Talk:Shivaji/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Too much objectionable Content in Shivaji Maharaj's Wikipedia page

MidouBan007 (talk) 12:49, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Wiki helpdesk,

I am unable to reach you. So writing here. There is too much objectionable content written about our Shivaji Maharaj on your page. This page is getting frequently edited by people of some different faith who might be trying to malign the image of Maharaj. Shivaji Maharaj is a God-Level historic role model for hindus. Many times words like 'bribe, treachery, retreat' are used to malign his image here.

I request to review this entire article on Our respected Shivaji Maharaj so as to avoid any further potential controversy.

Please remove the entire paragraph of "Conflict with Bijapur" where the editor has written foul words like bribe for maharaj's first military action. Kindly replace with below:-

"In 1645, at the age of 16, Shivaji carried out his first military action by attacking and capturing Torna Fort of the Bijapur kingdom. By 1647 he had captured Kondana and Rajgad forts and had control of much of the southern Pune region. By 1654 Shivaji had captured forts in the Western Ghats and along the Konkan coast. In a bid to contain Shivaji, Adilshah imprisoned Shivaji's father in 1648–49 and sent an army led by Farradkhan against Shahji's other son Sambhaji at Bangalore, and another army led by Fattekhan against Shivaji at Purandhar. Both Bhonsle brothers defeated the invading armies. Shivaji petitioned Emperor Shahjahan's son, Dara Shikoh, who was governor of Deccan, pledging his loyalty to the Mughals to seek his support in securing the release of his father. The Mughals recognised Shivaji as a Mughal sardar and pressured Adilshah to release Shahaji. In return Shivaji had to cede a fort and Sambhaji had to cede Bangalore city and a fort to Adilshah."

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 14:18, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2020

103.106.136.21 (talk) 14:05, 17 February 2020 (UTC) Instead of "Shivaji" word use "Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj" and Instead of "Jijabai" word use "Rajmata Jijabai"

Please see WP:HONORIFIC. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 15:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Changing Name

Please change the name from "Shivaji" to Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj because a great emperor cannot be called or written with only one word due to respect reason Rohitshelar7 (talk) 19:08, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Please see WP:HONORIFIC. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:14, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Rohitshelar7, even a University named after him is just called Shivaji University. It shows that until recently attaching prefix and suffix with Shivaji's name was not a common practice. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 22:42, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

The Mumbai airport is not merely called 'Shivaji airport'. Correct honorific must be used for Shivaji maharaj in this page. --Nimrodindia (talk) 15:40, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Highly misleading and hurting comments on excerpt on Chatrapati Sambhaji maharj

Excerpt on Chatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj is utterly wrong in depicting him as irresponsible with unruly behaviour. He was a godman and it was all a political plan to get him in instilled in mughal to defeat them as planned by father son duo less known to anybody else due to feuds. also please address him as Chatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. Please correct that, its highly misleading and hurts sentiments of maharashtrian community. Pratikdindorkar (talk) 05:06, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Please read our policies on defining neutral content, not censoring our content, and not using honorific titles. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:09, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Removed content

The state as Shivaji founded it was a Maratha kingdom comprising about 4.1% of the subcontinent at the time he died, but over time it was to increase in size and heterogeneity, and by the time of the Peshwas in the early 18th century the Marathas were dominant across the northern and central regions of the Indian subcontinent.

More removed content

Shivaji was a devout Hindu, but respected all religions within the region. Shivaji had great respect for other contemporary saints, especially Samarth Ramdas, to whom he gave the fort of Parali, later renamed as Sajjangad. Among the various poems written on Shivaji, Ramdas' Shivastuti ("Praise of King Shivaji") is the most famous. Shivaji's son Sambhaji later built a samadhi for Ramdas on Sajjangad upon the latter's death. Samarth Ramdas had also written a letter to Sambhaji guiding him on what to do and what not to do after death of Shivaji. Shivaji applied a humane and liberal policy to the women of his state. Kafi Khan, the Mughal historian, and Francois Bernier, a French traveller, spoke highly of his religious policy. He also brought converts like Netaji Palkar and Bajaji back into Hinduism.

More

By ear's end he besieged Belgaum and Vayem Rayim in modern-day northern Karnataka.

More

Rabindranath Tagore wrote in his famous poem "Shivaji":

In what far-off country, upon what obscure day
I know not now,
Seated in the gloom of some Mahratta mountain-wood
O King Shivaji,
Lighting thy brow, like a lightning flash,
This thought descended,
"Into one virtuous rule, this divided broken distracted India,
I shall bind."

This article's name must have to change as Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. This is the official name of First emperor of Maratha Empire. His birth name is Shivaji Shahaji Bhosale. Maratha People & peoples of Maharashtra idolize Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. And he was a savior of Maratha peoples in 16 the century. Kundan Ravindra Dhayade (talk) 18:11, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Change article's name as Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. It is more appropriate. I think in British documents Britishers called Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj as Shivaji and it very disrespectful to call Great Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj just Shivaji. Kundan Ravindra Dhayade (talk) 18:13, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

More

Vivekananda agreed to preside over the festival in Bengal in 1901. He wrote about Shivaji:

Shivaji is one of the greatest national saviours who emancipated our society and our Hindu dharma when they were faced with the threat of total destruction. He was a peerless hero, a pious and God-fearing king and verily a manifestation of all the virtues of a born leader of men described in our ancient scriptures. He also embodied the deathless spirit of our land and stood as the light of hope for our future.

More

In time, even British commentators began to review their opinions; Field-Marshal Bernard Montgomery, in his History of Warfare (1983), while generally dismissive of the quality of generalship in the military history of the Indian subcontinent, makes an exception for Shivaji and Bajirao I. He says Shivaji had a "mastery of guerilla tactics" and was a "military genius".

More

When Shivaji went to Tanjore to fight his half-brother Venkoji (Ekoji I), he met the English at Madras (then known as Madraspatnam) on 3 October 1677 as stated in a plaque in the Kalikambal temple. The East India Company officials who looked after the fort at that time have recorded that Shivaji came up to the gates of Fort St. George and had sought the services of the English engineers but the request was politely turned down.

References

Have to add Shivaji Maharaj's full name in info box as Shivaji Shahaji Bhosale

Shivaji Maharaj have his birth name as Shivaji Shahaji Bhosale . So Why not it written in info box. Kundan Ravindra Dhayade (talk) 18:19, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

When did the tradition of having your father's name as your middle name start? Was it used during Shivaji's times? I am curious.Jonathansammy (talk) 18:43, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Name

It's Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj . It was the title given to him and we don't call him as Shivani. He is our Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. Title needs editing. Sris20 (talk) 03:36, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

I took agree that the title should be changed to Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj as well as throughout the article. WorldWikiAuthorOriginal (talk) 15:02, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

No, we don't put WP:HONORIFICS. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:54, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

But there are numerous articles on wikipedia with titles. The title of Chhatrapati is equvivalent to emperor as per the Wikipedia page linked. Also, according to WP:HONORIFICS, "Where an honorific is so commonly attached to a name that the name is rarely found in English reliable sources without it, it should be included". Chhatrapati is always attached to Shivaji whenever he is referred to in all Marathi historical literature. Of course the same is not in English literature from the time for obvious reasons of colonialism. Some examples from British royalty: Queen_Elizabeth_The_Queen_Mother and Queen Victoria contain their title. Does this mean those titles can be removed from the page header too ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.34.76 (talk) 04:05, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

