Talk:Marathi people
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pl add brief biographies of prominent Maharashtrians. mahawiki 14:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Great work on expanding this article. The last time I saw this was a stub. Commendeble work indeed.
--NRStalk|mail 13:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Credit goes to Arya Rajya Maharashtra.It is good to see Marathi wikipedians awakening and contributing finally.mahawiki 18:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Trivia section
Very POV. There are claims of Maharashtra being the most improtant contributor in cricket, film, etc, etc but where are the stats? Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 07:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
- I have removed all the POV sounding statements. I have also added references and citations, in case someone wants them. Also, Zaheer plays for Baroda team but he is originally from Shrirampur in Ahmadnagar district. He speaks fluent Marathi at his home and many times with Marathi media as well. He has a restaurant in Pune as well.
- --Arya Rajya Maharashtra 07:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Stop removing tags
Stop removing "citation needed" tags that other users add without providing citations. Also if I am right(admin:Bluguyen may please confirm), other WP articles are not supposed to be used as citations. Provide better citations and dont remove tags before providing citations. Also about Gururaj Deshpande, provide citation that he is Marathi. Sarvagnya 08:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Sarvagnya,we are not supposed to provide citations for each and every senetence here.Pl dont forget their's a article about Kannadi ppl also!Stop taking revenge of ur defeats!Grow up.mahawiki 10:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
- Nobody is asking for citations for each and every thing. I am not asking for citation to prove that Madhuri Dixit(incidentally my favourite actress of all time - Aishwarya is not in my list of faves) is Marathi. I am only asking for citations for borderline cases and cases where the Marathi roots are not commonly known. Sarvagnya 17:10, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- But, then again, what do you define by borderline and commonly known. These things are subjective. What is known to you may be unknown to other. Similarly, what is unknown to you may be well-known to others. Can you give a citation to prove that "Madhuri Dixit is Marathi is commonly known" ? Why are mongering a war out of nothin' at all ? Why are you acting so childishly, Sarvagnya ? Take my advice, just chill !
-
- --Arya Rajya Maharashtra 17:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- So what is common for an Indian might not be for someone from say Iceland. a user from another location might not see it as common that Madhuri Dixit is from Bombay and ask for citation. [1]Can be a citation for her place and date of birth.
-
So defining borderline or commonly known is not required. Even mainstream can be challenged if one wants to. The way mahawiki and Arya are going people will start to question mainstream too. Sarvagnya is sticking to a narrower no of issues, and if uncited he has the right to remove it, and it not called vandalism. Also mahawiki has been told in the past not to use kannadi- he persists. The right term is Kannadiga. To persist with Kannadi is rude and counterproductive and can lead to admin's taking action. Why don't you take it as a challenge and source the citations ? Will add to the quality of the article and ensure what you source stays on the article rather than it get deleted a few months later. Haphar 18:06, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Am I missing something here ? There seems to be a link. Haphar, how do you know Mahawiki has been told not to use Kannadi before. And were you checking and picking where and when mahawiki used that word ? Why would you do that ? And how do you know "Kannadi" is rude ? Give me a citation ! The link you gave proves nothing. It just shows that IMDB knows Madhuri is Marathi. But say one of my friends doesn't know it. Say most people in the West don't know it. Then ? By the way, you forget that I can tag many "Kannadi" articles if I want. I know Sarvagnya got a considerable "defeat" at the hands of mahawiki in the Belgaon article and that's the reason why he is trying to create bumps in this article. But what about you ? I thought you were assuming good faith. But I seriously doubt now.... As for Kannadi and Kannadiga. Well, Kannadi is Marathi for Kannadiga. We, Marathi people refer to "People speaking Kannada language" as Kannadi. So, there is nothing rude about it. As I said give me a citation that "Kannadi" is rude and another one that "Kannadi" is not Marathi for Kannadiga.
-
- Go get it !!! Will be a great challenge for you :)) !!!!!!
-
- By the way, Arya and Mahawiki, you are doing a great job, keep on rocking !!!!
-
- Also, I would say that this is a nonissue being blown out of proportion. This article is just fine. Let it be.
-
- Sarvagnya, you need to remain civil and there is no need for a "Tit-for-Tat" attitude. These things are actually proving counterproductive to Wikipedia. Again I would tell the same thing that I told Haphar - Assume Good Faith Keep Rockin' but No Messin' !!!
