oxford and he is not reliable? And casteism activist Jogendra Nath Bhattacharya is?
Anyway, I am glad you have recused yourself from this matter and I do not want to point fingers. I hope you will agree that the article is in need of clean-up, improvement and an encyclopaedic, impartial tone. Ohh btw I love Nepal (assuming that you live there but sort of doubt it). Do Indian ATM cards work there? If so, which ones?Recently, we noticed that they did not. Please help as I really want to visit again. Thank you. :) --Trickipaedia (talk) 05:08, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Because you were using primary sources to support your claim. In such historical articles, you need reliable secondary sources.-Admantine123 (talk) 17:14, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Sarkar, Jadunath (1949). "Ain-i-akbari Of Abul Fazl I Allami Vol. 2 Ed. 2nd"
It appears to be a translation of Primary source, "Ain-i-akbari by Abul Fazal. You need a modern post 1947 book written by any historian, which mentions that Utpala Dynasty had origin from Chamar caste, to include it in the article.-Admantine123 (talk) 17:21, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Ok, those who are dead, sources are present for verification. Those who are alive, sources with self identification exists.-Admantine123 (talk) 18:33, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
You have recently edited a page related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic designated as contentious. 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.
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete or generic. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact source (such as the web page, or printed document) where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain, search engine, pinboard, aggregator, or the direct/bare URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. — Ирука1321:42, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi, recently i requested for a permanent solution regarding this on Wikimedia commons. The website from where the image is taken, is official website of Government of Bihar and its website policy says that material used therein are freely usable if they are properly attributed [2] . Hence, they are available under Attribution only licence.Admantine123 (talk) 18:50, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
From what I can tell, the image is probably OK to use under {{Attribution}}. However, you marked it as cc-by-4.0, which is definitely not the license they chose. Please take care to use the correct license in the future. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 00:47, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Suchitra Mishra.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gangota, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gopalpur Assembly constituency.
Can someone explain to me that, how's this Sangram Singh Patan article eligible for wikipedia article
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vikas Shakya until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
An article you recently created, Siddharth Sukhlal kushwaha, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DSP2092talk18:32, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Narayan Singh Kushwah, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
A "bare URL and 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)
I have marked this article as patrolled as the subject passes WP:NPOL. Thank you.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Maliner}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
you seem to have restored Amar Singh I to your own changes you made a while ago, i understand that you did so to revert vandalism but this caused loss of a lot of info about campaigns of Mahabat Khan, Abdullah Khan,Aziz Koa and other details regarding him. The revision you reverted to talks more about Pratap(in that too some of its historicity is disputed) than Amar Singh. Also info about his involvement in literary works he undertook was lost. Please do not revert the page entirely back to your own changes on occurrence of any future vandalism.
Feel free to expand the article with any info you want to.
You have used poor sources and removed the things from high quality source like that of Early. This is called vandalism and pov edit. Admantine123 (talk) 04:16, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Please add back any 'relevant' info you think is missing From Early in the article.
the sources i have used is R.C. Majumdar and Ram Vallabh Somani (who has done one of the most comprehensive research on history of Mewar). you are free to research about their credibility or take second opinion from any user who is a history scholar. Can you mention me what are your basis for calling their work as 'poor sources' then i might be able to clear your doubts
Reverting back to changes you made years ago i do not think is appropriate. this will undo all the efforts done by any other user
in your revision, under section 'Role in mughal-mewar conflict' two para's were dedicated to Pratap and Amar Singh role was summed up in few line, it lacked any details about the campaign and only mention their commander name . i have added info about their campaigns. Expanded it than before none of any previous relevant info is lost Mewar11111 (talk) 07:07, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
I don't question R.C Majumdar as he is a prominent historian. I had doubt on that Mateswari publication source. Because most of such regional publication may have some pov with respect to Rajput history. They tend to glorify the events rather than observing it neutrally. Which is often visible from the language. I dispute your removal of that quote of Amar Singh's submission before jahangir, which was reliably sourced.- Admantine123 (talk) 07:37, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 1
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dinanath Kushwaha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deoria.
Manipulating source to distort facts ? Regarding Kushwaha article
Hello Admantine123
It seems like you are trying to distort facts by selectively omitting text/facts from the sentences of the very sources you use.
