Talk:Gautam (clan)

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 October 2017. The result of the discussion was keep.

India: Bihar / Uttar Pradesh Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Bihar.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Uttar Pradesh.

for gautam rajput history

Handbook on Rajputs By A. H. Bingley-page-82

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=Cc2HyXP5dygC&pg=PA105&dq=nikumbh++clan&hl=en&ei=KgKkTaLHJYHYuAPyifGDCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=nikumbh%20%20clan&f=false

Comment removed from article

Comments added to article by Special:Contributions/221.135.243.5 which I removed and placed here for analysis: 174.109.208.72 (talk) 03:22, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above mention fact is not true.

Please refer

http://rajputsamaj.org/downloads/Rajput%20History.pdf

Aryan Siddharth Singh Gautam Bemahari Basti UP

Related to Shakya dynasty??

LukeEmily would u like to see whether my recent edit is useful or not?Heba Aisha (talk) 12:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Heba Aisha. Sure, I will look at the edit. BTW, Belated Happy Diwali. LukeEmily (talk) 16:15, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was shocked to see u didn't wished me.😁Heba Aisha (talk) 16:17, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies Heba Aisha. I will put a belated happy Diwali on your talk page..sorry :-) . BTW, Alexander_Cunningham was an engineer who died in 1893 - so not WP:HISTRS and from what I could see from the snippet view - the source is saying that "Cunningham's theory is totally dismissed" because he assumed the connection based on Gautam gotra. However, the source says that Brahmins also have this gotra. Hence the source concludes his theory of connection with Rajputs is invalid. So the source that is cited is also not supporting this theory by a Raj era non-Historian.LukeEmily (talk) 16:28, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was right to remove that. Btw ur Rajputization is vandalised continuously by someone who is closely related to the subject. But no worry I reported them.Happy Diwali btw.🪔Heba Aisha (talk) 16:31, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]