Wikipedia

Talk:Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya/Archive 1

< Talk:Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya
Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Archive 1

Titling

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello !! Someone named Vikarm Singh 06 moved Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya to Kutch Rajput. citing moved Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya to Kutch Rajput: Kutch is a Rajput Clan of Gujrat and People are more familiar to Rajput word than Kshatriya). While it is known fact that Kutch is name of region and not a clan. Further all the links [1][2][3][4] mention name Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya and other like Mistri or Kadia but nowhere Kutch Rajput name is mentioned. I tried to move back the name to Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya but a typing error occurred and name was changed to Kutch Gurjar Kshatriys last alphabet changed from a to s. Request if someonce can correct the spelling to original name Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya and detete the page Kutch Rajput, which is of no use.R P Jethwa (talk) 06:21, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

There has been some edit conflict which can be categorized as vandalism going on regarding name Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya fighting over Gurjar , Kshatriya & Rajput. Please note that name of community itself is Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya and they are Hindu & Kshatriya clan. All the websites given in the link confirm the name as Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya. Further, their sub class or surname of the clan are Chauhan, Rathod, Jethwa, Solanki, Parmar, Gohil, Chawda, Yadav, Bhatti, Taank, Vaghela, Makwana, etc, which are itself clans of Kshatriya or Rajput group. In 21st century abbreviated name KGK Community is often used. The


If someone (User:Mkrestin) has to fight over weather Gurjar are Kshatriya and Kshatriya are Rajput or not please go to the articles Gurjar, Rajput and Kshatriya. This page is about a clan or community, whose name it self is Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya and relevant links of the name as such are given in para above.

The "sources" given above to indicate the validity of the term "KGK" by R P Jethwa (Jethwarp) are all advocacy sites or otherwise non-Reliable Sources. Do we have any decent sources attesting this is the Common Name? The only hit I'm seeing for it on GoogleBooks is "Kutch Gurjar Kshatriya Mahila Mandals (KGKMM) established in 1977". Of course the KGKMM is apparently "a thing", but that itself is no endorsement that KGK is a legitimate term. I could found a group called the "Association of Japanese Vikings", and the AJK might well become significant and merit an article, but that wouldn't mean that "Japanese Vikings" are indeed a historical community and the common name for the type of people involved in the organisation. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:22, 13 April 2012 (UTC)


copy edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

by copy edit the article has turned in to mess. many important sections have been omitted or plainly deleted. Does the copy edit guild User talk:Chaosdruid has this special right to copy edit the article and detele or ommit important lines at his personal will or whim.?????????Hardyraj (talk) 02:48, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

What important lines have been deleted ? Chaosdruid (talk) 04:22, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
There are many lines, deleted. Some I have added back & some I will when I get time. Further, in your zeal to do copy edit, you have moved the whole most important Railway section to a new page, which is now pending discussion for deletion. Congratulations!!! The section was created over the years by contributors taking references and translated from mostly books: published in Gujarati language. As the community belongs to Kutch & Gujarat and most articles written over the years on them are in their native language. As far as wikipedia article on length stands, there are always few exceptions, which have been allowed and this page could have been one of them. See Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. Further, I went through your talk page, where another, editor jetvarp have suggested to move back the contents back to this page. You have opposed it. Hardyraj (talk) 07:26, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, many lines were deleted. The article was far too long and had massive unecessary lists of buildings and other examples that were far too long. The railway section was moved to a new page and a summary left in this one. That is standard practice.
"Many such companies were started by, for example, Mr Abernathy - Paper, Mr Bell- Paper, Mr Clarendon - Paper, Mr Daynes - Concrete, Mr Egnert - Saw mill, Mr Falstaf - Paper, Mr Google - Concrete, Mr Hairi- Saw mill, Mr Ignacious - Concrete, Mr Joule - Paper, Mr Kalgoory - Concrete, Mr Lime - Paper, Mr Marthews - Concrete, Mr Naomet - Rubber, Mr Other - Saw mill, Mr Peel - Concrete, Mr Rogers - Paper, Mr Stevenson - Concrete, Mr Tamalan - Paper, Mr Unverse - concrete, Mr Victor - saw mill, Mr Whisky - Paper, Mr Yelverton - Printing, Mr Zebra - Paper"
These lists were far too long and made the article virtually unreadable. I cut lists like that down to four or five entries "for example Mr Daynes - Concrete, Mr Abernathy - Paper, Mr Egnert - Saw mill, Mr Naomet - Rubber, and Mr Yelverton - Printing."
This gives one example of each type of company and is more than sufficient.
Listing all the railway companies one after the other in a massive twenty - thirty line paragraph is a LIST and should have been in a "List of railway companies..." page - take a look at the List_of_railway_companies_in_Japan
Listing every single person that has made a building in every single town and village is also a form of list and was unecessary. Create a "List of buildings in town A" page and move them there. Some examples of things that are being talked about are fine, but twenty or thirty examples in one paragraph starts to cloud the subject and stops the reader from understanding what the article is saying. Ultimately they wil lgive up and go and read something else.
Have a look at the these page Buildings_and_architecture_of_Philadelphia#Landmarks_and_monuments which shows how things should be done. To allow a reader that wants to find out more to do so they will click on the "Further information" link and be taken to the List of churches in Philadelphia page which lists all the examples. Each of the examples has its own entry Ukrainian Catholic which links to another page Ukrainian Catholic Archeparchy of Philadelphia for the individual buildings and stops the main pages from getting too big. Chaosdruid (talk) 12:14, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Additions and ridiculous size of the article

Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

It seems that since the last purge almost all of the material has been reinserted by Jethwarp. Let me make it clear again.

  • Remove the material to a separate page, leave a summary here.

I suggest that all irrelevant material is removed in the next week before I do so (again). Chaosdruid (talk) 17:31, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Once again the article has got bigger instead of smaller. My previous message said "make this page smaller"
I will begin removing bits of it again if someone does not do it first. This is an encyclopaedia, this page is too big, remove it to separate pages and leave brief summaries here.
originally
96,706 in January 2011, it was
233,510 by June, I reduced it to
135,542 in June, leaving a note to please start to move to separate sections, and it is back up to
151,176 now.
It has to stop. Start splitting it off into separate articles, I suggest taking each section to a new page. Chaosdruid (talk) 00:46, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Although I have not done any major edits to page since many months, however, as a genuine issue raised by User Chaaosdruid, I have tried to do a major clean up. Jethwarp (talk) 06:30, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
I have (so far) knocked about 25% off the size of the article. There is more to come.

Please be aware that publications by caste/community organisations - such as a samaj - are not considered to be reliable sources. They are advocacy groups and therefore have a vested interest; they often resort to puffery; their sources are usually primary or unstated; and their authors are rarely any more qualified to assess primary sources than we are. And whilst on the subject of primary sources, we do not usually use legal documents (court rulings etc) on Wikipedia.

A consequence of the numerous source removals, which are currently replaced by citation requests, is that the article is almost certainly going to end up being a fraction of its current length. Sure, I will try to do some sourcing myself but the multitude of community names, the manner in which those names are sometimes used by other distinct communities, etc is going to make this a difficult one. To be honest, I am not even sure that the article is correctly titled, per WP:COMMONNAME but we will find out in due course.

Please do not reinstate the content without discussion and please do remember that we are an encyclopedia - if you want the freedom to publish your research as you choose then Wikipedia is not the place to do it. - Sitush (talk) 20:48, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Lead section

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The lead says that the KGK are a branch of the Kadia Kshatriya or Gurjar Kshatriyas. I've just clicked on those links and am now even more confused. My first thought was the one redirected to the other, my second thought was that there is uncertainty as to which community it is that they are a branch. But it appears that those two articles, although separate, are referring to the same community. In other words, those articles should be merged. Although a merge discussion is incorrectly placed here, can anyone confirm/deny that the two are the same thing. Either the statement in this article needs fixing or those two articles are synonymous. - Sitush (talk) 23:53, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Rajput or Kshatriya

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Can we make our minds up, please? The article says "Kutch Gurjar Kshatriyas are a group of Rajput, or Kshatriya clans, who migrated from Rajasthan in early 7th century AD". Let's get this straight: Kshatriya is a varna and Rajput is a caste. The two are different things and therefore "or" cannot be correct. - Sitush (talk) 23:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