So if you would go through the history of the dispute which has been fought here and on other pages you would not ask that question ( where mahawiki was asked not to use the word) so he knows, and if you can search you would know too. So that is how i know. And if you could do some research before coming in you would know too. I am in Maharashtra- I know Marathi speaking people and no one here uses the word Kannadi. So if you claim it is a word that is used please do get the citation. As Mahwiki has been told not to use this before ( by an admin) the onus is on him to get the citation. The good faith is there, which is why the citations are being asked for. Would request you to help in the same. About Madhuri and the link ? I gave it to show place of birth and date of birth. and that's what I mentioned ( if you could read it ). I have given it as an example to give for her place and date of birth, not for her language. So if someone of your friends does not know about place or date , that's the link to get. So as you said Do assume good faith ( plus read a little bit) to help with the rockin man. So keep rockin in those citations please as there is no info on Israel or Mauritius that i have seen in all this singing. Haphar 18:48, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Hey, cool guys. Well, really ! Actually, Marathi people use "Kannadi" while conversing in Marathi with other Marathi people. Obviously, they wouldn't use Kannadi with you. It's only here that I find that Kannadi is rude ! Anyway, if people don't like it then all I can say is don't use it. As for Israel, see Bene Israel.
-
- And Keep Rockin'
-
-
- Well North Indians while talking among themselves call all South Indians " Madrasi's". Which they might not find offensive but south Indians do. Since this is wikipedia and the word is being used in a discussion with a person who is a Kannadiga, restraint would help.Haphar 09:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Sources required
Can we get sources on Marathi people being primary in Goa- ie is Konkani= Marathi origin as well as sources to say Marathi people are "significant" in Mauritius as well as Israel. I think the total jews of Indian origin are miniscule in Israel. And I have no clue as to the numbers in Mauritius, but as the claim has been made, i am sure there would be reliable sources to back the claims. Haphar 13:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Haphar firstly see Rashtrakuta Kaveri kannada and numerous other articles which have no sources.Ecah and everything cannot be cited (courtesy-a Kannadi wikipedian),on similar lines,each and every thing on this article cannot be backed by source.Few things are left for ur common sense.mahawiki 13:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
- So let me tell you a few rules of wikipedia. If it cannot be sourced then a citation required tag can be put and then if the details are not provided the uncited comments can be deleted. for instance check the tag put in the start of this article:- [2] Not my rules, not my interpretation, pls check with an admin if you doubt me ( and Blnguyen seems to be on a break so try another admin User:Gurubrahma, or User:Samir. Check the India article ( a featured article )- [3]the Demographics section gives it's references . So another article NOT conforming to this rule does not allow for this article to not adhere to the rules. You can ask for citations on those articles, and unless reliable sources are given ( for instance a blog discussion is not a reliable resource, neither is an obscure website not known to anyone else) you can remove the uncited content there also. Which is why superlatives like "director extraordiare" are POV and to be removed. You might know a famous personality and write stuff based on your knowledge, but that too would not be acceptable on wikipedia unless it can be backed up by sources. Haphar 17:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Systemized Vandalism
Few users are resorting to systemized and synchronized vandalism here. Although User:Sarvagnya stopped adding senseless tags, few editors are still making statements before confirming facts. Anyways, I am not gonna waste time on that, but let me make a few points.
As I said earlier, Zaheer Khan is from Maharashtra and is Marathi. Refer to my comment above. As for adding Farrokh Engineer and Karsan Ghavri, let me make it clear that this list is of Marathi people or people whose mother-tongue is Marathi or people of Marathi-origin, not of "people who reside in Maharashtra" or "Residents of Maharashtra". Farokkh Engineer and Karsan Ghavri, both do NOT speak Marathi. Their mother tongues are Farsi and Gujarathi respectively. Same thing applies for Shastri. If we include Residents of Maharashtra in this list, the list will become too long for Wikipedia. We would have to add Shahrukh Khan, Dino Morea, Shilpa Shetty (our Kannadi fanatic won't be happy then...;))...), Aishwarya Rai (I would be happy....;))...), Dilip Kumar and so on.... Tell me would they fit the definition of Marathi people. Also immigrants to Mumbai, never like calling themselves Maharashtrians or Marathi people. Another thing being this is an ethno-linguistic group, not a regional group.