Example :
This is the text you added on Sep 21 , 2023
"The communities which merged into this caste cluster includes Marrar, Mali, Panar, Shakya, Maurya and Saini besides the three castes of Koeri, Kachhi and Murao, which originally formed the part of this cluster."
"A number of families belonging to these caste groups, namely, Kachhi, Kachhwaha, Kushwaha, Mali, Marrar, Saini, Sonkar, Murai, Shakya, Mourya, Koyri, Koeri, and Panara have come closer to each other and have started intermarrying"
Question: Original text has the 'Kachhwaha' mentioned, which you omitted ! Can you please explain why this was done ?
NOTE: This can't be a mistake because you copy pasted this exact sentence from source in citation "A number of families belonging to these caste groups, namely, Kachhi, Kushwaha, Mali, Marrar, Saini, Murai, Shakya, Mourya, Koyri, Koeri, and Panara have come closer to each other and have started intermarrying. " The only thing missing here is the 'Kachhwaha' community and the only way to do that is to specifically remove it from original sentence and then paste manipulated sentence as citation.
GlynClarke, That is not said in the context of Kachhwaha Rajput, that is said in context of Kachhi caste, the term Kachhwaha has never been described by any author as Kachhwaha Rajput clan of Jaipur, they are saying that in context of Kachhi caste of agriculturist. Second thing is please don't make Wikipedia a place to write your pseudo historical assumption that Kachhwaha Rajputs and Kushwaha are same. No caste is weaker or stronger in present scenario. You don't need to link yourself with any caste to raise your social status, something you and few editors who choose to edit only selective articles are trying to do here.You think that anyhow merging with a Rajput clan will make you high,but this fact is used by them to claim that you are low and you have nothing to show to the world that's y to gain social recognition you are linking up with them. Be yourself like the Yadav and Jat caste. I am tired reporting disruptive editors who are here for sanskritising purpose.I am not against your caste.Your caste is presently more politically powerful than those with whom you are trying to link. And if even after that you are trying to do that... you are proving yourself low and giving them a chance to say that you are low.Admantine123 (talk) 07:08, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
GlynClarke, terms can be similar. And William Pinch also never said that Kachhwaha stands for that family of Man Singh and all from Jaipur. He was saying about cultivator Kachhwaha. Also in the source of Patel, Mahendra Lal, he wrote Koyri, Koeri as different caste, but they are just different pronunciation. So be selective in including the text from book. In present scenario too the surname Kushwah in Madhya Pradesh is used both by minority Rajput caste and OBC Kushwaha, about whom we are taking here. But outside Madhya Pradesh Kushwaha stand for the agricultural caste cluster of Koeri Kachhi Murao only. Even nowadays a general reader or common Indian will always understand Kushwaha to be the OBC Kushwaha, the agriculturist and except few history reader, no-one knows that there is something like Kachhwaha Rajput. We know that because we have grown up reading mediaeval history. But, the agriculturist Kushwahas are more renowned and produce more Notable politicians presently. It is disgusting to tackle editors who anyhow want to link them with Jaipur family now, by putting pseudo historical assumption. Believe me, there is no need to do so and my advice to all of you is that rather than forging manipulated history, you should preserve what is your real history. Admantine123 (talk) 07:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
(1) I have the presented the facts as they are. But it looks like you are pushing your own POV and using SYNTH by selectively omitting words from the very sources you are citing. This is against Wikipedia Guidelines and I will have to raise complain against you if you continue to vandalize.
(2) There is no linking of Kushwaha/Kachhwaha/Kachhi to Kachhwaha of Rajasthan. If you see properly I have not linked Kachhwaha article when mentioning Kachhwaha word in Kushwaha article. But as we very clearly see, in the same sources (whose text you manipulated) Kachhwaha is part of Kushwaha. whether this Kachhwaha is same as Kachhwaha of Rajasthan that isNOT the topic of this discussion , nor is mentioned or implied anywhere.
