Talk:Sanjrani

Let us upgrade

For the year 2006-07, let us concentrate on upgrading the contents as decided: Wales to upgrade quality of Wiki. Thanks. --Bhadani 03:57, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding revert

Hi @Sitush. I see you reverted Sanjrani article to its previous version. I am disappointed as you did not include a valid reason. The references I added were not from Raj Era or super old. The current origins section was also created by me and the information there and the references were added by me. Can you kindly remove them too from the current version of the article? Since you removed the Sindhi part. It would be best to remove the other parts too that I added, as they are from the same book. :) Sir Calculus (talk) 20:47, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nvm @Sitush just saw it's not you, sorry for that. @Sutyarashi can you explain in detail the reason for reverting? Sir Calculus (talk) 20:56, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir Calculus the main problem is that this source can't be verified. If Sanjranis are really Sindhi, as you insist so, then surely there would be some reliable sources about this in English media too. You should add them instead. Sutyarashi (talk) 01:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sutyarashi The author was a researcher at the Institute of Sindhology. - Sitush (talk) 03:54, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush it seems so. But don't you think Sindhi mention needs additional references, given that English sources call Sanjranis Baloch instead? The previously cited source just listed hundreds of tribes and clan, without any further explaining how come they have Sindhi origins. Sutyarashi (talk) 07:15, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sutyarashi Well, usually we would prefer English but a high-quality non-English source is OK. I assume this one is reasonably recent because the Institute has only existed for a few decades; I assume the author has expertise because he was an academic working at a recognised institution. I'm guessing it wasn't self-published.

But - and it is quite a big but - I didn't realise it was just a list. Is there nothing else in it, other than perhaps a foreword? That seems like an odd thing to publish & I'm curious as to why someone would do so, and why there wouldn't be at least notes if a particular tribe might exist as Baloch etc as well as Sindhi. - Sitush (talk) 09:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush It is not just a simple list. Detailed explanations are given where needed and lineage trees and their explanations are given. Here is an example [1] where he writes about both Sindhi & Baloch Magsis, adds the family trees of both Sindhi & Baloch Magsis, adds the statement of Nawab of Magsis and adds a reference for that statement. Also adds the opinion of other expert native historians as well as others. Also there's a bibliography section at the end of the book where all the books are mentioned, their respective authors and the language the books were written in. And regarding Sanjranis, for the sake of diversity I added another reference from a different book of a different author, so people don't say I'm promoting only one viewpoint. And the current book which I explained above, there are so many mentions of Sanjranis. Explanations of both Sindhi & Baloch clans. It's a 984 page book. I can't just add every page where it mentions Sanjranis. But let me know if you want that and I'll give in that effort. If you still don't accept that, then kindly remove the origins section which I created and the references for the Baloch part which are still up were also added by me. So remove them too since they are from the same book. And regarding what Sutyarashi said, I HAD added English language sources but they were removed because of RAJ. If you want to know that Sindhi Sanjrani exist, even a simple google search of Sindhi Sanjrani will bring up singers & common linkedin profiles. But we both know we can't use that as references on Wikipedia. Sir Calculus (talk) 10:36, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir Calculus You really need to accept RAJ, even if you don't like it. A source that falls under RAJ is not a source.

However, from what you describe it does sound like the Sindhi source is OK. If there is still a difference of opinion then I think it should be raised at WP:RSN to get a wider consensus. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 10:48, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush Yes, I'm not arguing about RAJ anymore just was addressing Sutyarashi that I had added English language sources before. And if the Sindhi source is OK. May I add it back for now? If Sutyarashi is not okay with them he can revert the article to its original form (which excludes all my edits) & I won't edit war. Sir Calculus (talk) 10:53, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir Calculus I think it is better to wait fior Sutyarashi to respond here. Getting consensus before reinstatement is always going to reflect well on you. - Sitush (talk) 11:09, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I'll wait for @Sutyarashi Sir Calculus (talk) 11:20, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir Calculus can you provide the link of page where "detailed explanation" for Sindhi origins of Sanjranis is given? Sutyarashi (talk) 12:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sutyarashi You think I'm arguing about Sindhi or Baloch origins in Sanjranis? If you think that, then you are mistaken. The references I added mentioned them as both a tribe in Sindhis & in Balochs. In Sammat Sindhis, they are the clan of Burira tribe & a clan of Jats.

References: For the first, here at page 134, top, no. 27 in Burira. [2] For the second, page 59 (no numbered list here) [3] & the section for bibliography for the second at here, pg 97. [4]

Supporting ref for Burira [5] Supporting ref for Sanjranis being both a Sindhi & a Baloch clan [6] This is Encylopedia Sindhiana, Volume 7.