As far as Norman Pritchard is concerned, he was not the first Indian to win medal. He won in 1930s when India was still a British colony. After independence Jadhav was the first Indian to win medal. Please do NOT belittle the great man's achievements.
I think most things are clear now. From now on, in future, please discuss on talk page before removing authentic information as POV or adding tags.
--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 14:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Norman Pritchard did win it for India. Please mention " Independent India" if you want to make a claim of "first individual medal" and Maj Rathore also exists as an individual medal winner. Ratan Tata is born in Mumbai as were as his ancestors, that is different from a Shah Rukh who was born in Delhi and lived there till he was in his 20's. Raj Kapoor was not born in Maharashtra, though he stayed here, but Rishi /Randhir was as are their children ( ie Kareena) so none of them may be of your "original marathi stock" but compared to a Shah rukh or a Dilip kumar those born here in the state have a stronger claim to it. As mentioned if those born here speak the language do they qualify even if they are Parsi ?
And I dont know why Haphar added Balwinder Sandhu. He removed it though.
Haphar, I know you are doing it in good faith, but the list should be limited to Marathi-speakers. If you want, we can create another article say "List of notable residents of Maharshtra" or something like that. You did a good job though.
--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 15:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Zaheer Khan is from Shrirampur.He is a Maharashtrian since his mother-tongue is Marathi.mahawiki 15:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] ettiquette
This is not a systemised vandalism. Someone with a POV that does not match yours is not a vandal. A vandal is someone who adds unrelated stuff which is not linked at all to the article. If you want to keep the article "ethno-linguistic" ,and if you want to keep people who have been in Maharashtra for some 3-4 generations out of your " Marathi People" article ( ie the Tata's) then please rename the article as Marathi "speaking" people. ( and if Farokh Engineer happens to know and "speak" Marathi despite being Parsi- does that still keep him out ?) I do not know of any other article on wiki that tries to be so parochial so I am not sure if it is the right way to go, but I am sure you will hear of it if such ethno linguistic cuts are O.K or not.Haphar 17:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
- Haphar, if they speak Marathi, I have no objection to them being mentioned here. But the people themselves do not want to be called Marathi themselves. I don't know much about Parsis, but almost all other ethnic people, then they may be Punjabi or Gujarati or Kannadi, they don't want to call themselves Marathi. Even Parsis use a dialect of Farsi, highly influenced by Gujarati, then how can they be called Marathi. It's a group of people whose "Mother-Tongue" (Maayboli in Marathi) is Marathi. Marathi is based in their ethos. And that's what this group is.
- See, I have utmost respect for the Tatas. I consider them as fellow "original" Mumbaikars. But, they are still not Marathi. They haven't adopted the language or the culture as yet. As it is this group is defined by ones who are traditionally Marathi or whose mother-tongue is Marathi. For example Zaheer Khan is Maharashtrian because his mother-tongue is Marathi. But then Munaf Patel is not Marathi, although he stays in Mumbai and plays for Mumbai because his mother-tongue is not Marathi. Similarly for others in this list. Maybe after 4-5 generations more, when the Tatas become more Marathianized, then they will be automatic inclusions in this group. But now, it won't be correct to put them in this group. Even the Tatas themselves wouldn't like it. (Although Ratan Tata said he is a Maharashtrian, while accepting "Maharashtra Gaurav" award. But for that see Maharashtrian article - The word has two meanings.)
- I mistook Sarvagnya's edits for you. Sorry, I called your edits vandalism. Which they were not.
- --Arya Rajya Maharashtra 18:01, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
- LOL. He thought I made those edits and called it vandalism. Once he realised that someone else did it, the same edits became good faith edits. Ha ha. Sarvagnya 18:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Call the article "People of Marathi origin " then. No cause for confusion then. Haphar 18:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Improvement
I have even added names to the lists of people on the page, so I am trying to "add" to the article and not take away from it. However the confrontational approach, not listening to others ( and the jumping in attacking comments by Rock Star) are not looking to resolve the issue but raise temperatures. So let me reiterate- there is a lot of good stuff in the article, and if the disputes go away you can work on adding even more to other articles you have interest in. But without citations there would be questions asked and the dispute would linger. Over the rest of the article and it's contents and disputes you all can continue. However I request that sources be given for the " significant population in Israel" as well as "significan population in Mauritius" claim. From the same logic you gave for Parsi's not being a part of Maratha people, Jews from Mumbai do not qualify as Marathi.Haphar 19:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Also pls check the following links to get more names to add to your lists. :- [4] and [5] . Haphar 20:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well, Haphar, these guys, Arya and Mahwiki have done a really good job. I mean the last time I came here the article was a small stub. But they have really expanded it brilliantly. And if instead of appreciating their effort if we go on asking for citations and start finding small glitches then it certainly is not good. They deserve a good pat on the back. I mean, both of them seem to be new to Wikipedia and we must not sledge them rightaway.
