::::Unfortunately for you. As per the discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard, most agree that it is not a reliable source. It may be appropriate for WhatsApp group chats but a different standard is used on Wikipedia. As I have advised, there is also the 3 revert rule and what you are doing in this situation may be considered [[WP:Canvassing]] [[User:RuudVanClerk|RuudVanClerk]] ([[User talk:RuudVanClerk|talk]]) 17:38, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
::::Unfortunately for you. As per the discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard, most agree that it is not a reliable source. It may be appropriate for WhatsApp group chats but a different standard is used on Wikipedia. As I have advised, there is also the 3 revert rule and what you are doing in this situation may be considered [[WP:Canvassing]] [[User:RuudVanClerk|RuudVanClerk]] ([[User talk:RuudVanClerk|talk]]) 17:38, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
{{Od}}
{{Od}}
{{PING|RuudVanClerk}}, i saw only one comment there and you are misleading us to say that everyone agrees.`[[User:Heba Aisha|Heba Aisha]] ([[User talk:Heba Aisha|talk]]) 17:52, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
{{PING|RuudVanClerk}}, i saw only one comment there and you are misleading us to say that everyone agrees.`[[User:Heba Aisha|Heba Aisha]] ([[User talk:Heba Aisha|talk]]) 17:52, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
:Incorrect. @[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]], @[[User:RegentsPark|RegentsPark]] and myself agreed it was not a reliable source. That’s three. @[[User:LukeEmily|LukeEmily]] was unsure. So only one person thinks it’s a reliable source and that’s you. You may wish to work on your English comprehension. [[User:RuudVanClerk|RuudVanClerk]] ([[User talk:RuudVanClerk|talk]]) 17:54, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
:Incorrect. @[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]], @[[User:RegentsPark|RegentsPark]] and myself agreed it was not a reliable source. That’s three. @[[User:LukeEmily|LukeEmily]] was unsure. So only one person thinks it’s a reliable source and that’s you. You may wish to work on your English comprehension. [[User:RuudVanClerk|RuudVanClerk]] ([[User talk:RuudVanClerk|talk]]) 17:54, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
::May be, but they are not editing in this topic area, and if this is so, we need to scrutinize a lot of articles about princely states of Bihar, where the users have used similar authors. Wait, and let me scrutinize the various articles like [[Kharagpur Raj]] and all.[[User:Heba Aisha|Heba Aisha]] ([[User talk:Heba Aisha|talk]]) 17:56, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage ofIndia-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit theproject page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject ofHistory on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
YaRaabAlHind andItWiki97, please discuss the issue here on the talkpageusingsources to back-up your claims and invite athird opinion if you cannot resolve it yourself (other editors are welcome to chime in too). I have protected the page for now, and the protection can be shortened or extended depending upon how the discussion proceeds. Note that continued edit-warring or disruption may lead to the involved editors being blocked or sanctioned; hopefully that won't be needed.Abecedare (talk)17:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
References
^Jha, Hetukar (1 October 1977). "Lower-Caste Peasants and Upper-Caste Zamindars in Bihar (1921-1925): An Analysis of Sanskritization and Contradiction between the Two Groups".The Indian Economic and Social History Review.14 (4):549–559.doi:10.1177/001946467701400404.
The only issue seems to be whether Rajput or Bhumihar goes first. The original had Rajput first but the other editor wanted to put Bhumihar first likely for caste promoting reasons. You can put the second paragraph back with Bhumihar first if that would end the dispute but I was just reverting an unneeded change.YaRaabAlHind (talk)18:49, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Stuff from Shodhganga can be dodgy - the name Hetukar Jha rings a bell but whether good or bad, I cannot recall right now. One thing is certain: as far as Wikipedia is concerned, the Bhumihars are not Brahmins - yes, they claim to be such but it is a claim not widely accepted outside their own community.
I am not sure what else might be in dispute here but the phrasing would need a copyedit, eg there is no such word asholded. Easily fixed if it goes back in the article. -Sitush (talk)01:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is this book a reliable source? Published by Vani Prakashan. Will take it to the reliable sources notice board and and based on their judgement will remove the reference and sentence. Further input is welcome here.RuudVanClerk (talk)15:27, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
RuudVanClerk, the discussion you are talking about doesn't exist at all. You got this reply for your query[1] and the respondent didn't say that it's not a reliable source. Stop deliting the sourced content. Go throughWP:RS properly, Hindi sources are also reliable source and can be used on English Wikipedia.Heba Aisha (talk)17:09, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The current discussion indicates that it is not a reliable source I am afraid. Please refrain from rude remarks. If you feel passionately about this, then you should demonstrate this. From what I can see, English isn’t you’re first language but generally, we only accept work from academic publishers and authors.RuudVanClerk (talk)17:45, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately for you. As per the discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard, most agree that it is not a reliable source. It may be appropriate for WhatsApp group chats but a different standard is used on Wikipedia. As I have advised, there is also the 3 revert rule and what you are doing in this situation may be consideredWP:CanvassingRuudVanClerk (talk)17:38, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
May be, but they are not editing in this topic area, and if this is so, we need to scrutinize a lot of articles about princely states of Bihar, where the users have used similar authors. Wait, and let me scrutinize the various articles likeKharagpur Raj and all.Heba Aisha (talk)17:56, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