@72.94.34.76: While those are interesting examples of exceptions, I would submit they don't violate WP:Honorifics because they're simply the easiest way to provide that individual a distinct name. Former British monarch Victoria simply isn't commonly referred to as "Victoria I", so choosing "Victoria (British queen)" was apparently decided to be less streamlined than Queen Victoria. Good rebuttal, but not a definitive one because the title "Shivaji" leaves no doubt to 99% of readers as to who we mean, in a way "Victoria" doesn't. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

We have historically had an extremely myopic attitude towards the British monarchy, that contradicts both common sense and our more general guidelines. That is not a reason to be similarly misguided here. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:13, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Add Full Name with Respected tittle CHHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ. WHY DONT U PUT ONLY Pratap in your Maharana pratap page. And just Mention Only Shivaji. Why? Change the Name Immediately.put full name with respected tittle. He is not University. He is not Airport as u said before and Comparing to Mumbai Airport and Shivaji University.He is Great Man who Served our Life for Safety of india from cruel Invenders. He is Great Great Maratha Warrior King and God For Us not Only in Maharashtra for all india. He is a Father of Indian Navy. He is Father of all Gorrilla War tactics for India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nealwikichavan (talk • contribs) 07:42, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Portrait

In my opinion, this image from commons is better suited for the main portrait. This image is also from the same time line and thus, is a reliable depiction (almost same if you compare). Current image (Shivaji's portrait (1680s) in the Rijksmuseum) is not terrible but the subject is oveershadowed by a giant border. Let me know if anybody has objections. I'll attempt this in few days if there are no replies here. Thanks. GreaterPonce665 ^(TALK) 17:34, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I have no problem with the change, but I think it's worth noting that if the large border is seen as an issue, cropping the existing image is always an option.
Alivardi (talk) 18:09, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, definitely. I also think the British Museum image is much crisper. GreaterPonce665 ^(TALK) 18:26, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2020

Please change the name as Shivaji Maharaj instead of only Shivaji. He is not only king but also God for us. So kindly request you to make changes. SayyadAmir (talk) 03:38, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. TheImaCow (talk) 06:24, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 June 2020

DEATH of Shivaji SHIVAJI WAS DIED OF POISON 2409:4073:2000:F791:8FB9:2258:BAD4:D977 (talk) 05:47, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. TheImaCow (talk) 05:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Name

Name has written wrong way it should be Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. He is our king you can't write it just Shivaji. Change it Jeeetug (talk) 19:07, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Please see the various discussion points above on this page. --regentspark (comment) 19:19, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2020

2409:4042:18:E101:B826:88FF:FE2E:BF20 (talk) 10:01, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

I want to edit the name Shivaji to " Chattrapati Shivaji Maharaj"

 Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 13:40, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2020

Name Change from Shivaji to Chattrapatti Shivaji 2405:204:214:3233:A1C2:75C:151A:E (talk) 08:08, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. TheImaCow (talk) 08:43, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

(Honorific edit requests)

Edit name chatrapati shivaji maharaj every where in the content Maharaj 1115 (talk) 16:36, 21 November 2019 (UTC) Pawan2207 (talk) 14:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Change the name to shivaji maharaj Wasim beg (talk) 17:57, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

The title should be changed to 'Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj' as he resembles pride of millions of people in India. PrasadRaje Bhopale (talk) 06:42, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

It should be done Nitinkchavan (talk) 19:14, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Change the name with Chatrapathi Shivaji Maharaj Iamgroot2410 (talk) 14:29, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@Iamgroot2410: Not done, see WP:Honorifics. GreaterPonce665 ^(TALK) 16:07, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@Nitinkchavan: Not done, see WP:Honorifics. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes it should be Changed to Add honorifs i support it Sungpeshwe9 (talk) 04:18, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2020

Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj 103.84.82.114 (talk) 08:43, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

See MOS:HONORIFICS – Thjarkur (talk) 09:11, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 June 2020

Sambhaji was not irresponsible heir but because of a internal politics it became complicated for him to be a new Chatrapati. 2402:3A80:C8F:B847:8B3D:B034:7E0D:DB68 (talk) 00:46, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not doneUnclear what change your are seeking. --regentspark (comment) 01:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Rafiq Zakaria book

The book by Rafiq Zakaria "Communal Rage in Secular India" is used as a reference book for article on chatrapati shivaji. It can not be used as a reference book because Rafiq Zakaria was a politician and not a historian. He wrote his thoughts in the book and not actual history. So please grant me the permission to remove the book name from bibliography section. Thankyou! Mahusha (talk) 06:23, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Zakaria was indeed a historian, with a PhD in the History of South Asia. The book appears to be a very good source; unfortunately you replaced the citations using that book with other sources without providing any reason, back in February. Could you explain your reasoning behind this series of edits? --bonadea contributions talk 12:24, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Oh, you are comparing the great historian G.S Sardesai with Rafiq Zakaria. Please take some information, who was G.S sardesai. He was the man who first wrote his book A new History of Marathas by examining 8000 contemporary documents and references. His books are considered as general reference to Maratha History. I will agree Rafiq Zakaria is a historian, but have he examined this much documents about "Maratha History". The answer will be NO. I think we should give more importance to Maratha Historians to this article, rather than Rafiq Zakaria. Please think of it. I am sure this article will be a good article if due importance is given to the main historians of Maratha History. Thankyou! Mahusha (talk) 04:50, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm still not sure why it was a good idea to change the source for a quote from one to the other, when the content is essentially the same – and looking at your edits, there are actually subtle but very important changes in content as well. The gist of the section used to be that Shivaji was tolerant towards other religions than his own, giving his treatment of Muslims as a prominent example, but after your edits, it seems to be all about the treatment of non-muslims. Information about Shivaji's inclusion of Muslims in his military has been removed entirely, even though it was sourced, which I can't understand at all. Pinging Sitush for input on this issue. My gut feeling says that a scholarly work from 1946 (Sardesai's New History of the Marathas: Shivaji and his line) should not be used in preference to a scholarly work from 2002 (Zakaria's Communal Rage In Secular India), but there may be other considerations as well. In any case, please do not remove Zakaria from the list of references just yet.

Looking at the sources used, it might be worthwhile to update the Cambridge History of India (Haig) references to The New Cambridge History of India and double-check the information supported by those referencs. Haig's edition is from the 1930s, so should not be relied on too much for that reason, while the new edition is quite recent. I see that the library at the campus where I work has the newer book, so I could get hold of it there, unless someone else has quicker access to it (I'm not sure when I'll next be on campus). --bonadea contributions talk 11:05, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Sardesai is (technically) from the British Raj era and we try to avoid that stuff. Then again, I think he did a revised version of the Marathas book in the 1950s: still dated but it might scrape through for matters where he and more recent sources disagree (ie: we could show both opinions per WP:NPOV). Against that possibility, I think he often worked in retirement with sponsorship of the government, which is definitely going to taint the output. Hagiography etc is a feature of Indian historical writing and the immediate post-independence years were a period when they were trying to assert a glorious new identity.

As a rule, we prefer modern academics and we assume they have consulted the writings and ideas of any relevant earlier historians. If Sardesai was indeed a "Marathan historian" in the sense of being a Maratha himself, then that's also a little dodgy. As a comparison, there are numerous historians of the UK who were in their day considered to be "great" at what they did - Arnold Toynbee springs to mind - but are now thought to be of little merit. Mahusa, is there anything specific that you consider to be poor regarding Zakaria's book? Please bear in mind that Indian historians of a certain era tended to really glorify their subjects and we know that Shivaji has come in for that treatment.

