User talk:Ekdalian

Archives

1

This is Ekdalian's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1

This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics: post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them the Arab–Israeli conflict He should not be given alerts for those areas.

This user is aware of the three-revert rule

Please don't template me! Everybody makes mistakes, and this user finds user warning templates impersonal and disrespectful. If there's something you'd like to say, please take a moment to write a comment below in your own words.

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Ekdalian, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Happy editing, Tito☸Dutta 13:56, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

== Seasonal Greets! == 

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Ekdalian, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Happy editing, Mahensingha 19:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

A cup of tea for the gentleman! Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:06, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. Ekdalian (talk) 08:08, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note and help.

A Dutt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adutt77 (talk • contribs) 14:22, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Adutt77, good to see that you have understood the basics of our policies. Ekdalian (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use Google Books snippet views, for which we have no sense of context and which very frequently end up misrepresenting the source when it comes to caste articles. I thought I had mentioned this to you before but I'm not digging around to find it. - Sitush (talk) 11:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holi!!!......Happy Holi!!!

Hello , may you be surrounded by cheers, pleasure, peace, success and happiness on this Happy Holi and through out the year 2015. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy Holi, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Happy Holi 2015. Happy editing, -- Mahensingha (Talk) "Thanx n Regards" 06:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mahensingha. Wish you a happy & colourful Holi.. Ekdalian (talk) 07:29, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, SMahenS. Wish you a very happy & prosperous New Year 2016. Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 09:50, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MahenSingha (Talk) 17:50, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ekdalian,
It gives us great pleasure to inform that the Train-the-Trainer (TTT) 2017 programme organised by CIS-A2K is going to be held from 20-22 February 2017.

What is TTT?
Train the Trainer or TTT is a residential training program. The program attempts to groom leadership skills among the Indian Wikimedia community members. Earlier TTT have been conducted in 2013, 2015 and 2016.

Who should join?

• Any active Wikimedian contributing to any Indic language Wikimedia project is eligible to apply.
• An editor must have 500+ edits.
• Anyone who have already participated in an earlier iteration of TTT, can not apply.

Please see more about this program and apply to participate or encourage the deserving candidates from your community to do so: CIS-A2K/Events/Train the Trainer Program/2017

The last date of filling the form is 26 January. If you have any question, please leave your message here.
Regards. GSS (talk|c|em) 09:27, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mahishya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kaibarta. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ekdalian,

You can see The Indian Law Reports: Calcutta series, Volume 10 By India. High Court (Calcutta, India) page 465.It is freely available on the web.

In this case I thought it was essential to read the British Judgement.

It is clear after reading this 1884 judgement that the British court considered only the customs(and varna) of specific regional Kayasthas and made their judgement on only certain particular Kayasthas of some regions. (It is explicitly mentioned in the judgement as to what they took into account). So to make a blanket statement about all Indians (of the community) is not right IMHO ; especially if it is offensive.

Secondly , there have been judgments made much later by the British as well as census reports by British that classify Kayastha as Kshatriya. In the view of the above facts, it is obvious that the "them" pronoun mentioned by the author you quote is referring to the last noun in that sentence(page 202 of Rowe) i.e. Bengali kayasthas. Either that is what the author meant or the author has been careless in framing the sentence. This is obvious from the judgement itself.

In any case , if there are conflicting opinions , it is best to avoid one sided/biased views since they have an agenda(especially that can be hurtful to a community).

BTW, I am neither Bengali not do I belong to the above community, nor am I in India. I only have interest in the literate castes of India (like Brahmins and Kayasthas) and their history.

Just my two cents.

Regards, M. Acharya. ps. I am new to Wikipedia. Please guide me if I am incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acharya63 (talk • contribs) 05:19, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Acharya63, what you have mentioned above is fine. But Wikipedia doesn't consider primary sources like judgements, and instead consider reliable texts; the part of the text mentioned in the source (Page 202) clearly talks about all the Kayasthas in general. This is probably because of several judgements from different British courts. Anyway, we are not supposed to modify the statements taken from the reference, and these are considered as sourced statements. I understand you are new to Wikipedia and may not be fully aware of our policies. Please read WP:RS, WP:V and WP:OR. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 08:45, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your comment on the talk page on the basis of which the mythology of this Hindu-apartheid vindicated community has been deleted , I humbly want to inform you that do not AGREE WITH. Firstly Only writer of International recognition to have mentioned the Mythology is Manoranjan Byapari . He is , not was as you have written . He is not promoting Dalit Writing that much . Rather he did not get any publicity though his Autobigraphical Discourse ( not a Novel ) is not about Dalits , rather a discourse about the Oppressed People In General ; unfortunately being a victim of Hindu Apartheid he faced personally many problems , and one of those is Destroy His writing . And what you have written the truth is just the opposite of that , Rather The Dalit Literature Promoted Him. Now neiter Sekhar Badyopadhyay , Nor Joya Chatterjee , nor any Caste Hindu Writer , whose reference is in your list , has mentioned the Mythology , is that a community fault , is that enough reason that for this a Bangla Academy Award winner writer becomes unreliable , although any such past writers , have been used in many India related articles as reliable source , is that him being outcaste , an Avarna , makes his writing , the autobiographical Discourse , an unreliable source ?

