Talk:Khatana

Fake history without any refrence

Please remove fake history written by some on Khatana page.

Fake history without any refrence

Please remove fake history written by some on Khatana page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.119.104.226 (talk) 04:47, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Khatana

Caste, clans (Gotras) ethnicity, race and religion lists cause lots of arguments in Wikipedia, please follow the general consensus:-
All names added to any list must have verifiable, reliable sources to show that they are notable enough to be included on the list, which usually requires an article on the English Wikipedia.
In a caste, clan, ethnicity, race or religion list, such as this, there must also be a clear, specific, reference to show that the person is a member of that specific group.

A person's last name is NOT sufficient evidence for their inclusion in, or exclusion from, a list, as assumptions based on a name are synthesis - a form of original research which is not allowed.
If the person is alive, their inclusion in any list is also covered by our policies on biographies of living people, so a specific reference, where they state they are a member of the category is required.
Someone stating, or claiming, that someone else is, or is not, a member of a Caste, ethnicity, race or religion, is insufficient.
Some people, such as Amitabh Bachchan, have clearly stated they do not agree with caste or ethnic categorization, as these are divisive. These people should not be included in any such list, even after their death.

All names in this article must have a clear, specific, reference to show that the person is a Khatana.
Of the current list on this article only one name has a specific reference. Names without adequate references will be removed. - Arjayay (talk) 18:52, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any issues with my work ?

@Utcursch Good evening sir may I have made any mistakes while creating or putting the source content on this page.? If I made any serious mistakes you can point out I would love to know about my mistakes and will never make such mistake in the future. Thank you so much. Transe Ænd Danse (talk) 00:13, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

sir you also Removed many reliable sources written by various historians. ? Without any serious issues these all refrences and text is new not old one. Transe Ænd Danse (talk) 00:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nau Nihal Singh, Ram Sarup Joon etc. are not reliable sources for history, as is the case with many other sources cited by you. Many of these sources have been challenged as evident from the page history, which you tried to hide by moving the page to Khattana and then starting afresh here. utcursch | talk 00:31, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I will contribute with sources written by other writers but why these are not reliable?. No I didn't mean to hide or to mislead any history sir but yes I made redirect to create this page I made redirect to another page. Transe Ænd Danse (talk) 00:50, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed elsewhere (e.g. WT:IND), but here's a summary: They are not qualified historians / academics.

Ram Sarup Joon's work is aimed at glorifying the Jat caste. For example, he talks about the "Maurya Jat Dynasty" (p. 50; also claims Guptas, Kushanas etc. to be Jats); claims that Turks were descendents of a Jat named "Tar Jatali" (p. 35-36); and counts Scandanavia, Germany, England, Rome etc. among the ancient "colonies of Jats" (p. 43).

Nau Nihal Singh's The Royal Gurjars is full of fringe theories and aimed at glorification of the Gurjar / Gujjar community, and is not WP:HISTRS-compliant. For example, it claims that Porus was a Gurjar king who defeated Alexander. Quote from pages 331-332: "Porus Maloe who fought bravely with Alexander and defeated him and Nand Mahar who offered hospitality to him when he was wounded were both Gurjars."

Similarly, other writers - even if they are qualified anthropologists etc. - are not acceptable sources for history unless they are qualified historians. See WP:HISTRS and WP:RS. utcursch | talk 01:17, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I got understand now next time I will be carefully about the sources written by these two writers. Thank you so much for explaining in deep. Transe Ænd Danse (talk) 01:24, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Utcursch sir why you again removed origin section and Samthar state? Even on the Smathar State it is clearly written they they're Khatana Gujars? Sir do you want me to contribute? Please tell me Transe Ænd Danse (talk) 01:49, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

in origin section it can be mentioned that some historians said they're the descendants of Jaspal of Hindu shahi and Pandavas of Mahabharat.? This all mentioned clearly in the sources and I am not using the sources from the writers that you talked about being non_reliable?? Transe Ænd Danse (talk) 01:51, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which reliable sources say that they are descendants of Pandavas or Hindu Shahi? See WP:FRINGE - we don't mention fringe theories. utcursch | talk 01:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As for Samthar, please present quotes which support your assertion - the cited sources do mention "Gurjar" / "Gujjar", but not Khatana. utcursch | talk 02:01, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Utcursch see again book by Javed Rahi mentioned Samthar and Khatana state being ruled by Khatana even on The page of Samthar their are two paid books written by some other writers talked about Samthar state and their rulers being khatana Gujjars also for origin section it can written that some historians said they're Descendants of Jaspal and Pandavas? Even I have mentioned this many times in quotes and Refrences this can be rewritten like they claimed to be Descendants of Jaspal and Pandavas (of Mahabharat). But I do humble request please let me add this phrases because I do respect your all concerns and duties I know you're here to guide young contributors. Transe Ænd Danse (talk) 02:16, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any issues with my contribution.?

@Tamzin I saw your contribution at Gurjar against vandalism so I just mentioned you here you can see an administrator from Indian origin removed some sourced content and many refrences also.? I am just want to know whether I violates any Wikipedia's policy or what type of mistakes I have made. Transe Ænd Danse (talk) 00:23, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be a good-faith content dispute. Neither Utcursch' admin status is relevant, nor his ethnicity. Please follow normal dispute resolution steps to resolve this matter, and please do not highlight other editors' ethnicity or nationality in the future. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 01:12, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]