Regarding the New Cambridge, I think it is a completely different work from the 1930s series: different organisation, focus etc. There may be difficulties reconciling the two series for statements that we make here, although it is certainly worth checking. The old series, in any event, really could do with being replaced by alternate sources. - Sitush (talk) 13:10, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Can you please explain why these selected lines "Verily, Islam and Hinduism are terms of contrast. They are used by the true Divine Painter for blending the colours and filling in the outlines. If it is a mosque, the call to prayer is chanted in remembrance of God. If it is a temple, the bells are rung in yearning for God alone" were taken from the letter written by Shivaji Maharaj and then giving the reference of book by Zakaria. Yes the book by GS sardesai is of 1946 and book by Zakaria is of 2002, but facts are facts, and they are sancrosanct. It was a letter written by Shivaji Maharaj to Aurangzeb on the issue of Jizya on Hindus. But to show him secular, selected lines are taken from his letter. It is not at all needed to do this to show him secular. Whether the book is written in 1946 or in 2002 but does the content written in the letter will change?? Mahusha (talk) 12:14, 16 July 2020 (UTC)SitushBonadea

Sitush I am not against Zakaria, I am against the selective picking of information to suit someone's agenda. Mahusha (talk) 13:22, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Without comment on the content of letter, or how it is represented in the article, note that we don't care what the letter says. We only look at interpretations that reliable sources make of that content. In other words, what Zakaria says (or Sardesai, if acceptable) is what should go in the article. --regentspark (comment) 13:41, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks! Mahusha (talk) 14:00, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Citations in Lead

I have removed the Maintanance tags (Citation needed and Failed verification) from he lead. The Lead serves as an introduction to the article and is a summary of most important contents. The citation for "the chhatrapati (emperor)" sentence can be found in Corronatation section and for Marathi language, it's been cited in Promotion of Marathi and Sanskrit section. Finally, the failed varification tag also seems confusing, as the cited source discusses exactly what the text in question says. Santoshdts ^[TalkToMe] 18:49, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Native languages revived by Shivaji

Mention that Marathi and Sanskrit are the native languages of the region and Persian is a foreign language brought by the invaders. Shivaji revived the language of the populace. -Raj — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.175.100.183 (talk) 13:09, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2020

2401:4900:519E:8626:CE5E:1965:6DD7:23B4 (talk) 17:08, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Please make this chhatrpati Shivaji Maharaj not shivaji

 Not done Not clear what "this" refers to.--RegentsPark (comment) 17:39, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2020

please update the title from Shivaji to Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. Hareshtupe123 (talk) 17:14, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done See WP:HONORIFICS--RegentsPark (comment) 17:40, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 September 2020

Hey I request you to please change the name "Shivaji" to "Shree Chattrapati Shivaji Maharaj" as he was a great king and referring him just Shivaji is considered disrespectful like all other kings Shree Chattrapati Shivaji Maharaj should be referred with due respect and titles he had, for example Maharana pratap is reffered as maharana pratap on wikipedia and not just pratap. Your kind cooperation into the issue would be highly solicited. Thank you 2409:4042:691:34F3:D0FB:E665:21B9:E2CF (talk) 09:17, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Asked and answered above. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 13:54, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

To change name

Change name from Shivaji Bhosale to Chatrapati Shivaji Bhosale and there is mistake Shivaji Bhosale 1 not I. Dnyanesh M. Patil (talk) 05:36, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Dnyanesh M. Patil, please read the wikipedia policy on adding honour titles first. Signed, Field Marshal Aryan (talk) 23:04, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Write the name of the great king with honor as "Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj". Mayurnikam9696 (talk) 15:21, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Kindly change ur page title with proper respect to Chhatrapati shivaji Mahararaj. Amitsonmale (talk) 14:09, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Not shivaji this is Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaja Dkallale (talk) 06:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Write the name of the great king with honor as "Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj". Dkallale (talk) 06:57, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Plz edit name Chhatrapati shivaji maharaj Tj dsl (talk) 12:19, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Plz edit it to chhatrapati Shivaji maharaj Nsyk44 (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Please correct the name it's CHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ Mrhulk79 (talk) 05:43, 13 December 2020 (UTC) Please correct the Surname it's not Bhonsle its Bhosale — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shiva kale7575 (talk • contribs) 13:19, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2020

Please change the title of the page to "Chattrapati Shivaji Maharaj" Pankajgudhekar (talk) 08:46, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Already answered above, see WP:HONORIFICS. – Thjarkur (talk) 09:10, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 November 2020

Starting of this page from the name of shivaji maharaj But there is one mistake in spelling of shivaji maharaj that is Shivaji Bhosale not a Shivaji Bhonsale please correct it as soon as possible. Gunga Patil (talk) 04:17, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

@Gunga Patil: Not done for now: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. -ink&fables «talk» 11:17, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2020

Name of this page should be Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj instead of just Shivaji. He was the Chatrapati not just any other nizam or small town nawab. Kindly do the needful. Ubhe6328 (talk) 06:59, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 10:36, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2020

Make the title of the page "Chattrapati Shivaji", the official title of the Maratha king. Inhuman2 (talk) 08:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Seagull123 Φ 12:25, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

ADD "MAHARAJ" SUFFIX TO THE TITLE HITENDRA1406 (talk) 17:11, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2021

Abhinavrt29 (talk) 10:13, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. 54nd60x (talk) 13:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Indian warrior-King should be Indian Emperor

Chattrapati Shivaji Maharaj was an Indian Emperor. The first line should be changed to reflect that. Chattrapati means Emperor. Check this page for details - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chhatrapati — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooperhewitt (talk • contribs) 03:32, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Maratha empire wasn’t at its peak during Shivaji ChandlerMinh (talk) 08:10, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2021

you written only shivaji and it is without special designation Chhatrapati. Because in Maharashtra he is our God no one can disrespect him like written this in whole country please correct it as soon as possible. Otherwise we will ban our self for using Wikipedia. 2409:4042:89F:FDF6:75C1:8A9E:94F3:7EEE (talk) 18:00, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per WP:HON GreaterPonce665 ^(TALK) 18:16, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2021

PLEASE CONVERT THE ONLY SHIVAJI NAME TO SHIVAJI MAHARAJ 203.194.99.133 (talk) 13:54, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per WP:HON GreaterPonce665 ^(TALK) 14:42, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 February 2021

I requested you to write the name as CHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ instead of shivaji. He is the biggest ruler of india. Here in india we worship him like god.please don't insult him by just writing his half name. I am requesting you to do it immediately 103.236.200.28 (talk) 04:39, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Please check the notice at the top of the page which begins "Note on the article title". Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 08:41, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 February 2021 (2)

27.106.11.237 (talk) 04:43, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Please mention Maharaj after the name.

 Not done: Please check the notice at the top of the page which begins "Note on the article title". Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 08:41, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 February 2021

Chattrapati Shivaji Maharaj is Considered as the Father of Akhand Hindustan as beacuse of him the Hindus survived in Hindustan(India) during Mughal period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.64.208.8 (talk) 19:15, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Not done: It's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Reactivate your request by setting the answered parameter in the {{edit semi-protected}} template back to no. Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 08:47, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Untitled

ADD "MAHARAJ" SUFFIX TO THE TITLE HITENDRA1406 (talk) 17:11, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2021

The surname of shivaji is bhosle,not bhonsale 2409:4042:41C:9561:B35A:1878:A751:649C (talk) 05:28, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Bestagon ⬡ 16:31, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Adding the information by Jawaharlal Nehru as given in introduction of History class 4th Maharashtra board textbook.