Pasting the excerpts again from the same legitimate sources:
>> Original Text from Book "Kushvaha-kshatriya identity was espoused by agricultural communities well known throughout the Gangetic north for an expertise in small-scale vegetable and (to an increasingly limited extent after the turn of the twentieth century) poppy cultivation. Prominent among them were Kachhi and Murao agriculturalists of central Uttar Pradesh, Kachhvahas of western Uttar Pradesh, and Koiris of Bihar and eastern Uttar Pradesh." Source: Peasants and Monks in British India
>> Original Text from Book : "The reclassification by identification as other backward classes has placed them in various disadvantageous situations, as political reservations are not permitted to OBC persons. A number of families belonging to these caste groups, namely, Kachhi, Kachhwaha, Kushwaha, Mali, Marrar, Saini, Sonkar, Murai, Shakya, Mourya, Koyri, Koeri, and Panara have come closer to each other and have started intermarrying. They have now developed an all-India network to ensure caste solidarity without jeopardizing the caste interests." Source: Awareness in Weaker Section: Perspective Development and ProspectsGlynClarke (talk) 12:42, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Then properly write the spelling of Kachhvaha as mentioned in the source. No author have said that they both are same. Pinch mentions them but he is talking about cultivator kachhhvaha of western Uttar Pradesh and not any Rajput clan. Also, learn editing before starting to edit contentious articles. You have left error after your addition on that page. Admantine123 (talk) 12:47, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Also, I am not here to add something on a single article like some people are doing here with two three accounts. So, its not me, who need to care about complaints. Admantine123 (talk) 12:53, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
All spellings are copy-paste from the source as is. Without manipulation like you were doing !So read before you rage. Regarding editing, yes i am learning, thank you for the kind suggestion. GlynClarke (talk) 12:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
It seems you have the time right now. Why don't you remove that redlink from the quote that is showing up in reference section. Admantine123 (talk) 13:08, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Yes I am trying to check how to do, meanwhile if you can remove those errors without removing the Kachhwaha mention please feel free to do that. GlynClarke (talk) 13:15, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
GlynClarke, I will reiterate. Whatever be the intention behind forcibly including the Kachhwaha word, it was not at all necessary as it creates confusion. Kachhi call themselves Kachhwaha and even without linking many will understand it to be Kachhwaha Rajput of Rajasthan. Specially kids visiting Wikipedia. They will argue on social media that jaipur fort was made by their ancestors and will make fun of themselves among others. No aware person from this caste group links themselves with Kachhwaha nor any caste organisation of Kushwaha caste claim Jaipur family to be their own. I have read them differently. Specially in context of Mandal politics, Bihar land Reform drive and their rise along with Yadavs and Kurmis. Whoever trying to link them by manipulating the loopholes of Wikipedia is making fun of themselves and branding their own community as lowly, not having any contribution of their own. Admantine123 (talk) 13:02, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
As already mentioned above (please re-read) there is no linking of Kushwaha/Kachhwaha/Kachhi to Kachhwaha of Rajasthan, mentioned or implied anywhere. At Wikipedia we focus on presenting facts without worrying about socio-political outcomes. You seem to be too emotionally involved to think rationally. GlynClarke (talk) 13:13, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Well, I have nothing to reply on this. I have explained everything already. A genuine advice for you and others is you people should also contribute to Wikipedia by editing other articles rather than appearing only occassionally to edit particular articles by doing minor edits rather than any significant improvement in it. Admantine123 (talk) 13:21, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Lonia
Hello Admantine123. I saw that you had recently been in an editing dispute with another editor on the Lonia article. The other editor has since been blocked, however I wanted to check that you were aware of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring and in particular the three revert rule, which applies to you whether or not you are in the right when changing something back to how it should be. Inadvertently breaking the 3RR rule can have serious consequences including being blocked from editing, so be sure to bear that in mind when you next revert someone else's edits. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:47, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Regarding Kachhwaha article
Below arguments are regarding and limited only to Kachhwaha clan mentioned on the the Kachhwaha article.
There is an overwhelming evidence that the name 'Kushwaha' is and has been used as synonym for Kachhwaha.
I am presenting some of the evidences below. If there are any legitimate and fact based counters ( not emotions, not opinion, not OR ) please present.
I will wait for a week and if there are no reliable counters I will be adding Kushwaha as a synonym of Kachhwaha.