Different page in the first book where it separates the Baloch Jats, Serai Jats and Sammat Jats pg.238-239, Sanjrani in Sammat Jats at no.61 on the right side at pg 239. [7]

Again, keep in mind it was me who added the references and the text for both Sindhi & Baloch parts. :) Sir Calculus (talk) 13:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir Calculus given that the Sindhi and Baloch Sanjranis have completely different origins, it does not seem they are same people. Baloch ones are described as Mizaris, while Sindhis one as Sammat Jats. I believe the right way is to create a separate page for the Sindhi Sanjranis. This case looks similiar to Babbar (tribe), where around half a dozen different ethnicities (baloch/Pashtun/Jat/Sindhi/Khatri etc,) were mixed up, all on same article. Sutyarashi (talk) 16:21, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sutyarashi Or we could deal with both in this one article. I am unsure why this would be a difficulty: should it become unwieldy that at that point we WP:SPLIT. Are you sure about the different origins? As I understand it, a lot of Sindhi tribes migrated from the Baloch region many, many years ago, so are you saying that is not in fact the case here? - Sitush (talk) 16:37, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify: you mention the Mizari and Jat differences of origin but is that two scholars arriving at different conclusions or a single scholar pointing out the difference? - Sitush (talk) 16:40, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush yes, it appears that the Sindhi Sanjranis don't descend from the Baloch ones who live in northern Balochistan, that's why they are described as Jats. The 6th reference provided by SirCalculus states them to be Mazaris, while 7th calls them Jats (instead of Sindhi-Baloch; the Sindhis of Baloch descent). Sutyarashi (talk) 18:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sutyarashi I'm completely confused. You'll have to find someone else to comment, I think. Or a source which explicitly says that they have different origins and aren't just historic migrants whose customs, legends etc have diverged. - Sitush (talk) 18:30, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush you asked that: a lot of Sindhi tribes migrated from the Baloch region many, many years ago, so are you saying that is not in fact the case here?

I thought I was clear enough in my reply that Sindhi and Baloch Sanjranis seem to have completely different origins, and it is not the case in which some Baloch tribes moved to Sindh and gradually got assimilated. The Sindhi Sanjranis are Jats who are living in Sindh since long, while Baloch Sinjranis are sub-branch of Baloch Mazari tribe. The similarity is only in the name. Sutyarashi (talk) 18:49, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if SirCalculus can provide a source clearly stating the Sinjranis of Sindh to be descendants of the Baloch tribe of same name, I would be fine with Sindhi mention. Sutyarashi (talk) 18:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sutyarashi Well, if Sir Calculus agrees and no-one raises an objection here in the next week or so then we need two articles - Sanjrani (Baloch tribe) and Sanjrani (Sindhi tribe). We can't have one of those just called Sanjrani (and please note that the tribe names should indeed be singular, not the plural Sanjranis.) - Sitush (talk) 18:57, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush yes that was my point. Sutyarashi (talk) 19:01, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sutyarashi I thought you wanted Sindhi Sanjranis to be created & this one left under the current title for the Balochs, sorry. We can't do that because it is plural, harder to find in a search + not neutral etc. This current article will have to be moved to the new title & both articles will need a disambiguation header template. (We can't convert this current page to a disambiguation page because those are only used for three or more articles sharing a similar name, not two articles). - Sitush (talk) 19:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sitush @Sutyarashi I don't think a separate article is needed but I won't object to it.

As I have added before the Sanjrani are either diverse or are different people with the same name.

The Sanjrani are present in Mazaris, Sammat Jats, MirJats, Jats, Laghari, Burira, Khosa Matwaals, Mosiani Brahvis, Noohani, Rahimoons from Tharparkar and to make it more complex a son of Jatoi was called Sanjr, whose children are called Sanjrani and are the 48th clan of Jatois. So even in Baloch & Brahvi, they are found in different tribes.

My humble suggestion is to just edit the article slightly.

In the main section, let's just mention the Sanjrani are a clan in Balochs & Samaat Sindhis. Then in the origins section we can include other information, like in how many or which Baloch or Sindhi tribes the Sanjrani are found in.

The founding fathers of these tribes likely named at least one of their son 'Sanjr'. The reference I have for the Sanjr thing is only for in Jatoi tribe though. So I don't know about other children named Sanjr. Sir Calculus (talk) 19:46, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir Calculus single article doesn't have any merit as they are unrelated groups. You yourself agree that Sindhi and Baloch Sanjrani tribes are of diverse and different origins, which means the existing page needs to be split into these two. Sutyarashi (talk) 09:35, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]