"Shivaji Maharaj did not belong to Maharashtra alone; he belonged to the whole Indian nation. Shivaji Maharaj was not an ambitious ruler anxious to establish a kingdom for himself but a patriot inspired by a vision and political ideas derived from the teachings of the ancient philosophers. He studied the merits and faults of the systems of administration in kingdoms existing at the time and determined his own policies and administration in the light of that knowledge. A devout Hindu, he was tolerant of other religions and established a number of endowments for maintaining sacred places belonging to them. As a general he was undoubtedly one of the greatest in Indian history ; he saw the need for and raised a navy to guard his coastline and to fight against the British and the Dutch. Pratapgad Fort built in 1656 stands today a monument to his military genius. Shri Shivaji is a symbol of many. virtues, more especially of love of country." - JAWAHARLAL NEHRU U1472580369 (talk) 17:26, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

If this is supossed to be an edit request: Not done: It's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. GreaterPonce665 ^(TALK) 18:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2021

I would like to propose a more detailed account of the events regarding the conflicts between 1670-72. The key engagement of Salher in 1671, which actually turned the tide has not been mentioned. The Maratha army in this battle was not led by Shivaji personally, but rather by his Peshwa Moropant Pingle and his Sarnoubat (General of the Cavalry) Prataprao Gujjar. In brief, the events leading to this battle were instigated by the Mughal setbacks, which prompted Emperor Aurangzeb to send fresh reinforcements to bring Shivaji to heel. The Mughal defeats (Loss of Forts, Sack of Surat and Battle of Vani Dindori) in 1670 were largely due to the mutual jealousies and suspicions between the Mughal commanders in the Deccan, to this end Aurangzeb sent the veteran General Mahabat Khan as the acting Commander, as well as commanded Bahadur Khan of Gujarat to go to the aid of Mahabat Khan with his army. Far from being a passive spectator, Emperor Aurangzeb grasped the situation and immediately acted to alter and reconfigure the disposition of his armies in the Deccan. The subsequent defeat at Salher and the loss of Baglan was more down to the tactical inadequacy and the lack of coordination between the Mughal forces, as while the Mughal commanders tried to pressurize Pune, the Baglan region was left under a single Mughal army, which was then set upon by a pincer attack by the forces of Moropant Pingle and Prataprao Gujjar. Diler Khan who was the Commander in charge of besieging Salher, a very important Maratha fort in Baglan, anticipated the oncoming Maratha attack. He in turn dispatched Ilkhas Khan to repel the Maratha offence. Prataprao Gujjar engaged Ilkhas Khan, and then retreated, luring Ilkhas Khan. After some time of this pursuit, Prataprao rallied and reorganized his contingent and counter charged Ilkhas Khan. At the same time Peshwa Moropant Pingle also arrived and joined the fight. Ilkhas Khan was driven back with losses, and though Diler Khan sent him some reinforcements, against the combined arms of Moropant and Prataprao, he was defeated and captured. Diler Khan was now overwhelmed by the Marathas, and thus was forced to flee, leaving behind his entire camp, baggage and supplies. The collapse of the Baglan front unraveled the Mughal plans to continue their offensive. The rest of the Mughal armies, now had to retreat to stem the breakthrough, and were forced to retreat, as a large army had been lost, and they could no longer contain the Maratha advantage.

Here I would also like to correct the point about the Pashtun rebellion, that it actually occurred in 1672, not 1670. It was because of this rebellion that the Mughals were not able to mount a counter attack after their defeat at Salher and the loss of Baglan. Hence, the mistake in the chronology which is there in the article currently may confuse the readers from a strategic point of view, as to why was the rest of the Deccan forces of the Mughals were not deployed to counter-attack and retake the lands lost, especially as in 1674 the Maratha State was engaged against Bijapur Sultanate, which had earlier been commanded by the Mughals to coordinate from the south with their own attacks from the north but had not done so to any substantial extent.

In effect there are 2 specific sections which I would like to change and expand in 'Reconquest' section of the Article, from 'Peace Between Shivaji' to 'In September 1671' of the section. The correct chronology of the Pashtun rebellions and the Baglan campaign that culminated in the Battle of Salher are missing, and as such I would like to add them. I have cited from the book 'Shivaji and His Times by Jadunath Sarkar.

I believe that these strategic and tactical aspects will better help the readers to appreciate both Shivaji and his achievements from a more grounded and informed point of view. Mahasadhanika (talk) 04:17, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Melmann 09:40, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2021

Please change name "Shivaji" to "Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj" everywhere in whole page. 103.148.120.124 (talk) 09:18, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Lone Warrior 007 (talk) 12:34, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Apeal for full protection of this page

Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj is a great leader in the Indian history and has an important place in our lives as many people are influenced by him and therefore information regarding him should be reliable and fully filtered.Therefore I urge that it should be fully protected so that no wrong information about him would be conveyed through wikipedia. Jesbd....shdjx (talk) 06:51, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

To editor Jesbd....shdjx: requests for increases to the page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 12:53, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Resumption of Hostilities with the Mughal Empire (1670-1672)

By early Januray in 1670, Shivaji felt confident enough to begin the reconquest of his lost territories . By late 1669 Aurangzeb was alerted by the desertions of some of his Maratha Captains back to Shivaji, due to this he sent Daud Khan to defend Khandesh and assist Prince Muazzam, who was posted as Viceroy in the Deccan at the time . Shivaji sent his Maratha bands to raid and plunder Mughal territories, while several other Maratha Captains, aided by the local Mavles and Kolis, began attacking and besieging the many hill forts in the region, mostly using stratagems and stealth to win, the capture of Kondhana, later named Sinhagad, by Tanaji, a Captain of Shivaji, on 4th February 1670 being a prime example. Important strategic forts such as Purandar and Mahuli also fell to the Marathas, though not without losses . The Mughal forces, nominally under the command of Prince Muazzam, had been languid in their defense of their forts, which were both mostly undermanned and lacking in provisions, and were not sufficiently supported, with only Daud Khan actually marching to relieve and support them from enemy assaults, though his efforts alone were not enough. Where the Marathas could not take a fort, they immediately withdrew and plundered the other undefended Mughal districts. Left mostly to their own devices, most Mughal Qilledars and Faujdars fled or resigned their posts.

Meanwhile the Mughal Central Command of the Deccan, Prince Muazzam and General Dilir Khan were locked in their quarrels. Neither had mobilized their forces efficiently to catch up with the more mobile Maratha bands, thus they were unable to either supply or militarily support their forts and outposts. Further there were suspicions regarding Prince Muazzam's relations with Shivaji, both had been on very cordial terms prior to the breakout of hostilities. Taking advantage of theses internal dissentions, Shivaji was able to rapidly take several forts and raid many Mughal districts. In early October, Shivaji led some 15000 men, both Cavalry and Infantry, to sack Surat, attacking the city on 3rd October. . However, unlike his first raid on Surat, this time Shivaji did not rely on speed or stealth to make a quick dash, rather the approach was more stately, that of a conquering army. The Imperial forces, despite having been reinforced by Bahadur Khan and his 5000 troops earlier in the year, had only 300 or less troops present in Surat at the time of this, Shivaji's advance had come unexpected despite earlier threats. As such the meagre garrison fled at the first sign of the Marathas. After 2 days of plundering and looting, on October 5th, finally Shivaji left the city and withdrew back to the Deccan .