I want your permission to use both his writing and another Ph.D thesis of a member of this Avarna community to be permitted being used as reliable source . If the Varna Hindu samaj due to their hatred and Apartheid inherent in their Hindu Religion ignores and omits our mythology , then it is not our fault , and I strongly believe , that the editors should take the discourses written by our community members as reliable source . প্রাকৃতনমঃস্বেজ (talk) 04:49, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is an example where an author belonging to a community, writes about the same, and is a clear case of conflict of interest. The source would not be considered as a reliable one in this context. PhD thesis cannot be cited here as WP:RS, please check reliable texts by reputed & neutral authors. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 05:58, 27 July 2017

Reputed and neutral . Hoom !!Will this do ? https://www.morebooks.de/store/gb/book/namassej/isbn/978-613-3-52173-5 প্রাকৃতনমঃস্বেজ (talk) 13:35, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It would be better if you mention this on the talk page of the article. Sitush is actively involved and can put forward his opinion as well. I shall also check and revert back. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 10:59, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The scholar Sipra Mukherjee in her writing has written that In Matuya movement 'Chamar , Mahishya , mali ........ etc." communities joined.I have written In Bengal Not "Chamar" the term is "Muchi/Muchiram" , "Ruhidas" or "Rishidas" etc .Their population is also not much. And the "Chamars' we find in urban Bengal now came mainly from Bihar . But Sipra Mukherjee has written so , got a publisher like elite and so Sitush did not allow and I think you will not also . The upper caste people are changing things in the discourse . Erasing the original myths and etc. It is miserable . In the main book of Mtuya primarily Harichand not acknowledged as "Avatar" but the Mukherjee has so written . You are a Bengali Upper Caste . I do not know about Sitush. But you must be aware of the distortion . The tragedy is that Harilialmrito itself cannot be used as a source book as it has no English Translation and secondly for being not written by a Reliable Person ( Tarak Sarkar , is an untouchable lower caste practically uneducated non-pundit ). I am not asking for any correction . For a suggestion as what could be done?117.194.195.149 (talk) 06:25, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See the edit-summary at this edit of mine.Best,∯WBG^converse 14:08, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Winged Blades of Godric, thanks for the note. Regards, Ekdalian (talk) 05:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is wrong information about nath cast i am edit again Naveennath6966 (talk) 03:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Naveennath6966, you need to cite reliable and verifiable sources, as per WP:RS and WP:V; otherwise your edits will be reverted. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 07:19, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Ekdalian, me being blocked from Wikipedia won't necessarily cover up or alter the truth. The Kayasthas have been legally accorded Kshatriya status. Do conduct at least SOME research before reversing the edits. Thank you. Regards from Semper Curious Semper Curious (talk) 06:59, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of the 'truth', and have done all possible research on the topics I edit. But you need to be aware that we have stick to the policies of Wikipedia, and we can mention only reliably sourced verifiable statements in the articles here. No original research is allowed; read WP:OR. It would be better if you keep your opinion aside for a moment, and check what reliable sources say, especially in this case about the quasi-historical narrative related to the origin of Kulin Kayasthas in Bengal. Hope you understand. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 07:27, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do consult the article on the exact Varna status of Kayasthas.. That Wikipedia has to offer. We don't have our version of truth... But one should not hold himself from accepting the truth Semper Curious (talk) 08:34, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The last census of the British Raj in India (1931) classified them as an 'upper caste' i.e. Dwija and the final British Raj law case involving their varna in 1926 placed them into the Kashtriya varna.

According to W.Rowe's account (that later scholars disagreed with), during the British Raj era, certain law cases led to courts classifying Kayasthas as shudras, based largely upon the theories of Herbert Hope Risley who had conducted extensive studies on castes and tribes of the Bengal Presidency. According to Rowe, the Kayasthas of Bengal, Bombay and the United Provinces repeatedly challenged this classification by producing a flood of books, pamphlets, family histories and journals to pressurize the government for recognizing them as Kshatriya and to reform the caste practices in the directions of sanskritisation and westernisation. However, scholars from the University of Berkeley as well as the University of Cambridge have disagreed with Rowe's research by pinpointing 'factual and interpretative errors' in his study as well as criticizing his study for making 'unquestioned assumptions' about the kayastha movement of sanskritisation and westernisation.