COMMONNAME, and the plethora of redundant Kadia/Mistri articles

Latest comment: 12 years ago15 comments3 people in discussion
Are we taking any bets on what will eventually turn out to be the WP:COMMONNAME for this page? I'm betting Kadia (caste) or Mistri (caste), based partially on this utterly non-authoritative Gyan book which at least gives some interesting clues about common synonyms. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:48, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
I would rather trim it first and then determine where we go from what is left. My guess is that there will not be much at all because this appears to be mostly trivial, WP:OR and WP:SYNTHESIS. I'd usually give cite requests a fair few months to be fulfilled before I delete (after trying to source myself, of course) but in this instance I am inclined to give them just a fortnight or so. The mess has been around for a long time, the major contributor is active and there have been past attempts to clean it up. Some time in May, anything that is unsourced will be gone. - Sitush (talk) 14:03, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Thing is with that, might not a massive Merge aforehand make some sense? I haven't even explored in-depth, but it appears that Kadia (community), Kutch Gurjar Kshatriyas, Kadia Kumbhar, Mistri caste (and to a lesser degree Mistri), Kadia kshatriyas , Mistry (surname), etc. are all basically covering the same occupational caste.
Jethwarp, you've worked on a lot of these articles; do you have a strong argument for why there should be so many different articles covering what appears to be the same group? If there are legitimate subsets thereof, could they not be covered in one blanket article, with subsections pointing out some internal distinctions? There's also a whole lot of unsourced or sketchily-sourced material in all of these, so once the unsat material and the redundancies are trimmed I imagine we'd have an article of manageable size with some decent cites. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Kadia kshatriyas explicitly identifies this title as a synonym, and after cleanup there are only one or two refs left. Moving the tiny snippets of okay-ish content here for incorporation/merge:

  • They are group of different Kshatriya --- Gujarat, Part 1 By Kumar Suresh Singh, Rajendra Behari Lal, Anthropological Survey of India. 2003. p. 561.

Going now to redirect to this article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:14, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

That redirect will need to be changed in due course. There are almost no sources at GBooks for either KGK or Kadia kshatriya, if you exclude the mirrored content. As I said above, I am increasingly of the opinion that this is some sort of pet project and has little real substance other than self-definition by a group of involved people (ie: the KGK Samaj). - Sitush (talk) 15:27, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, it was just a short-term redirect to get some consolidation here. I'm not totally clear as to the distinction between Kadia and Mistri (they may well rate separate articles), nor whether it's worth discussing Mistri as a technical term separately from Mistri caste and Mistri surname. Kadia Kumbhar appears to be at least somewhat of a separate entity though. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
One snippet view source suggests that Kadia Kumbhar consisted of only 41 people around 1939 and that it was a self-definition that did not appear prior to the 1931 census (the usual sanskritisation fumbling, in other words). I'll try to find that one again, but more worrying is that this is yet another poorly sourced and seemingly pretty much unsourceable "kshatriya"-based article. The varna claim itself has no support and could well be the usual puffery. - Sitush (talk) 15:39, 13 April 2012 (UTC)


I agree there is lot confusion for a layman between terms Kadia, Kadia Kshatriyas, Gurjar Kshatriyas, Mistri, etc and lack of reliable sources which are acceptable to Wikipedia. Now one source which may be acceptable [[5] PEOPLE OF INDIA, GUJARAT PART 1 VOLUME XXII mentions Kadia as Kshatriyas.

As I belong to Gujarat, although I no longer stay in Gujarat. I am aware that there are at least three groups among Kadias : 1. Muslim and among Hindus again one Kshatriya and another Kumbhar.

Again Kadia Kshatriyas often call themselves Gurjar Kshatriyas. There are two segregation among them on basis of their regional distribution : Kadia Kshatriyas ( living in Saurashtra region of Gujarat ) another living in Kutch region. Now those living in Kutch are also called Mistris as a caste also. Again Suthar community is also called Mistry in Gujarat. I had earlier stumbled upon a PDF document mentioning this by some department of Govt of India. I am trying to locate it again. Meanwhile, I wish to say most of recorded history or mention of this community is in Gujarati language and online citation are difficult to find. Though there were some links to PDF formats of this Gujarati books of 1890/1920s available but I find the links have been removed probably because they were provided by KGK community websites.