As Shivaji descended to Baglan, General Daud Khan was sent to intercept and defeat him. On receiving the intelligence of Daud Khan's approach, Shivaji immediately prepared to impede the Mughal advance dividing his forces in 4 divisions. He tasked 3 of his divisions to attack the Mughals, and sent the 4th Division with the plunder back to his territory. The Maratha Horsemen engaged and 'hovered around the Imperial lines'. However, Daud Khan spotted the 4th Maratha Division with the plunder, and sent troops to pursue. Shivaji, who was accompanying this 4th division, immediately turned repelled this force by a strong charge. Throughout the day, several engagements were fought indecisively, however, the Mughals were unable to prevent the Marathas from withdrawing back with their plunder intact, consigning the entire battle as a failure for the Mughals . Several Mughal commanders were injured in this battle, and as such Mughal forces were subdued for a time, allowing the Maratha Peshwa Moropant Pingle to capture the fort of Trimbak in Nashik. However, Shivaji was not done yet, in December of 1670, he captured several forts in Baglan, and then personally led raids into Khandesh and Berar . While the imperial forces under Daud Khan had been recuperating, the rest of commanders proved too slow to catch the Maratha raiders and bring about any pitched battle where the Mughal power could be brought to bear.

In response to the Imperial forces' lack of effective coordination and defense against the rapid Maratha raiders and the second sack of Surat, Emperor Aurangzeb sent the veteran General Mahabat Khan with additional 40000 troops to take over command of the Mughal's Deccan forces . Countering the rampaging Maratha bands, Mahabat Khan appointed Daud Khan, the only General to have performed actively thus far, as his second in command, and sent him to drive out the Marathas from Baglan, a task which the latter performed admirably, rapidly marching and routing the plundering Maratha bands. Early in 1671, Shivaji personally led some 20000 troops to besiege and take the fort of Salher, an extremely important fort, the Mughal reinforcements under Daud Khan, despite that General's urgings, proved unable to relieve the siege in time. Meanwhile other Maratha divisions had been plundering Western Khandesh, Baglan and Berar. Daud Khan later was joined by Mahabat Khan himself, and both of them besieged the Ahivant fort in Baglan, which was taken, though mutual jealousies over the credit of the victory destroyed their effective relationship. After this as the monsoon season came, Mahabat Khan withdrew, and the Imperial operations were restricted greatly, further many men fell victim to attrition by lack of suppliers or pestilence in the rains .

Dissatisfied by the lack success and the subsequent lack of activity, Emperor Aurangzeb sent General Dilir Khan, and commanded General Bahadur Khan from Gujarat to assist Mahabat Khan. As such with fresh reinforcements and commanders at his disposal, Mahabat Khan resumed the Mughal offence. Mahabat Khan and his lieutenants Dilir Khan and Bahadur Khan, left Ahmednagar to advance against the Marathas. By the end of December of 1671, Dilir Khan had led a mobile division to capture the Puna town, meanwhile Bahadur Khan took Supa, and Ilkhas Khan was besieging Salher in Baglan . In response, Shivaji gathered a large army at Mahad, opposing the Mughals in the Puna District. Shivaji sent 2000 horsemen to raid Dilir Khan' camp, but these were charged down and cut to pieces by the Mughals. Shivaji then commanded Peshwa Moropant Pingle and General Prataprao Gujjar, with 15000 and 5000 troops respectively, to relieve the siege of Salher and attack Diler Khan. The two Commanders moved separately to Salher, looking to catch the enemy in a pincer. Prataprao Gujjar's advance was opposed by Ilkhas Khan, who attacked the former's contingent near Salher. Prataprao Gujjar retreated in the face of the Mughal charge, leading the enemy in a pursuit. But as the Mughal pursuit became more disorganized, Prataprao Gujjar rallied his horsemen and counter charged the Mughals. At this juncture, Moropant Pingle also arrived with his 15000 and attacked the Mughals. The combined arms of Moropant Pingle and Prataprao Gujjar led to the complete destruction of Mughal army at Salher. Ilkhas Khan's defeat at Salher turned the tide of the war, forcing back the Mughal advance from Puna district . Subsequent to the Battle at Salher, Moropant Pingle advanced and took the fort of Mulher and provisioned several Maratha forts in the area before retreating back to Konkan. The Mughal Commanders were forced back to Ahmednagar as another Mughal campaign failed to discomfit the Maratha holdings or restore the imperial authority in the region.

Any possibility for a further Mughal offence was soon extinct as the Satnami and Pashtun rebellions forced the Mughal Commanders back to north, giving Shivaji the space and time to be able to move against the Koli country and the Bijapur Sultanate, the latter had taken much of the southern territories of Shivaji, especially Panhala. 122.177.164.92 (talk) 06:36, 4 April 2021 (UTC)Mahasadhanika

References

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2021

Please replace 'Shivaji' by 'Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj' to give him proper respect which he deserves. Ghatkar1 (talk) 20:22, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Please replace 'Shivaji' by 'Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj' to give him proper respect which he deserves. Ghatkar1 (talk) 20:24, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: MOS:HONORIFICS RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:41, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2021

chatrapati shivaji maharaj had 8 wives and only 5 are mentioned in this blog. 122.175.237.9 (talk) 04:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 22:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Name

Write full name as Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. Mr. Nakshatra (talk) 03:59, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, it is noted that is an alternate name. See the notice at the top of this talk page that goes into further detail in regards to WP:COMMONNAME etc. Fixing26 (talk) 17:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Physical Description of Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj

Shivaji Maharaj's face is beautiful and watery. His complexion is white like other Marathas. His eyes are sharp and his nose is long and fluffy. Shivaji Raje is active and excellent, he speaks very precisely and fast and he seems to be smiling while speaking. Maharaj's height was around 5 feet 6 inches and his weight was around 65 to 70 kg. Maharaj's body language The overall personality of the Maharaja was like a Bhavani sword to the waist and the extraordinary confidence that flowed from his face while walking. Kalpeshgaikwad96 (talk) 13:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Kalpeshgaikwad96: welcome to Wikipedia. I am not sure if you are requesting that the text above should be added to the article Shivaji, but I'm afraid it is not written in a neutral tone, so it can't be used in an encyclopedia article. --bonadea contributions talk 14:24, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Removal of controversy section

Generally, we include anything relevant about a notable historical figure, not just biographical events from their life. If you feel any of this material is not relevant, please explain here and get consensus. --RegentsPark (comment) 17:43, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

The Controversy section in the article does not reflect the aspects of life of character. Contents of the section are irrelevant since they try to sensationalise the political issue in the name of famous character. Also, it tries to defame the character by creating pseudo controversy around the character which is clearly a POV. It is evident from the contents of the section that whoever made this edit had an ill agenda in his/her mind.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 256Drg (talk • contribs) 01:44, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

The section is relevant in this article because it directly relates to Shivaji. It is written in a neutral tone and is well-sourced. The sources show that this is not a "pseudo controversy" but two separate incidents each of which sparked controversy. As for "whoever made this edit" – the section was not written by any one individual. --bonadea contributions talk 08:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 May 2021

Request for removal of incorrect information: "In 1667, the Portuguese Christians started to forcefully convert Hindus in Bardez. Shivaji quickly raided Bardez in which three Portuguese Catholic priests and a few Christians were killed and stopped the forceful conversion of Hindus.[141][142]"

Reasoning: Conversions in Bardez did not start in 1667. The Velhas Conquistas was already overwhelmingly Catholic by that year. Christianisation of Goa started with the Portuguese conquest of Goa in 1510. Conversions of Hindus in Bardez taluka started in 1555, when a Brahmin man, Mangappa Shenoy of Pilerne, became the first Hindu there to request conversion to Christianity and changed his name to Pero Ribeiro.

