260:
which are supposed to be "used with caution". Its use as a source for mentioning the supposed place of origin and other information related to Gaur
Brahmins in the concerned article doesn't seem to be problematic or pseudo-historical in any way. Its removal seems very unwarranted. Besides, like so many British era sources, that book source is also heavily used in numerous wiki articles. Please explain more precisely on why that source should not be used in article
137:
291:. You seem to be interested in discussing it only after I removed it, and not before (the above comment of mine was on 13th Jan). Yes, people seem to enforce a blanket ban on British Era sources on caste/communities except census figures from that period. I beleive there are numerous consensuses against using those at
329:
doesn't even talk about the concerned source (Jogendranath
Bhattacharya book) particularly. Its emphasis is largely on the works of British/ European authors not on those of Indian authors. On another note, I want to discuss something about another article with you. Should I do it on your talk page ?
259:
doesn't deem the
British era sources completely unreliable or unusable and neither does it impose a blanket ban on their use. Jogendranath Bhattacharya's 1896 book "Hindu Castes and Sects" (the source in question) isn't even mentioned specifically and separately among the listed British era sources
324:
I'm not much active on this platform nowadays. I missed reading your earlier comment. There must be some specific conditions under which the
British era sources are not supposed to be used. To not use them at all especially in stub articles where valuable and non-controversial content can be added
182:
166:. 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
151:
268:
that doesn't even mention this source individually to remove it and its related content without precisely mentioning what exactly is wrong with them doesn't appear justified. -
73:
79:
226:
edit. The reason it was removed was because it used a
British Era source and sources from that time period are not considered reliable per
205:
38:
201:
24:
68:
175:
187:
59:
304:
239:
105:
101:
97:
92:
114:
319:
300:
250:
235:
163:
49:
119:
64:
145:
45:
194:
159:
116:
174:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
171:
326:
296:
292:
288:
265:
261:
256:
227:
167:
136:
331:
284:
269:
20:
178:
describes the
Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
155:
are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
118:
339:
308:
277:
243:
209:
191:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add
181:
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
149:
is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All
120:
15:
283:
Perhaps you need to discuss that in the talk page with
231:
223:
162:
is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
27:, where you can send them messages and comments.
325:using them doesn't sound justified. The essay
8:
287:who removed it in the first place, per
7:
146:2023 Arbitration Committee elections
130:ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
14:
264:. Making a passing reference to
135:
39:Click here to start a new topic.
185:and submit your choices on the
1:
210:00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
164:Knowledge arbitration process
36:Put new text under old text.
340:22:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
309:10:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
278:00:01, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
244:10:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
44:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
358:
202:MediaWiki message delivery
74:Be welcoming to newcomers
335:
273:
199:to your user talk page.
295:which is mentioned in
230:. See the explanation
69:avoid personal attacks
160:Arbitration Committee
143:Hello! Voting in the
222:Hi, it is regarding
255:Hi. The essay page
176:arbitration policy
80:dispute resolution
41:
212:
127:
126:
60:Assume good faith
37:
349:
323:
320:Fylindfotberserk
301:Fylindfotberserk
254:
251:Fylindfotberserk
236:Fylindfotberserk
200:
198:
139:
121:
16:
357:
356:
352:
351:
350:
348:
347:
346:
317:
248:
220:
215:
214:
192:
140:
132:
123:
122:
117:
86:
85:
55:
12:
11:
5:
355:
353:
345:
344:
343:
342:
312:
311:
219:
216:
183:the candidates
152:eligible users
141:
134:
133:
131:
128:
125:
124:
115:
113:
112:
109:
108:
88:
87:
84:
83:
76:
71:
62:
56:
54:
53:
42:
33:
32:
29:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
354:
341:
337:
333:
328:
321:
316:
315:
314:
313:
310:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
282:
281:
280:
279:
275:
271:
267:
263:
262:Gaur Brahmins
258:
252:
246:
245:
241:
237:
233:
229:
225:
218:Gaur Brahmins
217:
213:
211:
207:
203:
196:
190:
189:
184:
179:
177:
173:
169:
165:
161:
156:
154:
153:
148:
147:
138:
129:
111:
110:
107:
103:
99:
96:
94:
90:
89:
81:
77:
75:
72:
70:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
51:
47:
46:Learn to edit
43:
40:
35:
34:
31:
30:
26:
22:
18:
17:
247:
221:
186:
180:
157:
150:
144:
142:
91:
285:User:Sitush
188:voting page
172:topic bans
168:site bans
82:if needed
65:Be polite
25:talk page
93:Archives
50:get help
19:This is
195:NoACEMM
332:Vibhss
327:WP:RAJ
297:WP:RAJ
293:WP:INB
289:WP:BRD
270:Vibhss
266:WP:RAJ
257:WP:RAJ
228:WP:RAJ
21:Vibhss
78:Seek
336:talk
305:talk
274:talk
240:talk
234:. -
232:here
224:this
206:talk
158:The
67:and
23:'s
338:)
307:)
299:.
276:)
242:)
208:)
197:}}
193:{{
170:,
104:,
100:,
48:;
334:(
322::
318:@
303:(
272:(
253::
249:@
238:(
204:(
106:3
102:2
98:1
95::
52:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