And before I close MatthewVanitas & Sitush you are all much experienced and have been doing a great job on Wikipedia especially on cleaning caste related article and POVs. I am a silent admirer of your works and would leave it upon your good judgement. Regards & Thanks.Jethwarp (talk) 16:10, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

The systemic bias issue regarding sources did strike me as a likely scenario. However, when we hit a situation whereby there is virtually nothing written in English and yet a series of articles are as detailed as this, I feel that questions need to be asked. It is pretty unusual, especially if this community was as important to the development of infrastructure during the Raj etc as is claimed. - Sitush (talk) 16:16, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm certainly sympathetic (on a personal level) to concerns of vital bits of history not sufficiently covered by historians, to concerns that Brahmins or other highly-placed figures had undue influence in shaping "academic consensus" in the West and thus suppressed subaltern narratives, and also just to concerns that there are plenty of good materials that are just not available online or in English. However, we have to draw a line somewhere, again lest the "Japanese Viking Association" fill a page with their own personal opinions, cite it to the JVA, and basically use Wiki as a vehicle of promoting their personal narratives. Wiki has specific standards for Reliable Sources and Neutrality, and if we chuck that out the window it all goes to pieces.
I'd love to see some in-depth studies of the people who call themselves KGK, and some scholarly examinations of how the community's narrative is supported or contradicted by old British railway records, legal testimonies, narratives of other communities, commentaries by Indian elite scholars, etc. However, failing having those on hand, we have to trim the articles down to that which we can support with available materials. MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Jethwarp, gBooks won't let me look at that individual page of PEOPLE OF INDIA, GUJARAT PART 1 VOLUME XXII; can you quote for us exactly what it says about the Kadia and their Kshatriya identity? I can't help but notice that the highlighted bars on my blank "not for viewing" page happen to be in separate portions of the page, vice one word next to the other... MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:34, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
The following lines are mentioned in the book PEOPLE OF INDIA, GUJARAT PART 1 VOLUME XXII about Kadia and Kshatriya status.

The Kadia community has exogamous ataks (clans) which are equal to their status. The clans are named after dead warriors who are looked upon as gods. Solanki, Chaora, Tank, Parmer, Chowhan, Maru, Varu, Waghela, Chotalia, Gohel, Bagera, Wasani, Rathor, Kacha, Yadav etc are some of the clan names. The clan tank has division, viz., again Mewara tank, chitora tank and Bajania tank.

The community is well aware about its varna status and regcognize itself as Kshatriya in the four fold varna system. This self perception is reciprocated by other communities.

As you will notice most of these are Rajput / Kshatriya surnames for example :- Solanki, Chaura i.e. Chawda, Tank i.e. Taunk, Parmar, Chowhan i.e Chauhan, Maru, Varu, Chotalia, Gohel i.e. Gohil, Wasani, Bagera / Waghela i.e. Vaghela, Wasani, Rathor, Kacha - a branch of Chauhan, Yadav etc.

Basically, I am fan of railway and its history and my this passion about railways history led me to buy and study the books mostly in Gujarati published in various decades of last century throwing light on building of early rail lines and this communities participation on it. Jethwarp (talk) 17:19, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

People of India comprises little that is new but they do not always attribute well. The books are mostly compilations of earlier Raj works & so it might be worth checking out whatever sources they list at the end of that particular page, section or chapter. Jethwarp, me also, although my interest is confined mainly to the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway. - Sitush (talk) 17:29, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
I agree with u, Sitush. It is past 11 pm in India and I may as well retire for the day. GnJethwarp (talk) 17:43, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Coupla things; thought the PoI bit is interesting, it dodges and weaves like a boxer as to actually defining the Kadia as Kshatriya. Note it calls it a "self-perception", and the "reciprocation" bit sounds a lot like "I'll say I believe you're a Kshatriya if you'll vouch for me." Not trying to be difficult, just saying it's an uncommonly vague way to phrase it, and certainly doesn't sound definitive. So far as the last-names issue, glancing at a few of those names I'm noticing most of their articles claiming Rajput status are awfully uncited/vague/POV. And for the Tanks, I've written on them before, and they're another working-class caste (like the Mair caste) with suspect Rajput ties: "E. A. H. Blunt noted in 1931 that the Mair and Tank claims to Kshatriya status had never been "satisfactorily proved", but allowed that some Sonar sub-castes "may well be of Kshatriya descent", taking as evidence the high social status of goldsmiths."
The issue of Indian castes integrating into a new technology (railway work) is certainly fascinating. The issue is simply that your independent work is interesting Original Research, but not yet an established secondary source. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:41, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Kutch Gurjar Kashtriya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:47, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kutch Gurjar Kashtriya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kutch Gurjar Kashtriya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:25, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kutch Gurjar Kashtriya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:46, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kutch_Gurjar_Kshatriya/Archive_1&oldid=1183704676"