• Mascarenhas, Nascimento (6 August 2008), Establishing one's roots, Saligao Seranade, archived from the original on 24 December 2011, retrieved 15 April 2011 2402:3A80:CB8:A4E4:15D9:FA9F:D16F:3BAB (talk) 19:38, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The reference provided is not reliable and self-published Run n Fly (talk) 19:48, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Here's a reliable source that talks about mass conversions in Goa, including Bardez, taking place in the 1500s, more than a century before Shivaji's arrival: de Mendonça, Délio (2002). Conversions and citizenry: Goa under Portugal 1510–1610. Concept Publishing Company. ISBN 978-81-7022-960-5. page 4032402:3A80:C92:8964:18B0:F622:873C:DD5A (talk) 04:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2021

It should be stated in his introduction that Shivaji was a vassal of the Mughal Empire under Aurangzeb. This explains his beginnings 2.49.173.148 (talk) 17:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Please provide reliable sources and state the exact text you would like to insert.--RegentsPark (comment) 17:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Shivaji or Bajirao ?

Why photo of bajirao on the site of shivaji ??? any logic ?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.88 (talk) 18:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

It is a site of shivaji or bajirao ?

I think there is a separate page for bajirao , write whatever u want there , and bajirao or nanasaheb were not rulers during shahu's lifetime , after him peshawa became powerful till death of madhavrao , why you are unncessary creating confusion , dare to write truth if at all youare a scholar— Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.88 (talk) 18:19, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, there is a seperate page for him. However, he is somewhat relevant to the article and the image adds information and context to assist the reader. Fixing26 (talk) 10:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Not agreeing , do you to put aurangzeb image on Akbar article ? Please understand that it is article about shivaji maharaj , not maratha empire , there u put the image of bajirao or any peshwa u desire no problem, remove bajirao image from article on shivaji maharaj please — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.65 (talk) 17:49, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

It is quite interesting and unfortunate to note that wikipedia is slowly clsoing its ranks and becoming a clsoed niche like any other encyclopedia , now see example look at mughal emperors individual page meant for Akbar ,shahajahan etc or any other rulers one will find photo of that particular emperor , and on the page of mughal empire one will find photos of many emperors , now come to this article on shivaji maharaj , now photos of bajirao or other peshwas are already on maratha empire page , that is agreed but why bajirao photo is included on this article of shivaji maharaj ? any rational behinnd it , is it a sign of intellectual bankruptcy , keep adding all information to this article on shivaji maharaj which is not relevant to him , what you people can do it except this ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.65 (talk) 06:53, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Remove image of bajirao from this page

Please remove the image of bajirao from shvaji maharaj , and show on maratha empire or peshwa or bajirao page , why you people hijacking it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.65 (talk) 17:45, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

done. Abbasquadir (talk) 09:24, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Consensus for Infobox image

• 
  Image from British Museum
• 
  Painting by MV Bhasker

There have been reverts back and forth between the British Museum's image and MV Bhaskar's painting. What are the arguments for and against using either of them? -- DaxServer (talk) 16:52, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

-- DaxServer, I can't find anything on painter MV Bhasker who died in 1944. But there is the famous painter M.V. Dhurandhar who also died in 1944. Dhurandhar was commissioned by the Maharaja Bhawanrao Pantpratinidhi of erstwhile Aundh State to make a series paintings on the life of Shivaji. Even if the painter of the image in question turns out to be Dhurandhar, the image is a modern depiction and therefore my preference would be for the British museum image. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 21:04, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jonathansammy I agree. The painting from British Museum is produced during 1680-1687, which is right after the death of Shivaji. I believe this is the closest accurate portrayal. The other painting from 1944 is a modern depiction, however it is based on other paintings/sculptures over the centuries as the painter has no direct knowledge of Shivaji, nor does he know of someone who has a direct knowledge of Shivaji, they wouldn't be alive after about 250 years. But only in 1680-1687. I believe we should use the British Museum's image. I would also add a comment after the image to refer to this conversation, so that others who knowingly or unknowingly wanted to change it, would read this discussion. -- DaxServer (talk) 07:14, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree. The 1680 painting would naturally be more accurate.LukeEmily (talk) 07:56, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I would prefer the M.V. Bhasker's painting. His painting does match with the other modern paintings of Shivaji. Atleast we know the name of author but in British Museum's portrait, even the name of author is not known. Shivaji died in 1680 itself while the British museum painting was drawn after his death. How can it be considered as a contemporary portrait? Secondly, most sources point out that Shivaji used to worn tilak on his forehead which is not visible in the British museum image. For example, Gautam Pradhan's Lord of the Royal Umbrella : Shivaji II writes about Shivaji's appearance: "His rugged face with his neatly cropped beard, that met on either side of his face with his thick sideburns; his pearl earings and the crescent shaped tilak on his forehead, showed no anger."

I think its clear that the modern image from M.V. Bhasker is more accurate in portrayal of Shivaji as it features tilak on his forehead. KmpVmp (talk) 20:07, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

As I have said earlier, there is no painter called M.V. Bhasker. Please get that clarified before we can have any further discussion on the topic. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 03:23, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Jonathansammy, Bhasker or Dharandhar, whatever be. My point is that the portrayal of Shivaji in his painting is more accurate than the one in British museum. KmpVmp (talk) 11:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Dr.Pradhan is an India radiologist by profession (an MD, doctor) and not WP:RS for history topics. See https://www.amazon.com/Gautam-Pradhan/e/B075J21TNJ . In the preface of the book he himself says that the book should not be taken as a historical account.LukeEmily (talk) 10:57, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@KmpVmp Adding to @LukeEmily's comment, the disclaimer of the book, the second page in the Google Books link you have shared, says, Though based on real events and individuals, this is a work of fiction and should not be taken as an accurate historical account. The author does not claim that all incidents and descriptions in the book are historically exact or documented; they should not be used as references by scholars and students. The description you have quoted is a fictional work. This is not a reliable source. -- DaxServer (talk) 12:10, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@KmpVmp As to your argument about no author in British Museum's portrait, it is unfortunate that the name is lost. But I am confident that the curators did their due diligence in verifying its authenticity before accepting it into their collection. Wouldn't you agree? -- DaxServer (talk) 12:20, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

DaxServer, KmpVmp, Jonathansammy. Here is another interesting link: https://factly.in/this-is-not-the-picture-of-chatrapati-shivaji-inside-london-museum/ . Please compare the London Museum picture with the last image on that page (it says it was made after the 1664 Surat raid). The authentic black and white image seems to match the one in the museum. The site says In 1664 AD, Dutch Governor of Surat Von Valentyn had commissioned the paintings of Shivaji Maharaj and other princes. During his research in Europe, Vasudev Sitaram Bendrey found these paintings and published it for the first time in 1933. Until this picture was published, most people attributed a picture of Muslim Sardar to that of Shivaji. Based on this, it seems that the London museum painting is the authentic representation of Shivaji. I agree that the site is not WP:RS but the image in the end is enough to clarify all doubts (unless it has been edited).LukeEmily (talk) 07:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