H.Bellenoit gives the details of the individual British Raj era law cases and concludes that since the kayasthas are a non-cohesive group and not a single caste, their varna was resolved in the cases that came up by taking into account regional differences and customs followed by that particular caste. Bellenoit also disagrees with W.Rowe by showing that Herbert Hope Risley's theories were in fact used to ultimately classify them as Kshatriyas by the British courts. The first case began in 1860 in Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh with a property dispute where the plaintiff was considered an 'illegitimate child' by the defendants, a north-Indian Kayastha family. The British court denied inheritance to the child, citing that Kayasthas are Dvija, "twice-born" or "upper-caste" and that the illegitimate children of Dwijas have no rights to inheritance. In the next case in 1875 in the Allahabad High Court, a north Indian Kayastha widow was denied adoption rights as she was an upper-caste i.e. Dwija woman. However, in an 1884 adoption case as well as a 1916 property dispute, Calcutta High Court argued that Bengali kayasthas have started using names like 'Das' and classified the Bengali Kayasthas as shudras - although the court did acknowledge their Kshatriya origin. The Allahabad High Court ruled in 1890 that Kayasthas were Kshatriyas. Finally, in a property dispute case in Patna in 1926, the Patna court characterized both the 1884 and 1916 Calcutta courts rulings as inconclusive and ultimately ruled that the kayasthas were of Kshatriya origin and hence twice born or dwija. The Patna court cited smritis and Puranas, several colonial ethnologists, such as William Crooke and Herbert Hope Risley, and used their qualified endorsements on the dwija origins of Kayasthas. The British census of 1931 also lists Kayasthas as one of the upper (twice-born) castes. Semper Curious (talk) 08:39, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Plz don't chnage about nath coz nath are high ranked brahmins they are called rudraj brhamins nowadays debnath nath don't get obcs maybe earlier time they got but nowadays they didn't so they are recognized as brhamins.plz sir don't chnage it thus is real don't call a brahmin other backward class Siddy0070 (talk) 06:49, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We have to follow the policies of Wikipedia, and I have already left a note on your talk page. Ekdalian (talk) 07:20, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ekdalian Hey, I am commenting here since I am not interested in starting a new thread on the similar topic. The Links provided under your edits to "Debnath" do not show any such information. It was raised. Kindly check/verify that yourself and do what is necessary. These two links are devoid of any such mentions. Given your experience with WIKI editing, the due diligence can be done. You do have a coterie of people, it appears, that acts in a concerted manner to prevent editing of any broken links on such topics. I am still assuming it is done in a good faith, given the complexity of the issues. The purpose is not to engage any edit-redit cycle. One needs to place verifiable information. It was not done. Hope you take care of this issue. 131.169.233.226 (talk) 10:19, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ekdalian Hi, I noted that the page "Debnath" has been updated. Thanks for taking the time. But, kindly check the information on the link provided. There is no mention of the surname "Debnath". OBC assignments has been made to Nath only. Do what is justifiable by removing that assignment, if necessary. I did mention that in the previous discussion, which was clearly misinterpreted. Hope you realize the gravity of the issue. Kindly do not conflate the issue between the caste and the reservation listings – a majority of the debate that you are having in this page in related to that. Your previous discussion elsewhere did reflect a fact-based approach. Why get sloppy here – it is incomprehensible. But I do appreciate you taking the time. 131.169.233.226 (talk) 13:08, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Debnath belongs to the same group as Nath and are considered as OBC; the information is correct! Ekdalian (talk) 17:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't refer non-vandalistic edits a 'vandalism'. See WP:NOTVAND. Try addressing concerns on talk page before restoring any WP:OR unsupported by source. Aman Kumar Goel^(Talk) 13:18, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aman Kumar Goel, hope you understand that I am here in Wikipedia for quite a number of years now, and very much of the discretionary sanctions; I have pasted this on others' talk pages, and I keep on fighting with unsourced edits as well as vandalism; therefore it doesn't make much sense to inform me about the same. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 05:34, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I included those surnames because they are listed on the same page and because multiple source materials reference these very names.

Melotown (talk) 16:33, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Melotown, I understand; and there's no doubt that these are reliably sourced and all. The list is too limited, typically including the surnames of Kulin Kayathas. I had earlier included a list of common Bengali Kayastha surnames here, which was somewhat more inclusive, and reliably sourced; somehow, it is no longer there in the current version. Moreover, I strongly believe that it should not be included in the lead section, even if the list is more inclusive, and may deserve mention in the body of the article. In this case, these surnames are already mentioned later in the article itself. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 05:19, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ekdalian,

Would like to have a discussion about Ambasth Kayasthas.

I added a few contents which have been edited out by you.

Ambasth kayasthas are not just confined to Bengal. They're widespread in Punjab,Bihar and Jharkhand regions mainly and also in MP,Chattisgarh etc.

Ambasth Kayasthas are Brahmin Kayasthas or Brahm-Kayasthas.

This confusion between Ambasthas and Vaidyas exists only in Bengal and nowhere else. Instead of clubbing the Ambasthas of all regions of India,you should allow to write the truth in wikipedia.

I'd like to know your source which you're using.

The Ambashtha Kayasthas (found chiefly in Southern Bihar), Crooke suggests "may be connected with the old Ambastha caste of Western-Punjab mentioned in the Mahabharata" as some Kayasthas are also associated with the practice of medicine and surgery.[42][32]

Note:You haven't added anything on that page,instead you've intentionally removed the edits made by other users. It's known as vandalism.

Note:Please tell me your source. Dinopce (talk) 12:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dinopce, let me tell you that I have been fighting against vandalism (on Wikipedia) for years, and not only all my edits are reliably sourced, I revert all unsourced / unreliably sourced statements that I encounter.

Please check the Revision history (older revisions) to find out how I have worked in order to improve the article. Also, do note that the unsourced POV edits by you will amount to vandalism if you continue with the same, but reverting the same is my obligation as a responsible editor. I should have asked you the question you have asked me. Who said that the Ambastha Kayasthas are just confined to Bengal. But, what you think as truth may not be acceptable unless you follow the principles of Wikipedia; you are not supposed to add unsourced content (mostly POV edits), even if you are a Ambastha Kayastha; what you need are reliable & verifiable sources. You may easily go through the links available for the respective sources in the References Section, which will surely answer your question. I am also providing the links, which are as follows:

Link1 [1] Page 45 and Link2 [2] Page 208.

Anyway, please feel free to discuss any constructive edit, or share links supporting your point of view. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 11:22, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ekdalian,

I understand your concern about the addition of unsourced POV edits but I added the paragraphs in the introduction section from Ambasth Kayasth book written by K.N Sahay.

It's not merely about providing the reference from where you've taken the information.

You've simply quoted the sentences from the books that you like but when I added the following paragraph,

Barhaspatya Arthashastra-The Ambastha were so important in the early centuries before Christ there is an Ambastha Sutra in the Pali work. "Ambasth here are represented as Brahmins. The Puranas call them Anaya Kshatriyas."

from the K. Sahay book,it was reverted by you.

May I know the reason why??!

Mr. Ekdalian,your article itself is ambiguous.

You've quoted that Ambasthas are from Brahmin father and Vaishya mother and the son begotten by a Brahmin father in all the 3 castes is a Brahmin. Once again,you've quoted this sentence from a book and even provided the reference but you've intertwined the Caste and Varna(categories of Hinduism) here.

Then in the 3rd paragraph you've written about the Ambasth tribe in Mahabharat which clearly makes them Kshatriya.

