This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Deshastha Brahmin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 21 days |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Deshastha Brahmin was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Deshastha Brahmin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 21 days |
This is a quickfail criteria for WP:GA. The article has far too many unsourced statements, as indeed it did at the three GA nominations. Cirt failed the first two, and the third was initially failed for the same reason but then Zuggernaut managed to push it past the reviewer, who appears to have been new to the process. - Sitush ( talk) 07:39, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
My own recent edits, let alone those of other contributors, amply demonstrate that the article is not stable. Those edits also suggest that it may not be neutral and certainly indicate that a fair number of sources were misrepresented. - Sitush ( talk) 07:39, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
opinion from non-admin: I am not an admin hence I do not know if I am allowed to edit here. I have been trying to cleanup this article for the last one year, and trying to add sources to some outsourced content. This article as it stands currently is definitely not
WP:GA and needs a lot of fixes. I agree with
Sitush. Thanks
Acharya63 (
talk)
13:44, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Dear User:MRRaja001, I recommend you get consensus before adding content with non-reliable sources. As we discussed before, the % population numbers have not been backed up by reliable academic sources and therefore should not be added. Also the lede is supposed to be an abstract or a summary of what is in body of the article. Please consider moving most of the new content to more appropriate sections in the body.Thanks. Jonathansammy ( talk) 14:57, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Brahmins population is 3 to 4% of Maharashtra if someone is caliming it to be 10% then please back up your claim with screenshot Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 19:17, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Brahmins are about 10% of the population in Maharashtra. [1] [2] [3]" ← Clearly mentions 8-10% in all these three sources. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 19:30, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
References
In first source it says Bramhims leaders claims that Brahmins population 8 to 10 % . It doesn't mean the population of Brahmins is actually make 8 to 10%
In the second source no mention of Brahmin population
The third source is outdated requires subscription to access the info.
All of the sources are some newspapers none of them are authentic sources reverting till you come up with some authentic sources. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 19:38, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
These are newspapers sources not authentic sources please see see Marathi people Wikipedia page. On this page it is clearly mentioned with authentic sources Brahmin population is 4%. I am reverting your changes till you come with authentic sources not "newspapers sources" Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 20:03, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
I went through the source it clearly mentions "Brahmin population is 4%" I will put "screen shots" tomorrow for others to see.
I don't agree with newspaper sources. In newspaper anyone can write according to his own political ambitions. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 20:31, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
As we don't have 2011 census authentic data we have to go with 1930 census data . I hope you understand
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
20:49, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
References
The Deshasthas, who hailed from the Deccan plateau, the Desh, accounted for three-fifths of the Maratha Brahman population.
References
those whose occupations required an education, like the Prabhu, Saraswat and Kayastha castes, took education despite the barriers imposed by the Brahmins.
This @
Fylindfotberserk: user is biased, look at this guy's constant and deliberate edits on this page with fake, poorly sourced "newspaper sources" . I want you
Vikram Vincent,
Sitush, @
Jonathansammy:,
User:Chariotrider555,
User:AustralianRupert guys to take strong action against this person.
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
06:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
I have pinged Admins and popular users let them decide you are biased or not by going through your deliberate edits and comments you put here on the talk page. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 07:10, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes, for population related questions I have inclination to trust government sources. Those are usually authored by multiple people. Anthony gomes 92 ( talk) 08:18, 17 January 2021 (UTC).
Fylindfotberserk "You are crossing the line of WP:CIVIL" this statement of yours I will take it as threat and will seek further actions against you. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 08:26, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Citations to say that Brahmins are about 8-10% of Maharashtra state population:
While comprising only 9% of the Maharashtrian population, the eight endogamous Brahmin castes studied by Karve and Malhotra).
I think these citations are enough to say that Brahmins are about 8-10% of total population of Maharashtra.- MRRaja001 ( talk) 08:31, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
[3] In this 1970 Maharashtra gazetter source brahmin population is mentioned as 6% but the same source says "In Maharashtra, the scheduled castes form 5.63 per cent, of the population." How accurate is this source cause in 1930 consensus
Mahar alone were 8% of the population and in Scheduled caste there are other caste like
chamar ,
Mang. And Maharashtra government gives 13% reservation to Scheduled Caste so their population must be above 13% . Provided this we can verifye the given source's authencity. So, till we dont have authentic source it's better not to have Brahmin population on this page
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
10:29, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
[4] this source is not british source it is government source I am pointing out how unauthentic this source is specially its statement "In Maharashtra, the scheduled castes form 5.63 per cent, of the population." this makes its authenticity questionable. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 10:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC) .
