आपसे हाथ जोड़कर के अनुरोध है कि आपकी आंखों के सामने गुर्जर प्रतिहार को राजपूत बता रखा है तो आपसे निवेदन है कि आप राजपूत वर्ल्ड को बिल्कुल हटा दें क्योंकि राजपूत जाति का कोई उल्लेख था ही नहीं राजपूत वर्ल्ड तेरहवीं शताब्दी के बाद आया है तो इसमें राजपूत कैसे लिखा हुआ है गुर्जरों को राजपूत बनाने की पूर्व जोर से काम चल रहा है गुर्जर इतिहास को मिटाना चाहते हैं राजपूत लोग आपसे हाथ जोड़कर निवेदन है कि आप इसे तुरंत कार्रवाई करें VISHNU HARSHAL ( talk) 12:49, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- I suggest you provide
reliable sources for your claim alongwith changes you want to make.
Sajaypal007 (
talk) 12:13, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
- Gurjar Partihar Dynasty as the following page provides wrong information for Gurjar Partihar Dynasty, Gurjar Partihar Dynasty is not belong to Rajput Dynasty, Gurjar Partihar Dynasty is belong to Gurjar dynasty we have many evidence, they are belong to Gurjar community so requested to you please change the community of Gurjar Partihar Dynasty.
- Please check following references where you can check there Gurjar Partihar Dynasty belongs to Gurjar dynasty not from Rajput. So, we request you please remove the wrong information from the article and update given information on the following page. There is no evidence that rajput was exist before 13th century.
- This is wrong information:
- The Gurjara-Pratihara was a Rajput dynasty[5][6][7] that ruled much of Northern India from the mid-8th to the 11th century. They ruled first at Ujjain and later at Kannauj.[8]
- This is correct information:
- The Gurjara-Pratihara was a Gurjar Dynasty that ruled much of Northern India from the mid-8th to the 11th century. They ruled first at Ujjain and later at Kannauj.[4]
- Please check these given refrences. Along with this
- 1. Puri, Baij Nath (1957), The history of the Gurjara-Pratihāras
- 2. The Eighth Avatar By Manoshi Sinha Rawal
- Today, the Yamuna has changed her course beyond several miles. Originally, Gurjar are believed to be cowherds. Nandvash houses the Gurjar folks in great numbers. Gurjar also ruled kingdoms from time to time, worth mentioning are Gurjar Pratihar Dynasty (ruled major parts of northern india from the 8th to 11th centuries), Anangpal I & II, to name a few.
- 3. History of Sirsa Town By Jugal Kishore Gupta 24, 25
- 4. Rural Life: Grass Roots Perspectives By Brij Raj Chauhan 116
- 5.
Gurjara-Pratihara dynasty By The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica
Gurjaratra (
talk) 05:50, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- Regarding Gurjara word and controversy around it has already been explained on the page itself in quite detail. Even the supporter of Gurjara being tribe and not territory do not regard what you are stating, and even that is controversial.
Sajaypal007 (
talk) 08:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- @
Sajaypal007: That's why don't label them as Rajputs ASAT. You didn't understand the nuances of my revert here,
Special:MobileDiff/1094743316. It's a polite request to not engage in edit war. You are a senior editor, best not to push a particular POV.