Evidence are below:
(1) Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan (3 Vols)
By James Tod · 1987
Says "Kushwaha or Kachhwaha" are part of 36 royal races
(3) Memoranda on Native States in India, Together with a List of Independent Ruling Chiefs, Chiefs of Frontier States, and Other Notables with Their Proper Forms of Address ( 1911, British govt )
Says that "The Jaipur Chief is the head of the Kachhwaha or Kushwaha clan of Rajputs,"
(4) Memoranda on The Indian States 1935 (British govt)
Says that "The Jaipur Ruling Prince is the head of the Kachwaha or Kushwaha clan of Rajputs and is of the solar line tracing his descent from Kush, one of the sons of Rama, King of Ayodhya."
GlynClarke Here you lose. Tod is rejected by Wikipedia community and is considered an unreliable source. None of the sources you have listed are considered reliable and if you add it they will be easily reverted by senior editors like Sitush, Ekdalian and many others. Tod was considered reliable long ago because of his biased views and he is considered someone who was very impressed with Rajputs. You may check the history of Rajput article. There the same source was removed after a long discussion. This is what you call policies. Now personal view is that most of the people I mean Notables using Kushwaha surname nowadays are not those Kachhwaha from whose side you are here. They must be a minority group unable to make even a single MLA of their own. These sources are poor quality and even a newspaper source will defeat them easily. The source of your knowledge, which seems to be the Self Published Sources of Rajput community and their caste website are not reliable on Wiki. Admantine123 (talk) 20:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Most of the sources comes under WP:RAJ and are highly unreliable.
First two are from Tod, and he is too unreliable. This is not Hindi Wikipedia where the editors can add what they read on blogs. Kachhwaha royal house is never known as Kushwaha in history. I am a post graduate in history, they were always called kachhwaha. Their adoption of Kushwaha is a latest phenomenon. I am not surprised as they even claim Yadav and Saini surname to be their own. Actually they lost the race of civilization to the obc castes and want to show the world that they are still relevant, that's why associating themselves with them anyhow. On the policy side.... you try to add them. I will urge the senior editors who will remove them outrightly as they all are very poor opinionated sources. Admantine123 (talk) 20:57, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
OK Thanks. But even if we ignore evidence 1 and 2. Still we have the 4 more evidences from govt sources (indian and British) which clearly establish that Kushwaha has been used as a synonym if Kachhwaha Rajputs. And just to clarify the argument here is NOT where they were actually Kushwaha or not, or related to Kush (Lord Ram) or not,the argument is wether they were referred to as Kushwaha and Kachhwaha both by others or not. In this case, we clearly see that Kushwaha and Kachhwaha were/are being used interchangeably or as a synonym. GlynClarke (talk) 21:05, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
I said read WP:RAJ. They are unreliable sources. On caste articles specially for which modern sources are a available, pre 1947 sources are not reliable. Sitush has explained it in his castelist. This is because Rajputs and Brahmins were the translator and only educated section of society then. The writers like Tod and others were not historians or sociologists but British administrators and they used to mention everything told by those people. Hence their writings were biased. All your sources are from Raj era and rest which are not raj era is from Tod who was unreliable and removed from all places on Wikipedia, where it was used. A personal piece of advice: no community is interested in merging with Kachhwahas as they have nothing to give them. Second thing Koeri Kachhi and Murao never associated themselves with Jaipur family. They associated themselves with Rama and that's what every community does. Even when Balban was in power he associated himself with Afrasiyab. Whoever becomes powerful traces lineage from mythological characters. Admantine123 (talk) 21:12, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
GlynClarke Kachhwahas should use Chundawat Shaktawat etc. As officially Government of Bihar and even government of India issues OBC certificate with the name Kushwaha to Koeri Kachhi and Murao community. Government of India has officially recognised them with this name. Admantine123 (talk) 21:16, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello Admantine123, I hope you're doing well. I've added Thilsebatti's talk page to my watchlist and noticed your rating request. I just wanted to let you know that you can update an article's rating yourself on its talk page. Here's how you can do it: First, install WP:RATER. Then, navigate to the talk page of the article in question. On the talk page, you'll find a 'Tools' menu where you can click on 'Rater.' From there, you can adjust the article's assessment according to its quality and make sure to save your changes.
Howdy. DreamRimmer is correct on the installation instructions. The installation instructions are pretty easy so I think I'll let Admantine123 do it themselves first. If you run into any problems feel free to ping me. Happy editing. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:00, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