How accurate is this source cause in 1930 consensus Mahar alone were 8% of the population and in Scheduled caste there are other caste like chamar...". No need to compare the 70s data which is far reliable than the British era 1930s sources which are deemed unreliable in Wikipedia. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 10:58, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Okay forget for a while 1930 sensus . The Maharashtra government gives 13% reservation to scheduled castes from 1950 according to their population. And your source says "In Maharashtra, the scheduled castes form 5.63 per cent, of the population." Any sensible person will immediately know that there is something wrong with your source. So why consider such sources as authentic one. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 11:05, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Brahmins along with other priests formed about 6 percentin page:76. Isn't this a mistake - MRRaja001 ( talk) 11:48, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
[5] This is data from Ministry of Social Justice Department. It clearly says Scheduled Caste population is 12% in Maharashtra.
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
11:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
okay 1930 consensus says population is 4% and 1960 consensus says population is 6% If one has to add population related data on this page I will agree with "4 to 6 %" range . Scheduled caste population is mentioned as 5.6% because they did not count Buddhists as Scheduled caste.
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
14:14, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Fylindfotberserk So it's better we dont add any population data here, and wait for "Authentic Consensus Data" provided by government on Brahmin population. Forget that I will agree with figures provided by highely biased 'Newpapers', 'Media Houses'. I can give thousand of articles and incidents to proove that "Medias and Newspapers" are biased.
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
14:33, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
The article says, and I quote, "The Deshasthas are historically an endogamous and monogamous community for whom marriages take place by negotiation. The Mangalsutra is the symbol of marriage for the woman. Studies show that most Indians' traditional views on caste, religion and family background have remained unchanged when it came to marriage, that is, people marry within their own castes, and matrimonial advertisements in newspapers are still classified by caste and sub-caste." Sources cited for the above (Bahuguna, and Srinivasa - Raghavan) are both from Hindu businessline website.Is that considered a reliable source / publication? If not that we will have to look for alternate sources. Thanks. Jonathansammy ( talk) 17:26, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Deshastha Brahmin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 21 days |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Deshastha Brahmin was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Deshastha Brahmin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 21 days |
This is a quickfail criteria for WP:GA. The article has far too many unsourced statements, as indeed it did at the three GA nominations. Cirt failed the first two, and the third was initially failed for the same reason but then Zuggernaut managed to push it past the reviewer, who appears to have been new to the process. - Sitush ( talk) 07:39, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
My own recent edits, let alone those of other contributors, amply demonstrate that the article is not stable. Those edits also suggest that it may not be neutral and certainly indicate that a fair number of sources were misrepresented. - Sitush ( talk) 07:39, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
opinion from non-admin: I am not an admin hence I do not know if I am allowed to edit here. I have been trying to cleanup this article for the last one year, and trying to add sources to some outsourced content. This article as it stands currently is definitely not
WP:GA and needs a lot of fixes. I agree with
Sitush. Thanks
Acharya63 (
talk)
13:44, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Dear User:MRRaja001, I recommend you get consensus before adding content with non-reliable sources. As we discussed before, the % population numbers have not been backed up by reliable academic sources and therefore should not be added. Also the lede is supposed to be an abstract or a summary of what is in body of the article. Please consider moving most of the new content to more appropriate sections in the body.Thanks. Jonathansammy ( talk) 14:57, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Brahmins population is 3 to 4% of Maharashtra if someone is caliming it to be 10% then please back up your claim with screenshot Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 19:17, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Brahmins are about 10% of the population in Maharashtra. [1] [2] [3]" ← Clearly mentions 8-10% in all these three sources. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 19:30, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
References
In first source it says Bramhims leaders claims that Brahmins population 8 to 10 % . It doesn't mean the population of Brahmins is actually make 8 to 10%
In the second source no mention of Brahmin population
The third source is outdated requires subscription to access the info.
All of the sources are some newspapers none of them are authentic sources reverting till you come up with some authentic sources. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 19:38, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
These are newspapers sources not authentic sources please see see Marathi people Wikipedia page. On this page it is clearly mentioned with authentic sources Brahmin population is 4%. I am reverting your changes till you come with authentic sources not "newspapers sources" Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 20:03, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
I went through the source it clearly mentions "Brahmin population is 4%" I will put "screen shots" tomorrow for others to see.