As a citizen of India and a commoner in front of you(and not an Ambasth Kayasth), it doesn't MAKE ANY SENSE. It clearly seems to me like intentional degradation of a particular community by you,Mr.Ekdalian.

Mere quoting from a book isn't sufficient,it should also make sense.

Anyone who will read your wikipedia page will understand that it's ambiguous.

It's not about being a Kayasth or a Brahmin(caste) and not Varna. Everyone should have the right to add to wikipedia(quick Encyclopedia) but unnecessary degradation of a particular community is what I'm against.

I hope that it's not your intention and I'd like to make further changes in this page Mr.Eklavian. Plz don't use Wikipedia to spread wrong information like this.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but Wikipedia doesn't just require quoted statements only; instead they encourage the usage of adding info in YOUR OWN WORDS.

Dinopce (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply] 

Last but not the least, there's heaven and hell difference between Brahmin(varna) and Brahman(principle related to the cosmos).

Your article intertwines everything! Brahmin varna,Brahmin caste and Brahman(metaphysical concept of the Brahmaand or universe.

Your references are useless if your article doesn't make any sense.

Mr.Ekdalian or let me put it in a straight forward way,Mr.Bengali Brahmin(caste),plz don't try to defame any particular community.

Note:If that's not your intention and if it's my mistake of judging you wrongly, then I'm sorry that your article made me think that way about you.

Namaste.

Dinopce (talk) 16:32, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply] 

Just found one more thing in your article that caught my eye.

The following

"This differentiates the Ambasthas from the average Vaidyas, who were considered "unclean" and were denied the status accorded to the Ambastha.[6]".

Baidya are considered as Bhadralok in Bengal. You've called them as UNCLEAN.

Wikipedia is about writing about something so that the common people who don't have any knowledge about that topic can easily gain knowledge about it.

What you're doing here is not knowledge sharing but misusing your right as an administrator of this page which was clearly created by you to spew false information about Ambasth Kayasthas as whole.

Mr. Bengali Brahmin.

I've got deep respect for Brahmins(priests). I'm a Hindu and this is what my sanskaar teaches me. But your intentions don't seem clear to me!!

You're spewing venom against two communities of Bengal who are considered Bhadralok over there. BAIDYAS are also considered Brahmins only.

Let me give you my perspective without any quotations or references from any book.

The importance of varna or caste for that matter is the trait. It's in our genes!

I already told you about the confusion between Ambasthas and Vaidyas in Bengal but you didn't consider it.

Kayasthas are not the only ones who had mixed blood. Manusmriti is a live example of the Brahmin's misuse of their power. But nobody has written anything against the Brahmins in the Brahmin page.

This entire page is a clear misuse of your adminstrator rights. Nothing more and nothing less!!

Note:You've got administrator rights of this page. Please make judicious use of your power and spread knowledge for the betterment of the society and not to destroy the image of 2 of the communities which are part of your Bengali society specifically.

Namaste Dinopce (talk) 18:51, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dinopce, most of your statements are assumptions, and hence incorrect. You are a Ambashtha Kayastha yourself, therefore your very first assumption is that the article is about Ambashtha Kayastha. NO. Period. This article is all about the term 'Ambashtha'. This is not "my" article; no one owns any article here, WP:OWN. You are unnecessarily trying to find intentions behind editing this article, but do check my contributions, and you will be able to figure out that I am a neutral editor active here for a pretty long time. I would like to reiterate that this article is all about the term 'Ambashtha', and all reliably sourced statements associated with the term would be accomodated in this article as per WP:NPOV. Since the term is also associated with a sub-caste of Kayasthas, therefore reliable and verifiable (sourced) statements related to Ambashtha Kayasthas have also been incorporated in the article. Please stick to the basics of Wikipedia; would also request you to further continue any constructive discussion on Ambashtha on the article's talk page. Once again, this article is not about the Ambashtha Kayasthas, which is a separate caste / sub-caste altogether. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 06:32, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ekdalian,

I've added the paragraph space between the "Ambastha from Brahmin father...." AND "Ambastha also refers to a sub-caste of Kayasthas....".

This was creating a lot of confusion. I hope you'll not revert it this time!!

Also,I have a query.

The Ambashtha Kayasthas (found chiefly in Southern Bihar), Crooke suggests "may be connected with the old Ambastha caste of Western-Punjab mentioned in the Mahabharata" as some Kayasthas are also associated with the practice of medicine and surgery.^[1][2]

What is wrong with my edit above?

I've provided the source and reference as well.

Why

Dinopce (talk) 11:33, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply] 

2nd link is showing error here. Must have missed a letter over there Dinopce (talk) 11:35, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dinopce, sorry for the delayed response. The source provided didn't help much. Can you cite a source which mentions that Ambashtha Kayasthas are found mainly in Southern Bihar; then we can rephrase the statement. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 05:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"But Bihar was not the original homeland of the Ambashthas."

What do you understand from the previous sentence? :) Dinopce (talk) 05:32, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier Bihar meant Magadh region of Bihar. The Magadh region falls currently in the Southern-Bihar and Northern Jharkhand region.

Dinopce (talk) 05:35, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply] 

Hey Dinopce, I would like to see a reliable source, which categorically mentions 'Southern Bihar', that's how we edit in Wikipedia. Even if you know they are found mainly in Southern Bihar, then also we need a valid source for the same. You are not supposed to synthesize; read WP:SYN. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 05:42, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Ekdalian. Give me some time.

