User talk:Ranadhira

Please seek better Reliable Sources before adding back those in Mughal–Rajput wars and those fail WP:Notable guidline and lack historical notability of the other battles, additionally maintain WP:Neutral as you seem Rajput bias and remember WP:TRR and no WP:EW, do not add thoise back without proper consensus from other editors and do not add sources not listed as WP:RS, checkWikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources and gain a better understanding of Wikipedia policies before doing so again, take care! Dilbaggg (talk) 09:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is wrong with this source?[1] You need to explain why it's not reliable before removing content based on it. Ranadhira (talk) 10:02, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thats just one source, you need better than that. Anyway even if you do add it back maintain WP:neutral tone. I will be too busy to check the coming days but might fix things when I get back. Best wishes. Dilbaggg (talk) 10:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing biased in what I wrote. The tone is similar to what is written in the ref. Your editing on that page seems to be your own personal opinion. Ranadhira (talk) 10:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm since it survived deletion I will add it back, but I thank you for maintaining WP:neutral, a lot of editors in Wp:India do not seem to do that sadly. Dilbaggg (talk) 15:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also noticed you are a pretty experienced and active editor, I am not always available, I request you to protect the neutrality of this article: Battle of Khatu Shyamji. Dilbaggg (talk) 15:22, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was not able to find anything significant on that battle. I am also busy right now but I will try to fix the page in a few days. Ranadhira (talk) 18:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the late response, but got it! Dilbaggg (talk) 05:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you join a discussion?

Hello Ranadhira, can you join the discussion Talk:Siege of Mandsaur, whether Siege of Mandsaur was a Rajput victory or Gujarat Sultanate victory. Narook (talk) 10:24, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The refs apart from Hooja, come under WP:RAJ and should be removed. Add reliable souces of modern historians if you want to make changes. I will be removing the unreliable refs soon. Ranadhira (talk) 15:03, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I've cited another reference History of Mewar, from Earliest Times to 1751 A.D. which gives a brief description about the battle. Narook (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conquest of Mandalgarh

Can you check if these newly created articles Conquest of Mandalgarh and Conquest of Ajmer passes WP:GNG, as I didn't find such titles in sources. Sudsahab (talk) 04:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have not been able to spend much time on wiki recently. If true, then the person who created the page should be questioned. Ranadhira (talk) 15:36, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This ref [2], comes under WP:RAJ. Should check others as well and remove. I'll have a look tomorrow. Ranadhira (talk) 15:53, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright Sudsahab (talk) 14:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maratha-Rajput conflict (1800-1820)

Can you check if this article Maratha-Rajput conflict (1800-1820) passes WP:GNG, as it seems unreliable, even the title seems fabricated. There is no mention of Maratha-Rajput conflict (1800-1820). The entire article is based on 4 sources. Rajanyas (talk) 09:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ranadhira please review this page once Rajanyas (talk) 09:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it doesn't pass WP:GNG. @Sajaypal007, what do you think? I feel that add [need quotation to verify] after every citation and for now and also request the editor who started this page to cite how the heading is justified as it otherwise falls under WP:GNG. Ranadhira (talk) 11:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I nowhere read about a topic called Maratha-Rajput conflict (1800-1820). Nothing of significance happened in 1800 or 1820 which can start or end any such conflicts. There were many conflicts in present day Rajasthan around that time like kingdoms of Marwar, Mewar, Jaipur, Scindhia, Holkar, Pindari etc all fighting with one another, Marwar-Jaipur conflicts, Holkar-Scindhia conflicts, pindari helping one kingdom abandoning them and helping other, all of these happened simultaneously, so it can not be said that Rajputs like Mewar, Marwar, Jaipur etc were fighting unitedly against United Maratha forces of Holkar, Scindhia and pindaris. I seriously think the article is more like generalization of almost a century long warfare in this period of anarchy which also had other players like Mughals and many more new entrants like Sikhs, British, and many soldiers of fortunes working under some powers and later switching sides. In my opinion this article doesn't pass notability issue. Just show some references or citations where this particular topic is mentioned separately, or even just mentioned. Sajaypal007 (talk) 12:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article Maratha-Rajput conflict (1800-1820) seems to be illogical, it should be nominated for deletion. Rajanyas (talk) 13:01, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can nominate for deletion after adding tags for verification. Ranadhira (talk) 13:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Verification

@Ranadhira Could you please check that this article 1 passes WP: GNG. I would have checked myself but my exams are going on so, I was busy. Appreciate if you would helpRawn3012 (talk) 12:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was no siege. At best, it can be called a treaty that ended without a conflict. Also, Harmoda was a different conflict altogether and should not be clubbed together. Ranadhira (talk) 12:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Kota

Hey Ranadhira, can you check if Siege of Kota passes WP:GNG, because i'm unable to find such battle anywhere. You must nominate it for deletion. Moreover it looks like a Maratha POV pushing article. 2409:4085:78A:C8AD:CC95:A812:DDDB:2917 (talk) 16:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Battle of Mandan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Battle of Mandan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Mandan 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.

Admantine123 (talk) 01:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

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) 00:31, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Gupta, Bakshi, R.K., S.R (2008). Rajasthan Through the Ages. Sarup & Sons. pp. 215–216.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  2. ^ Rapson, Edward James; Haig, Sir Wolseley; Burn, Sir Richard; Dodwell, Henry (1958) [1928]. The Cambridge History of India: Turks and Afghans, edited by W. Haig. The University Press. p. 357.Public Domain This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.