I don't agree with newspaper sources. In newspaper anyone can write according to his own political ambitions. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 20:31, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
As we don't have 2011 census authentic data we have to go with 1930 census data . I hope you understand
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
20:49, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
References
The Deshasthas, who hailed from the Deccan plateau, the Desh, accounted for three-fifths of the Maratha Brahman population.
References
those whose occupations required an education, like the Prabhu, Saraswat and Kayastha castes, took education despite the barriers imposed by the Brahmins.
This @
Fylindfotberserk: user is biased, look at this guy's constant and deliberate edits on this page with fake, poorly sourced "newspaper sources" . I want you
Vikram Vincent,
Sitush, @
Jonathansammy:,
User:Chariotrider555,
User:AustralianRupert guys to take strong action against this person.
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
06:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
I have pinged Admins and popular users let them decide you are biased or not by going through your deliberate edits and comments you put here on the talk page. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 07:10, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes, for population related questions I have inclination to trust government sources. Those are usually authored by multiple people. Anthony gomes 92 ( talk) 08:18, 17 January 2021 (UTC).
Fylindfotberserk "You are crossing the line of WP:CIVIL" this statement of yours I will take it as threat and will seek further actions against you. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 08:26, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Citations to say that Brahmins are about 8-10% of Maharashtra state population:
While comprising only 9% of the Maharashtrian population, the eight endogamous Brahmin castes studied by Karve and Malhotra).
I think these citations are enough to say that Brahmins are about 8-10% of total population of Maharashtra.- MRRaja001 ( talk) 08:31, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
[3] In this 1970 Maharashtra gazetter source brahmin population is mentioned as 6% but the same source says "In Maharashtra, the scheduled castes form 5.63 per cent, of the population." How accurate is this source cause in 1930 consensus
Mahar alone were 8% of the population and in Scheduled caste there are other caste like
chamar ,
Mang. And Maharashtra government gives 13% reservation to Scheduled Caste so their population must be above 13% . Provided this we can verifye the given source's authencity. So, till we dont have authentic source it's better not to have Brahmin population on this page
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
10:29, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
[4] this source is not british source it is government source I am pointing out how unauthentic this source is specially its statement "In Maharashtra, the scheduled castes form 5.63 per cent, of the population." this makes its authenticity questionable. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 10:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC) .
How accurate is this source cause in 1930 consensus Mahar alone were 8% of the population and in Scheduled caste there are other caste like chamar...". No need to compare the 70s data which is far reliable than the British era 1930s sources which are deemed unreliable in Wikipedia. - Fylindfotberserk ( talk) 10:58, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Okay forget for a while 1930 sensus . The Maharashtra government gives 13% reservation to scheduled castes from 1950 according to their population. And your source says "In Maharashtra, the scheduled castes form 5.63 per cent, of the population." Any sensible person will immediately know that there is something wrong with your source. So why consider such sources as authentic one. Sid.ghodeswars ( talk) 11:05, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Brahmins along with other priests formed about 6 percentin page:76. Isn't this a mistake - MRRaja001 ( talk) 11:48, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
[5] This is data from Ministry of Social Justice Department. It clearly says Scheduled Caste population is 12% in Maharashtra.
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
11:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
okay 1930 consensus says population is 4% and 1960 consensus says population is 6% If one has to add population related data on this page I will agree with "4 to 6 %" range . Scheduled caste population is mentioned as 5.6% because they did not count Buddhists as Scheduled caste.
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
14:14, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Fylindfotberserk So it's better we dont add any population data here, and wait for "Authentic Consensus Data" provided by government on Brahmin population. Forget that I will agree with figures provided by highely biased 'Newpapers', 'Media Houses'. I can give thousand of articles and incidents to proove that "Medias and Newspapers" are biased.
Sid.ghodeswars (
talk)
14:33, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
The article says, and I quote, "The Deshasthas are historically an endogamous and monogamous community for whom marriages take place by negotiation. The Mangalsutra is the symbol of marriage for the woman. Studies show that most Indians' traditional views on caste, religion and family background have remained unchanged when it came to marriage, that is, people marry within their own castes, and matrimonial advertisements in newspapers are still classified by caste and sub-caste." Sources cited for the above (Bahuguna, and Srinivasa - Raghavan) are both from Hindu businessline website.Is that considered a reliable source / publication? If not that we will have to look for alternate sources. Thanks. Jonathansammy ( talk) 17:26, 16 August 2023 (UTC)