If I'll not be able to find the South-Bihar part. I'm ready to get it revert to only Bihar which is evident above. Dinopce (talk) 05:52, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=MihuAAAAMAAJ&q=South&hl=en

Pg60: It's mentioned South Bihar Dinopce (talk) 06:39, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

yes literally bro ekdalian is writing anything which doesn't make sense The Ambastha referred to in Smriti has got nothing to do with the Ambastha sub-caste of Kayasthas. Ambastha has two meanings. i had edited the page with both perspective but bro reverted everytime Dharmasevak20 (talk) 13:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi@Ekdalian It's regarding this line "The functionality of the Kayasthas, who identified themselves with "Chitragupta and paper-oriented service", was more significant before the 1870s, and historically, their caste status has been ambiguous."

I couldn't see any such thing written in the link that you've provided.

Can you provide the proper link? Dinopce (talk) 09:37, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dinopce, please go through page no. 42, for which the link has been provided; you should be able to understand. Also, in order to avoid copyright violation, we don't copy paste the content from the text; hope you understand. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 09:46, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi@Ekdalian, Sorry but I couldn't see any such thing that you've wrote. I've used my understanding to the core but even half of what you've written is not written over there.

The page no. 42 text says the following:

"speech,a consumption of goat flesh and a shared affinity for wine.74 And even though Kayastha would not become a caste category until the later nineteenth century,75 what was more significant before the 1870s was the functionality of....  

No preview available for this page"

How did you write the following from the above line?

"The functionality of the Kayasthas, who identified themselves with "Chitragupta and paper-oriented service", was more significant before the 1870s, and historically, their caste status has been ambiguous" 

There's NO MENTION of <Chitragupta,Paper-oriented service,historically their caste status is ambiguous> part. How did you rephrase something which is not there in the book? It's a case of addition of words from OUT OF NOWHERE.

I hope that my questions are neutral!?

Dinopce, I believe, you are checking a different page. Well, it's page 42. Wait, let me quote then. Ekdalian (talk) 11:04, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, not the link you are checking, Dinopce. Use the link in the Reference Section; or else check the link provided below:

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=9TElDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA42

Ekdalian (talk) 11:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No! I clicked the same link. THE PAGE NO.42 IS NOT VISIBLE! After page no.5 ,there's a blank page and then it's showing me page 162.

So,I typed the words "Functionality" in the search this book box present on the left side of this page. It's showing me the words that I've typed above.

What's the following link showing you?

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=9TElDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA42#v=snippet&q=functionality&f=false

If you use the above link, which you have provided, then you have to click on page 42, if it appears (it is appearing when I am clicking on your link). Otherwise, you may change your internet connection, and click on the link I have provided. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My INTERNET CONNECTION IS VERY FAST. If I'll download a movie,it'll download in 15-20 mins. Ok. Let me check from another device.

No! I checked from other devices as well. Changed my internet connection as well and then opened the links again. Page no. 42 is not visible after that. How can you see something that I can't?

Dinopce, let me quote the para from page 42. "There were further dimensions to Kayasthas' complex and ambiguous caste status. The Ain-i-Akbari may have listed Kayasthas as a 'caste', ................ And even though 'Kayastha' would not become a caste category until the later nineteenth century, what was more significant before the 1870s was the functionality of this looser group of pensmen who identified with Chitragupta and paper-oriented service. Though not framed in nineteenth-century debates, Kayasthas' varna status was, even in the Mughal period, difficult to define - whether they were twice-born (dvija) ........" Ekdalian (talk) 12:46, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Leave it. I'll ask other editors or admins whether they can see it or not. Dinopce (talk) 12:48, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) just ftr, I can verify that the quote is correctly reproduced – that is exactly what the book says. --bonadea contributions talk 16:40, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. So you can see that @bonadea? No idea as to why I can't see that.

Hi, guys. Dinopce, one of the big problems with Google Books is that not everybody sees the same things. It depends on which part of the world you're in, and other things too. Please see User:Uncle G/On common Google Books mistakes, especially [3]. Bishonen | tålk 09:22, 20 April 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Ok. Thanks Bishonen.

Can I interest you in semiprotection of this page for a few days, Ekdalian? Bishonen | tålk 19:52, 20 April 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Yes please, Bishonen. Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 05:44, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, 3 days. Bishonen | tålk 09:45, 21 April 2020 (UTC).[reply]

You are most welcome.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:58, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @Fylindfotberserk. Ekdalian (talk) 13:55, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, is this addition correct? You are knowledgeable in this topic area, so I asked . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:04, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is simply a POV edit meant to promote the Vaidya/Baidya caste; I have just reverted the edits. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 19:14, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that guy a sock? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:36, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah Fylindfotberserk, I am quite sure that he is a sock! Please check Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joshi punekar! Ekdalian (talk) 18:06, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely. Though I've a hunch that he might be this guy if not the other. Anyway, CU'll get them. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:09, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Create obstacle to add content to Sen (surname) and don't vandalism! Dr.SunBD (talk) 20:55, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:NOTVAND. You have been warned earlier & probably blocked as well. Think before you write on my talk page. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 18:53, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:33, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you so much for your recent work on the Karanam (caste) page. I really needed you. I had been deeply saddened by the vandalism there. Wish you joy and peace! Ayushsinha2222 (talk) 19:11, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message. Ekdalian (talk) 10:38, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, dont delete Ambattan details. I try to put best data only. Waked Bold Ambushed (talk) 11:40, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sir help me improve the Ambashtha details including Ayurvedic, Tamilnadu and Sri Lanka. Waked Bold Ambushed (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Heba Aisha. I noticed that you recently removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. If you have source regarding any case with counter verdict, bring it we can balance. For Your concern about lead, I have created a seperate section and also see WP:HSC, which the quote source fails, so I reverted it. Heba Aisha (talk) 19:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also,Raj era source are unreliable and not directly used but if a third party source interprets them, then the latter source could be used. Your revert hence is contentious. Heba Aisha (talk) 19:36, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Heba Aisha, first of all, I believe I have provided adequate explanation in the edit summary while editing; now, whether you agree or not is entirely different; all of us are expected to be logical and neutral while editing. And coming to the Raj era source, yes, interpretations by modern day authors are acceptable, while blind quoting is equivalent to the content of the Raj era source only. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 08:21, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brother, happy to see that you didn't reverted and added something more. The present version is acceptable as puts all view together. Basically, last one had one view only. Happy editing. Heba Aisha (talk) 12:36, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly don't remove my deletion in kumhar state division. Prajapati and kumhar not added in SC so far. So till that there is no need of adding that particular inclusion list new in community page.