Packer&Tracker (
talk) 08:28, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- @ Packer&Tracker: Let me simplify some points. Colonial historians started origin case on rajput dynasties, and most prominent among them was Pratihara dynasty. From colonial times to modern times many historians gave opinion on origin of Pratihara whether Gurjara appellation applied to them (remember Pratihara themselves never called themselves Gurjara it was conjecture of some colonial historians that word Gurjara used in some inscription of Rashtrakutas and others was addressed to Pratiharas although there was no direct evidence of that as well). Even among historians who says Gurjara word was used for Pratiharas, there is a disagreement whether it used for territory or a tribe. Even those who support tribe argument top most among them in later writers is Baij Nath Puri, although Baij Nath Puri had conflict of interest issue regarding this (which I can explain later if required), even he and those colonial historians regard it as a tribe and not caste. Argument of BN Puri is this, there was a Gurjara tribe among them were priests, Kshatriyas, and all kind of castes. That Pratihara were themselves of Gujar/Gurjar caste is never said by any historians of any note. While Pratiharas are regarded as Rajputs by almost all historians since colonial times to modern times, there is no controversy around them being a Rajput clan, even those who support Gurjara tribe argument also says they were a rajput clan. There is not a single historians of note who could say that they were not Rajput. You provided one source of Dr Santa Rani Sharma elsewhere, she herself in her book Pratiharas of Rajasthan call them a prominent Rajput dynasty. The two issues are being mixed to make the matter confusing where not much confusion is there. About origin, yes there is a controversy but that can be made for every clan, dynasty or castes because at certain point in history you will bound to get no source of their history, so you will say they are of unknown origin or something like that, the point is never that regarding origin already a para is given on the page itself, since I took up this matter, I will also add different views of different historians which are not represented enough and modern research being ignored in the face old and archaic colonial theories. Sajaypal007 ( talk) 09:23, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- @
Sajaypal007: That's why don't label them as Rajputs ASAT. You didn't understand the nuances of my revert here,
Special:MobileDiff/1094743316. It's a polite request to not engage in edit war. You are a senior editor, best not to push a particular POV.
Packer&Tracker (
talk) 08:28, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- Regarding Gurjara word and controversy around it has already been explained on the page itself in quite detail. Even the supporter of Gurjara being tribe and not territory do not regard what you are stating, and even that is controversial.
Sajaypal007 (
talk) 08:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
Sir here, a user is claiming Rajput resistance to Muslim conquests article as a hoax [1]. Is this true or they are venting out their frustration of failing to get the article deleted in the past ? 2409:4051:2E02:33E9:AA9A:1DB6:2A31:2C14 ( talk) 18:39, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
|
Happy New Year! |
Hello Sajaypal007: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary
blisters. |
- Spread the WikiLove; use {{ subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this messagePacker&Tracker ( remark) 10:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- @ Packer&Tracker Thanks and a happy new year to you as well, sorry for late reply, been a little busy these days. Sajaypal007 ( talk) 16:57, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
आपसे हाथ जोड़कर के अनुरोध है कि आपकी आंखों के सामने गुर्जर प्रतिहार को राजपूत बता रखा है तो आपसे निवेदन है कि आप राजपूत वर्ल्ड को बिल्कुल हटा दें क्योंकि राजपूत जाति का कोई उल्लेख था ही नहीं राजपूत वर्ल्ड तेरहवीं शताब्दी के बाद आया है तो इसमें राजपूत कैसे लिखा हुआ है गुर्जरों को राजपूत बनाने की पूर्व जोर से काम चल रहा है गुर्जर इतिहास को मिटाना चाहते हैं राजपूत लोग आपसे हाथ जोड़कर निवेदन है कि आप इसे तुरंत कार्रवाई करें VISHNU HARSHAL ( talk) 12:49, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- I suggest you provide
reliable sources for your claim alongwith changes you want to make.
Sajaypal007 (
talk) 12:13, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
- Gurjar Partihar Dynasty as the following page provides wrong information for Gurjar Partihar Dynasty, Gurjar Partihar Dynasty is not belong to Rajput Dynasty, Gurjar Partihar Dynasty is belong to Gurjar dynasty we have many evidence, they are belong to Gurjar community so requested to you please change the community of Gurjar Partihar Dynasty.
- Please check following references where you can check there Gurjar Partihar Dynasty belongs to Gurjar dynasty not from Rajput. So, we request you please remove the wrong information from the article and update given information on the following page. There is no evidence that rajput was exist before 13th century.
- This is wrong information:
- The Gurjara-Pratihara was a Rajput dynasty[5][6][7] that ruled much of Northern India from the mid-8th to the 11th century. They ruled first at Ujjain and later at Kannauj.[8]
- This is correct information:
- The Gurjara-Pratihara was a Gurjar Dynasty that ruled much of Northern India from the mid-8th to the 11th century. They ruled first at Ujjain and later at Kannauj.[4]
- Please check these given refrences. Along with this
- 1. Puri, Baij Nath (1957), The history of the Gurjara-Pratihāras
- 2. The Eighth Avatar By Manoshi Sinha Rawal
- Today, the Yamuna has changed her course beyond several miles. Originally, Gurjar are believed to be cowherds. Nandvash houses the Gurjar folks in great numbers. Gurjar also ruled kingdoms from time to time, worth mentioning are Gurjar Pratihar Dynasty (ruled major parts of northern india from the 8th to 11th centuries), Anangpal I & II, to name a few.