User:LukeEmily, you are a bit misinterpreting the link you shared. The link says- "In 1664 AD, Dutch Governor of Surat Von Valentyn had commissioned the paintings of Shivaji Maharaj and other princes. During his research in Europe, Vasudev Sitaram Bendrey found these paintings and published it for the first time in 1933." The said 1664 painting dicovered by V.S. Bendrey is the black and white one, which is shown at last in the link. The link doesn't say that the British museum image was drawn in 1664. Nobody is contesting the presence of the same painting in British museum which is uploaded as Shivaji British Museum.jpg on Commons. But the question is whether the British museum image is the accurate portrayal of Shivaji or not. The link shared by you also notes that before Bendrey's findings, most people used to attribute a picture of Muslim Sardar to that of Shivaji. I suspect that the British museum image is the said image which actually belonged to a Muslim sardar but wrongly labelled as Shivaji's portrait by the British museum. If you closely see, you will find that the person shown in the Shivaji's British museum portrait resembles a Muslim sardar like Shah Shuja or Murad Baksh. KmpVmp (talk) 15:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

• I support retaining the British Museum image. It is reliably sourced and has historical value. The discussion on what Shivaji did or did not look like is both WP:OR as well as pointless since, lacking a TARDIS or similar device, we're not going to get a guaranteed likeness anyway. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:52, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

I support using the British museum image as it's near-contemporary and the most authentic portrayal. It also has historical value, unlike the modern portrait. आज़ादी (talk) 11:22, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Remove photo of bajirao from this site

Bajirao was not a ruler please remember it was reign of shahu and not bajirao , please dont put wrong facts here , are you a historian or a champion of peshwa , then go on bajirao or peshwa page and write there whatever u like , have same shame — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.78 (talk)

Remove photo of bajirao from this site or delete shivaji maharaj page

Friends , i am requesting you all again and again to remove photo of bajirao from this site meant for shivaji maharaj , if not possible to remove bajirao photo , please delete shivaji maharaj page and write whatever you like , no problem , but don't sell any garbage under name of shivaji maharaj — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.78 (talk)

change chattrapati shivaji to Chattrapati Shivaji Maharaj in the beginning of the article

thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.22.142.211 (talk) 09:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 July 2021

Map of Maratha Kingdom in 1759 during the time of Shivaji. Please include this map under the first section below this photo. By reading this article nobody will come to know how big was his kingdom. The caption of the map will be " The empire of Chhatrapati Shivaji 1759 (yellow)". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:India1760_1905.jpg Antonyjensen1 (talk) 23:30, 4 July 2021 (UTC) </ref>

 Not done: The article already has a map of the Maratha Empire at the time of his death, in 1680 (see Shivaji § Conquest of southern India). The map you have suggested is of 1760, 80 years after his death. The 1680 map will provide readers with a better idea of the territory he ruled. Danski454 (talk) 00:35, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Please someone proofread the article and fix all the grammar errors

There are lot of grammatical errors in this article. I've corrected some obvious errors but I can't identify and correct all the mistakes as my grammar is not that good. Any help will be appreciated. Thank You.Eevee01 (talk) 09:53, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2021

Request for removal or correction of this statement: "In 1667, the Portuguese Christians started to forcefully convert Hindus in Bardez. Shivaji quickly raided Bardez in which three Portuguese Catholic priests and a few Christians were killed and stopped the forceful conversion of Hindus.[141][142]"

This statement in the article doesn't make sense. Hindu conversions in Bardez did not begin in 1667, Velhas Conquistas was already majority Christian by that year. Conversions of Hindus in Goa started with the Portuguese conquest of Goa in 1510. Conversions of upper-caste Hindu individuals have been recorded taking place in Bardez from 1550s onwards, e.g. In 1595 Vittu Prabhu became Irmão de Diogo Soares and the son of Raulu Kamat became Manuel Pinto in Aldona. Similarly, there was the record of a mass conversion of 200 Kshatriyas by taking place in a Bardez village in August 1560.

References

2402:3A80:C8D:9CA4:E98C:2F81:93D2:7C48 (talk) 09:33, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done I've modified the text per your suggestion (the only accessible reference does not support the conversions statement). --RegentsPark (comment) 11:32, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2021

Chhatrapati Shivaji (Maharaj) Bhosale. 2409:4042:2E95:34D6:F842:72D0:F80E:1D04 (talk) 13:47, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Bajirao photo and wrong information about him

Wikipedia if it is open media , then make two changes 1st Bajirao was a peshwa of Chatrapati Shahu not a ruler , so correct it 2nd Bajirao was not related shivaji , hence dont post here 3rd This page is about shivaji maharaj and not Bajirao 4th if u are not ready to present these facts , please disclose identity of the person who want this wrong information 5th If you want do do this kind of criminal activity , then change the name of web page , make it bajirao and write whatever you want 6th tomorrow if something goes wrong then the person who is writing this wrong information must be held responsible and no one else Lastly my appeal to conscience that why you people want to unnecessary hijack shivaji maharaj page ? Bajirao or peshwa played certain historical role but in any way not connected with shivaji , so please bear in mind If you want intellectual debate please mail me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.68 (talk) 16:07, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Double standard of editors of shivaji maharaj page

On one hand you are saying map of 1759 is 80 years after shicaji maharaj , then Bajirao is atleast 40 years after shivaji maharaj why you want to include it ? can you answer , further bajirao was not a ruler , he was a peshwa of shahu chatrapti, maratha empire reached its zenith under shahu and not peshwa , why you are putting wrong information and protecting it , if you are so much fond of peshwa , write on peshwa page , no problem , why you are interfering in shivaji maharaj page? can you explain — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.68 (talk) 16:22, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Changing the first line

it says also referred as "Chhatrapati Shivaji", it should be like "Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj" because he always been referred as "Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj" it is a Marathi language phrase, "chhatrapti shivaji" doesn't means anything, it completely wrong, the correct phrase used for him is "Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj". for reference please see this. always where ever his name is used it is written as "Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj" nothing else, for example mumbai airport is named after him, see Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport. so please make a consensus and change it to original name. Uttarpradeshi (talk) 09:36, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2021

changes in first line, please read my whole argument it says (also referred as "Chhatrapati Shivaji"), it should be like "Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj" because he always been referred as "Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj" it is a Marathi language phrase, "chhatrapti shivaji" doesn't means anything, it completely wrong, the correct phrase used for him is "Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj". for reference please see this. always where ever his name is used it is written as "Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj" nothing else, for example mumbai airport is named after him, see Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport. so please make a consensus and change it to original name.Thank You. Uttarpradeshi (talk) 09:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. — DaxServer (talk to me) 10:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@DaxServer How to make consensus, can you please explain the procedure. Uttarpradeshi (talk) 16:15, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@Uttarpradeshi You simply discuss about the topic with others on this talk page and provide reliable sources supporting your arguments. — DaxServer (talk to me) 17:08, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

wrong facts shown in this page

1st was Bajirao a great grandson of shivaji to be shown here ? 2nd It was shahu chatrapati under whom peshwa ,angre ,bhosale ,gaikwads etc rose .Maratha empire reached zenith under shahu and not bajirao . why you people are unnecessary bent upon creating rukus here , have some sense of history , do you know that it was angre who expanded maratha empire on sea , it was bhosale of nagpur who expanded maratha empire in orissa and bengal , it was dabhade and gaikwad who expanded in western india . Had not santaji ,dhanaji and tarabai defeated mughals , it would have been difficult for marathas to subdue mughals . Bajirao did expand in central india with help of pawar, holkar and shinde , then why you are hijacking and giving sole credit to peshwa , after battle of panipat it was shinde and holkar who restored maratha pride in north and no one else . From 1761 to 1818 which peshwa fought a battle in northern india , can you cite any name ? please have some sense of writing history , learn respect for other's contribution in history , may wisdom prevail upon you guys — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.68 (talk) 17:32, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

wikipedia policies

Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

If above are policies of wikipedia , then what about this article ? whether wikipedia is hijacked ? please follow yourself wikipedia policies — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.68 (talk) 17:43, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