Let me know if we need to have a detail conversation

Thanks in advance. Tamilan pugal (talk) 16:26, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, we have all seen what Heba Aisha is doing to articles on communities. Can we not bring in admin's attention? Do we have no way to stop her motivated disrupting editing? I am sure we can do something together. Ayushsinha2222 (talk) 10:33, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still believe in Manusmriti? Even Indian govt not following that in now a days.

Kindly let me know detail conversation. Tamilan pugal (talk) 20:32, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ekdlian - I have deleted Sudra Varna in this page. I know some people in India still following manusmriti. I think this is not a page to protarit them as a Shudra. Reason why i deleted this content is , they will feel bad after visiting this page. Even Wikipedia not protariting them in a good way.

So Kindly don't revert that content without my knowledge.

Looking forward for your response Tamilan pugal (talk) 21:19, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tamilan pugal, is the article on Kumhar an exception? All other caste articles including upper castes like Baidya & all mention them as Shudras as per reliable sources, though this is historical information only, and may have no relevance nowadays. So, if other caste can feel bad about it, do you think your caste is special, and caste members shouldn't feel bad about it, right? And let us follow our policies on Wikipedia, it's not just Manusmriti, but other sources mention the same as well. So, I must say that stop this POV removal, or else you may be blocked from further editing for edit warring; the article may also be protected from such POV edits, if required. Ekdalian (talk) 18:54, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I just checked other pages as well.Thank you for make me understand. Tamilan pugal (talk) 19:42, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, first of all, you learn about the title - Ghoshal. And then you do edits. It is already written in other pages that Ghoshal title is a Brahmin title. Professionalwriter1 (talk) 13:54, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Professionalwriter1, I guess you are new here. I don't need to learn, I know what I am doing. I am here for years, and aware of my responsibilities. I have asked for reliable source(s), otherwise anyone will remove it. Read WP:RS & WP:V first before writing on my talk page. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 14:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, wait for some time and I will give some reliable sources to let others know that Ghosal is a brahmin title. Professionalwriter1 (talk) 15:47, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi * Ekdalian, Before removing my edits on the Dutta page, first try to learn about the title- Dutta. Many of the people don't know about the title Dutta correctly. You are also one of them. Dutta is my title and I think that as Dutta is my title, I know a lot more about my title than you know. So try learning about the title Dutta from various sites before removing other's edits. From,

• Professionalwriter1 Professionalwriter1 (talk) 07:29, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Professionalwriter1, I am editing caste articles for years and have years of experience and studies; but that's not the point here. Because Dutta is your surname, you are constantly involved in what we call here as disruptive edits only having a single objective of glorifying the same, be it by removing a valid wikilink or tampering with sourced content, like you did in the article on Kulin Kayastha. We deal with people like you regularly, therefore we can easily identify your motives. If you continue with your unconstructive edits on Wikipedia, I shall issue an official warning on your talk page, and you may then be blocked from further editing if you still continue. Please take this seriously. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 14:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Your page is quite the honeypot, Ekdalian. I have warned the user. Bishonen | tålk 17:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

• • Thank you so much, Bishonen! Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 18:16, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so I have replied to *Bishoen yesterday that from now I will no longer do any kinds of edits in this Wikipedia page. Thank you. Professionalwriter1 (talk) 06:34, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ekdalian pls check the recent changes in Ambastha page. Thanks. Abhishek Sengupta 24 (talk) 16:19, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request § Digitization. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:45, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, TrangaBellam! Ekdalian (talk) 18:39, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement § BengHistory. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:04, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stop reverting it. Nadia Raj family is descendant of Bhattanarayan. Bengali Brahmins are traditionally followers of Shakti Kalikula tradition.

refer this http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article5882.html

Then do the necessary.

Hey IP editor, where is it mentioned that he was a Brahmin? Wikipedia is not about your knowledge/POV; reliable & verifiable sources are required for such claims. Also, do cite a WP:RS, along with page no. & url, which supports your statement "Bengali Brahmins are traditionally followers of Shakti Kalikula tradition"; read WP:V. Please be aware that there are discretionary sanctions in place for caste related articles, & especially the way you have reverted edits without discussions; you may be blocked if you continue like this. Further, for all article related discussions, use the article talk page, this is not the right place. Ekdalian (talk) 08:27, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I see several related IPs making the same edits and edit warring, so I have semiprotected the article rather than blocking the IP range, which is fairly large. Bishonen | tålk 08:44, 14 August 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you so much, Bishonen. We are really fortunate that we have an admin like you. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 10:12, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are enough sources available. I even provided the references. It is quite annoying the way you guys are subduing relevant sources.

Hello Ekdalian, why are traditional accounts removed from this page? What can be done?Mikemarssss (talk) 15:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mikemarssss, the reason/wikilink has already been shared with you on other talk pages. But don't worry, I will add reliable & properly sourced content when I get some time. We will come up with a better article. Ekdalian (talk) 18:46, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok.Thanks Ekdalian. Mikemarssss (talk) 08:49, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Completely unsourced; editors active on this page are so keen to establish the Brahmin link that they have not mentioned a single line about their actual social status, which is quite high indeed."

