User talk:Robo Zay

April 2019

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Rajbongshi people, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:52, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Rajbongshi people. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. AuroraButterfly^talk 22:05, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Rajbongshi people. I told you not to add unsourced content. And tell me in which page of [1], the name of Sarat Chandra Sinha is mentioned. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:51, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: Dear Sir, it is clearly mentioned in the page no 110 Of this source [2].Sir please also refer to this link [3] for "Upendra Nath Barman's" Source of being from a rajbongshi family and also I want to let you know this that you did undo the references in the case of Swapna Barman,you removed that source I added with her name that's why I did not mention the source again.Sir I request you, please check the references of Upendranath Barman again because it is already mentioned in the references about him in his wiki page and Lastly Sir, I beg pardon if I made any mistake cause I am new in wikipedia, Thank You --Robo Zay (talk) 16:06, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, I see it now. In that archive, for some reason, the search option is not working. I also found another source to supporting Sarat Chandra Sinha's Rajbanshi ethnicity which I've added.

I removed Swapna Barman's link from the Rajbongshi article because you've already sourced that in her article.
Upendra Nath Barman's source will also work. Wait, I'll add some content to his article.

Actually it is a better thing for an article to get scrutinized. That way it will stay in a good condition for long time. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:40, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Sir..😀😀👍👍 Robo Zay (talk) 17:51, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello, Robo Zay, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:52, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Directories and indexes Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

A kitten for you!

You are most welcome.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:31, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rajbanshi

Well it i who improved the page, the page was dead for last 2 years. Also there should be a third page for rajbanshi,the dravidian community to clean the confusion. Also the man given in the picture is wrong. The picture was taken 100 years ago, and the book is mostly inaccurate represention of different groups. Matak in that book is represented as a tribe, whereas Matak is actually a sect which has Chutia, Moran, Ahom and Kacharis. That picture is of Rajbanshi, the Dravidian community, also please verify if Koch are really related to Indo AryansHomogenie (talk) 12:45, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it needs cleanup but there is only one mention of the "rajvamsi" Dravidian community. Nowhere else it is mentioned, and also koch people page is already there. If you want to create a new page for the rajvamsi community then go ahead no one's stopping you, but make sure you have proper information to prove your point. Don't just go anywhere and remove anything what you feel is wrong. And lastly the page is not dead many contribution has been made throughout the past years. Robo Zay (talk) 13:10, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well in Bengal , there is KOCH and Rajbanshi .. the former is related to KOCH Dynasty but the latter rajbanshi is a dravidian community..both are SC in bengal. KOCH IN BENGAL ARE KOCH RAJBANSHI IN ASSAM, KOCH IN MEGHALAYA, RAJBANSHI IN NEPAL. Rajbanshi in bengal are not related to KOCh dynasty, it is KOCh in bengal are are to koch dynasty. Look in the Schedule caste list of Bengal .. there are two communities. Also the pictures of Rajbanshi man is not Koch but Rajbanshi... go through that book , it is inaccurate.. remove that picture it is making a wrong view...also are koch related to indo aryans?? I dont think so Homogenie (talk) 15:07, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Koch,Rajbongshi,koch-rajbongshi, rajbanshi they are all the same... And where did you find that Rajbongshis in Bengal are Dravidian ??? Go and read some books you will get your answer. And please don't come here to edit Wikipedia with what you personally believe. Robo Zay (talk) 03:39, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rajbanshi people

Please do not add the people without adequate citations. Chaipau (talk) 10:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]