- 3. History of Sirsa Town By Jugal Kishore Gupta 24, 25
- 4. Rural Life: Grass Roots Perspectives By Brij Raj Chauhan 116
- 5.
Gurjara-Pratihara dynasty By The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica
Gurjaratra (
talk) 05:50, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- Regarding Gurjara word and controversy around it has already been explained on the page itself in quite detail. Even the supporter of Gurjara being tribe and not territory do not regard what you are stating, and even that is controversial.
Sajaypal007 (
talk) 08:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- @
Sajaypal007: That's why don't label them as Rajputs ASAT. You didn't understand the nuances of my revert here,
Special:MobileDiff/1094743316. It's a polite request to not engage in edit war. You are a senior editor, best not to push a particular POV.
Packer&Tracker (
talk) 08:28, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- @ Packer&Tracker: Let me simplify some points. Colonial historians started origin case on rajput dynasties, and most prominent among them was Pratihara dynasty. From colonial times to modern times many historians gave opinion on origin of Pratihara whether Gurjara appellation applied to them (remember Pratihara themselves never called themselves Gurjara it was conjecture of some colonial historians that word Gurjara used in some inscription of Rashtrakutas and others was addressed to Pratiharas although there was no direct evidence of that as well). Even among historians who says Gurjara word was used for Pratiharas, there is a disagreement whether it used for territory or a tribe. Even those who support tribe argument top most among them in later writers is Baij Nath Puri, although Baij Nath Puri had conflict of interest issue regarding this (which I can explain later if required), even he and those colonial historians regard it as a tribe and not caste. Argument of BN Puri is this, there was a Gurjara tribe among them were priests, Kshatriyas, and all kind of castes. That Pratihara were themselves of Gujar/Gurjar caste is never said by any historians of any note. While Pratiharas are regarded as Rajputs by almost all historians since colonial times to modern times, there is no controversy around them being a Rajput clan, even those who support Gurjara tribe argument also says they were a rajput clan. There is not a single historians of note who could say that they were not Rajput. You provided one source of Dr Santa Rani Sharma elsewhere, she herself in her book Pratiharas of Rajasthan call them a prominent Rajput dynasty. The two issues are being mixed to make the matter confusing where not much confusion is there. About origin, yes there is a controversy but that can be made for every clan, dynasty or castes because at certain point in history you will bound to get no source of their history, so you will say they are of unknown origin or something like that, the point is never that regarding origin already a para is given on the page itself, since I took up this matter, I will also add different views of different historians which are not represented enough and modern research being ignored in the face old and archaic colonial theories. Sajaypal007 ( talk) 09:23, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- @
Sajaypal007: That's why don't label them as Rajputs ASAT. You didn't understand the nuances of my revert here,
Special:MobileDiff/1094743316. It's a polite request to not engage in edit war. You are a senior editor, best not to push a particular POV.
Packer&Tracker (
talk) 08:28, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- Regarding Gurjara word and controversy around it has already been explained on the page itself in quite detail. Even the supporter of Gurjara being tribe and not territory do not regard what you are stating, and even that is controversial.
Sajaypal007 (
talk) 08:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
Sir here, a user is claiming Rajput resistance to Muslim conquests article as a hoax [1]. Is this true or they are venting out their frustration of failing to get the article deleted in the past ? 2409:4051:2E02:33E9:AA9A:1DB6:2A31:2C14 ( talk) 18:39, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
|
|
Happy New Year! |
Hello Sajaypal007: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary
blisters. |
- Spread the WikiLove; use {{ subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this messagePacker&Tracker ( remark) 10:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- @ Packer&Tracker Thanks and a happy new year to you as well, sorry for late reply, been a little busy these days. Sajaypal007 ( talk) 16:57, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)