Hello, I thank you for your changes on the page. However, I didn't get what you wanted to convey through the last non-identifying relative clause of your sentence, that is, "which is quite high indeed". I will be grateful to you if you cast light on it a little here. Moreover, I request you to build the page. Your contributions will get the page stabler. Advaita2222 (talk) 16:32, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Advaita2222, regarding this part of my statement, I meant that the North Indian Kayasthas have quite high social status, and we should include the same citing reliable sources. Yes, in spite of paucity of time, I shall definitely look for reliable sources, and try to improve the article as & when I get some time. Thanks for writing to me regarding the article. Ekdalian (talk) 19:01, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bishonen | tålk 17:03, 24 August 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you for the email, Bishonen. I completely agree with what you have said. Thanks, once again! Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 18:13, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Ekdalian. I have partial-blocked Sketan from Chitraguptavanshi Kayastha for gaming the autoconfirmed requirements. See my comment on their page. Bishonen | tålk 19:42, 2 October 2021 (UTC).[reply]

My goodness!! They seem to go to any extent, previously two sock accounts were created just in order to abuse me!! Thank you so much, Bishonen. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 05:39, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

Anarchyte (talk) 11:36, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ekdalian. After reviewing your request, I have temporarily enabled rollback on your account until {{{expiry}}}. Keep in mind these things when using rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 17:38, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ekdalian, I speedied Vaidyabrahmin per your A10 nomination, but then discovered that it wasn't a recently created article, so A10 does not apply. I've recreated it and turned it into a redirect to Baidya instead. Bishonen | tålk 08:02, 25 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Got it Bishonen; it should be a recently created one only in order to qualify for A10. Thank you so much; the redirect would serve the purpose. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 09:01, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you think it will. I just warned Dr.SunBD against even thinking of changing it back. Bishonen | tålk 09:03, 25 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Update: Son of a gun! He hasn't technically reverted my redirect; he has just recreated the article under a different name, Vaidya Brahman. That's the last straw. Bishonen | tålk 13:03, 25 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Ha ha, my goodness!! Basically, some of these caste glorifiers become maniacs, and they can simply go to any extent, and he seems to be the perfect example. Thanks again for the update and your prompt action, Bishonen. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 14:24, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bishonen, would request you to protect the article on Vaidyabrahmin & if possible my talk page from obvious sock puppetry. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 18:03, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think, you may wait & watch whether this vandalism persists, or else whatever you think would be appropriate. Thanks & Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 18:40, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wait? Ha, no, not when our friend has flamed out like this. Wage sects was blocked as NOTHERE by another admin; I changed it to sock of Dr.SunBD, per WP:DUCK. And semi'd your page for a few days; let me know if problems persist later. Bishonen | tålk 20:15, 25 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you once again, Bishonen. Regards. Ekdalian (talk) 05:09, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When you get chance, can you please look at below link to provide your opinion there please? [4] MehmoodS (talk) 01:33, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, MehmoodS; I have added my opinion in the relevant discussion page. Ekdalian (talk) 06:35, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, Bishonen! Wishing you a truly happy & prosperous new year. Ekdalian (talk) 16:06, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The user: RegentsPark has advised me to ask for your help. See the last discussion on his talk page under title: "About recent changes on Charan page" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RegentsPark The issue is regarding the proper usage of verses of mythological texts like Ramayana & Mahabharata. I have written & tried to provide explanation on the talk page of RegentsPark. Please see the discussion. I hope you agree to help me on this issue. Thank you. Happy New Year. Krayon95 (talk) 19:16, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Krayon95, I shall check the article and related details soon. Happy New Year to you too. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 09:46, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Why did you revert my removal. It is just his imagination. It is evident that Chanakya born in 375 BC. How do you justify this. He is against Hindu and part of Anti-Hindu group. How can we take his book as reference. Please go through best research book The Human Record: Sources of Global History, Volume I: To 1500 (this says about Brahmins during 700 BC), i also have many references. These things cannot be concluded like this. So, we should remove it. Moreover he is a Periar follower, Anti-Hindu, and Anti-Brahmin. He wrote many things like this in his books.- MRRaja001 ^(talk) 07:53, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey User:MRRaja001, as per WP:NPOV, all points of view from reliable sources must be incorporated in the article; they could be contradictory as well. Moreover, in this case, the statement is attributed to the author, which clearly indicates that it is the author's point of view. If you can use the talk page of the article or WP:RSN to arrive at a logical consensus that the author/source is unreliable, then only the statement can be removed. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 09:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll discuss about this in talk page. Thanks - MRRaja001 ^(talk) 19:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A user Swapnil1101 constantly adding spams or poorly sourced content at Jaiswal (surname), with a single objective of glorifying caste. As per WP:RS, India TV, The Times of India, Dainik Bhaskar, Navbharat times and matrimonial sites (jeevansathi.com) are not considered reliable for history/caste related details. But the user Swapnil1101 kept on adding these sources which was already removed by me and one administrator. Also the user directly added level 3 warning on my talk page for a single revert. As you are a senior editor and I have seen your contributions in South Asian history. Your input would be highly appreciable in this article. Thanks and regards. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 11:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no objective of Gloryfying Caste. Most of the Citation were made to prove why they were degraded to low caste(vaishya). and you cheery picked my citations. I also included citation from official government sources(Report form 'West Bengal Government) that they are liquor makers and it seems you also don't have time to read my further references of book written by anthropologist K.S. Singh. All you are doing is revert by javascripts without using brain because you have Phd. degree from Denmark. Thanks Swapnil1101 (talk) 11:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Swapnil1101, please stay calm and civil while commenting, do not make personal remarks. Thanks. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 07:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dr.Pinsky, I have cleaned up the article for now. Swapnil1101, you need to cite modern scholarly sources by reliable authors. I shall try to find such sources as well for the article. Thanks! Ekdalian (talk) 18:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a ton Ekdalian. Best regards. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 07:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and Regrads Ekdalian. Swapnil1101 (talk) 08:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,I pinged you at sadgop talk page but you didn't respond.Please help me to find the source is WP:RS or not.opinion from an admin can also be helpful.thanks. Nobita456 (talk) 08:32, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nobita456, I have already reverted their edits. You seem to have added another source as well, and now it looks fine in my opinion. Ekdalian (talk) 12:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments,I just wanted to know is the source Mitra is reliable or not?? Nobita456 (talk) 13:00, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Ekdalian (talk) 13:07, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ThanksNobita456 (talk) 13:29, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, User: Ekdalian. Thank you for the correction regarding recent edits on the Charan page. It would be great if we can discuss beforehand if you have some issues or concerns about any changes. Since you are not familiar(assuming) with this social group, I understand if you find something strange in the article as I would be glad to explain those changes or help with the citations & sources. And I did add the term 'pastoralist' since it seemed important as you highlighted it yourself. Thanks.Krayon95 (talk) 12:02, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Ekdalian, I thank you so much for all your contributions to all those pages. I am sure that there are many more people grateful to you for all your wonderful contributions. I have always had great deference for you.