About Name

Its not shivaji bhonsale its Chhtrapati Shivaji Bhosale Maitreyi Gargote (talk) 10:11, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Please provide a reliable source that states that "Chhtrapati" was the first name of this person and was not an honorific applied to his name. --RegentsPark (comment) 13:30, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

"Chhtrapati" is not a first name, it's more of a title loosely translating to "King". --coolk (talk) 05:03, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

About wife's

Putalabai was youngest wife of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj & not eldest. Andveer (talk) 16:42, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Mis information about shivaji maharaj succession

This article is hijacked by partisans of peshwa and putting whatever they like in this article , one fine example is bajirao ? it is wriiten that" The Maratha Empire reached its zenith under the reign of Peshwa Bajirao I" Idiot do you know Bajirao was serving shahu chatrapti , he was not king , he was peshwa . Bajirao did certain role in expansion but that does not mean that maratha empire reached zenith under his reign , are you a fool ? How can you forget contribution of angre on sea , bhosale in eastern india ? in which way peshwa was connected with it ? tell us history , not gossips dear — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.78 (talk) 14:11, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

removal of Bajirao photo

Bajirao was not a ruler , he served under Shahuchatrapati , so why yiu are showing wrong information on shivaji maharaj page , if you are having little common sense and understanding of history , why like a coward you are writing false history — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.133.232.70 (talk) 13:12, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2021

CHHATRAPATI SHIVAJI MAHARAJ Sagar sanjay hatwar (talk) 18:22, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – NJD-DE (talk) 18:26, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Removal of content

A lot of content on this page has been removed by some editors stating that the sources are unreliable or old or too new and the page is being maintained as is. Some editors term the sources too old while some say contemporary sources are not valid. I request everyone to be open to new content and improvements rather than keeping it as is. You shouldn't decide on your own whether a resource is valid or not but by the guidelines provided by Wikipedia. Please have a discussion on the talk page before removing new content that is at least sourced. :@Fowler&fowler: Akshaypatill (talk) 21:41, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Gijs Kruijtzer

(Comment moved from User talk:RegentsPark) You reverted my edits on page Shivaji. The changes I had made were based on the given source. The source just mentions that things changed in the decade of 1977-86 and does not explicitly or implicitly state that the Shivaji was responsible for the change. Please read the source carefully before reverting any edits. I have reverted your reverts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akshaypatill (talk • contribs) 3:54 pm, Today (UTC−4)

@Akshaypatill: I don't know much about this topic but a simple google search brings up this: Kruijtzer is not averse to making strong assertions, ..... that the roots of modern communalism rest heavily (if not entirely) in the interplay between Shivaji and the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb during the decade 1677-87 (p. 8, 266 ff.).[1] As far as I can see, it is well supported. Are you sure you're not just deleting content you don't like without reading the sources? --RegentsPark (comment) 20:07, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@RegentsPark:Let me check in the book.

@RegentsPark: Couldn't find it in book (P 8). I think you are quoting an article, please check out the original text.

@RegentsPark: The text says - "Something had changed in the decade 1677-87. In the Introduction it has already been noted that all the Hindu-Muslim riots that we know of from the historical record of the Deccan and North India occurred after this decade. But what is more, the wave of tolerance and explicit religious syncretism that had swept the Islamic courts of India around the turn of the sixteenth century, and which reverberated through the seventeenth century, had come to an end."

Hmm. I don't have access to the book so, I guess, I'll let someone else figure this out. --RegentsPark (comment) 21:15, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

@RegentsPark: Please refrain from making uncostructive edits if you aren't familiar with the subject or haven't got hold on a valid source. Thanks.

Turns out that I could get hold of an e-book version from a library I have access to. The place to look is in the Introduction and not in the section you're looking at. Kruitjzer says: Moreover, I would argue that the roots of modern communalism (the antagonism between the “communities” of Hindus and Muslims) are to be found in this decade in the interplay between Shivaji and the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb (p8-9). Still, I'll let others decide whether this needs to be included or not. --RegentsPark (comment) 23:34, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

User:RegentsPark Shiavji died in 1780. I can't understand the authors point.Akshaypatill (talk) 13:11, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

(You mean 1680!) I guess what he means is that that particular decade, which started with Shivaji's battles with Aurangzeb's Mughals, was the root of modern communalism in India. As he says in the section you quote above, this Maratha-Mughal struggle signified the end of religious tolerance in the Mughal court (which became more Islamic under Aurangzeb) and from that springs the communal divide we see today. The changes occurred in the Mughals between 1677-87 but these were triggered by Shivaji's conquests before his death. At least, that's my reading of all this. --RegentsPark (comment) 13:55, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj

I have changed Chhatrapati Shivaji to Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. I am putting my arguments for the change here- I have quoted a reliable sources and footnote. Aside from that, as per the guidelines at - MOS:HON 'Honorifics and styles of nobility should normally be capitalized, e.g., Her Majesty, His Holiness. They are not usually used in running text, though some may be appropriate in the lead sentence of a biographical article, as detailed below, or in a section about the person's titles and styles.' As indicated Wiki doesn't fully prohibit the use of honorifics, especially in lead. In section Honorific prefixes and suffixes, there are guidelines about prefixes but nothing on suffixes. Also wiki allows this - "Where an honorific is so commonly attached to a name that the name is rarely found in English reliable sources without it, it should be included. For example, the honorific may be included for Mother Teresa." The Indian english news media rarely uses Shivaji without Maharaj as evident here in leading newspapers (reliable sources) in India - The HinduThe Hindu 2The Indian ExpressIndian Express 2Times of IndiaHindustan TimesHindustan Times 2Akshaypatill (talk) 06:59, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

This is a patently silly crusade you are on. Every monarch has honorifics that were used to address them, and are sometimes still used by sources that wish to be respectful; this does not affect how they were known. Elizabeth II (only relevant because it's an FA) does not include the phrase "also referred to as Queen Elizabeth", quite rightly, because it would be nonsensical. Really we ought not to say "also referred to as Chhatrapati Shivaji" either; we ought to explain his title in that sentence, along the lines of "ruled as the Chhatrapati, or emperor, of a territory that grew into the Maratha Empire". But that's not a fight I've the stomach for. Vanamonde (Talk) 23:12, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Vanamonde93 Noted. Will not bring it again.Akshaypatill (talk) 06:47, 3 November 2021 (UTC)