I want to bring your attention to some of the recent edits made by a user named Nobita456; the edits plausibly are with a view to maligning the caste status of a single caste as the user belong to another caste from the same region. I request you to bring admin attention to this edit-warring as well, if possible.

I have been indebted to you for all your wonderful work so far. May peace and bliss be your abode forever! Advaita2222 (talk) 20:50, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, Advaita2222. I have already brought it to the attention of admins! Let's see! Stay blessed. Ekdalian (talk) 07:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nobita has asked me to post this: "I unreservedly apologize to Ekdalian for suggesting he was being racist, and I will not make such accusations again. Nobita456 (talk) 6:09 pm, Yesterday (UTC+0)" Doug Weller talk 13:27, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, Doug Weller for the initiative! Thanks, Nobita456. Ekdalian (talk) 13:38, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All my forefathers surname was ghosal as far i know.They all are belong to Namasudra Community. How much you want to see Namasudra Ghosal.If you are in doubt, come to my area... I have never said that the title Ghosal does not belong to Brahmin...Roy,Majumder,Halder,Bagchi,,, all those surname is among the Brahmins...But lower caste people also use those surname.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghosal11 (talk • contribs) 12:06, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ghosal11, it's not about whether I believe you or not or whether your ancestors have been using the surname. As per our policies, you can add sourced content only; please read WP:RS and WP:V. Hope you understand! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 12:57, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it is regarding this edit. There is no URL so can't verify. Is this OK? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:11, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fylindfotberserk, thanks for pointing it out. I have checked, and removed the unsourced content (failed verification). Ekdalian (talk) 17:19, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:20, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it is regarding this edit. Here atleast, the IP expaliend in the edit summary that Das are used by other communities of Bengal. Obviously, it doesn't warrant removal of the word Bengal from it, can you find RS sources that says the surname is used by Kayasthas of Bengal. I was unable to find any. Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:08, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done, Fylindfotberserk. Ekdalian (talk) 18:15, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:21, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Ekdalian, hope you're doing well. The article Suvarna Banik may contain original research. Would you mind having a look. Thanks. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 20:18, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Checked thoroughly & modified some parts. Thanks, Dr.Pinsky! Ekdalian (talk) 12:01, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Much appreciated. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 14:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you might like to see these changes [5] that are largely unsourced with a POV, also these poor edits. - 117.201.115.163 (talk) 11:16, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		A respectful and keen editor. Wish you good health and happiness. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 16:34, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, Dr.Pinsky! Stay blessed. Ekdalian (talk) 17:35, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I had already informed you about the sourced content but again you revert the information which i shared before , i belong to this caste and know much more then anyone else about this subject, i didn't make much changes but only add some incomplete information about the topic which i get though reading books. Again i want to say that you are senior and experienced editor , im giving you proper respect but thrust me I want to share only relevant information with our users — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishvesh Rathore (talk • contribs) 17:06, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I had already informed you about the source and i have much more information about the subject if you want, i belong to this caste and have sufficient information about it. I don't know why you are in favour of spreading fake and incomplete information , if somebody want to share something and shared you information about the subject so atleast you can thrust on him/her. You are senior then me,you can guide me about the editing since im rookie in it but im in favour of spreading right and complete information. Vishvesh Rathore (talk) 17:21, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Vishvesh Rathore, Wikipedia is not about what you think as right! That being said, I will assume good faith and check the same. Since you belong to the caste, as mentioned above, though there would be COI, but I shall weigh the source as a neutral editor here. Do share the complete details of the source (author, publisher, url, page numbers, etc.) on the article talk page; we need to check whether the same is a WP:RS & verify as well as per WP:V. Hope you understand, Wikipedia follows certain policies; we need to adhere to the same. Ekdalian (talk) 18:12, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is to inform you that a discussion regarding the Karana-Kayastha connection is going on in WP:DRN. You are requested to express your concerns here. Thanks. Regards, Satnam2408 (talk) 15:22, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A recent change was made here. Since you have edited the article before, I think you should see this. 117.201.113.99 (talk) 16:54, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Wishing you a very happy & prosperous new year, Bishzilla! Ekdalian (talk) 17:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wishing you a year filled with prosperity, happiness, and good health. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 12:21, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Dr.Pinsky. Wishing you a very happy & prosperous new year!Ekdalian (talk) 17:44, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]