- As for Marathi Jews, Haphar, you don't seem to know about their history. No probs. I will provide some info. Bene Israeli Jews have been living in Maharashtra for more than 2000 years. That's a pretty long time. They have totally absorbed Marathi culture in them. Not only do they speak Marathi but they think Marathi. Their surnames are similar to those of Marathi Hindus (Cheulkar, Masurkar, etc..). In these 2000 years they have intermarried with Marathi Hindus and have adopted Marathi culture. But most of all, they refer to themselves as Marathi manoos (person). Tell you what there is a Marathi daily in Israel. For more information on Bene Israel (aka Marathi Jews) check the Wikipedia article on them. And all this info is from Wikipedia itself, the net and reputed newspapers like "The Times Of India". I think you must have confused Baghdadi Jews with Bene Israel. Baghdadi Jews are miniscule in population and very few of those are there in Maharashtra. Most of Baghdadi Jews are in Kolkata and Gujarat. So, one can't call them Marathi. Certainly, those haven't been mentioned in this article, I guess.
- Last, but not the least, Keep Rockin' in Good Faith !!!!
-
- Absolutely ! it's a good job and it can be made better by clarifying some facts so that they can withstand scrutiny. For instance Bene Israel can be mentioned in the article itself ! with the wiki link so that people know about this aspect. I think it should also be highlighted that Jews stayed in India ( and Maharashtra in particular) with NO prosecution ( except maybe by the Portugese) unlike most other places where Jews stayed.
- However the Bene Israel article shows them to be about .08% of the population of Israel. I do not think that can be seen as "significant" marathi presence. So the way around it can be to reword the table and name it "Areas with marathi presence" rather than "Areas with significant Marathi presence". Haphar 09:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
- The above troll is vgowda.The Kannadi fanatic is back again!Maharashtrians are best!
Jai Hind Jai Maharashtra. mahawiki 05:17, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Oh my, why are you guys hellbent on stalking us. Don't you have any other work. First of all, mind your language Kiritnut. Mumbai is Maharashtra's. Who is ruling Bangalore ? Gujarati Muslim Azim Premji !!!! You are fools. Don't you talk anything about our Empire ! We are extremely proud people. Not like you, who have left all your pride away. Kannnadi propaganda machine is going allguns blazing. Your gang of Kannadabadi, Sarvagni, Vgowda and you will not succeed. Please stop this nonsense. I hope you fools get wisdom first
- -Arya Rajya Maharashtra 04:46, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Addition of new section 'Festivals'
I have added new section 'Festivals' in this article. Not sure whether we should keep it here or move it to other main articles like Maharashtra. Work is still in progress...we may decide where it fits most and retain it either here or move it to appropriate article. Thanks!
Info4all 23:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Notable Marathi People
I think Gururaj Deshpande (sycamore) is Kanadi. Anyone agrees? - Parag Jagtap
This section and List of people from Maharashtra have a lot of duplicate entries. I thought of putting a merge notice, but then I realized that List of people from Maharashtra also includes a lot of non-Marathi-speaking people (such as Parsis and Gujaratis). But still, I feel duplicating such a long list is not good. Any suggestions? utcursch | talk 15:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sources
Despite requests still have no response on sources for claim of "significant" Maratha population in Israel and Mauritius. Bene Israel as a percentage of Israel population is in decimal points. No info at all on Mauritius. Request sources. Had removed the word significant in infobox, even that has been put back. Please find a way of resolving this, possibilities are- find a source- remove word "significant" or remove Israel and Mauritius from the list.Haphar 13:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- I have moved Mauritius and Israel to "Other". Pls discuss before reverting. Haphar 15:55, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
States other than those included in the population table may have larger Marathi population than certainly countries like Switzerland or even United Kingdom where Marathi people are a miniscule % of the British Indian population. User:Shakher59 16:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Dawood Ibrahim
i think dawood ibrahim should be included in the other's section,his surname is kaskar,he was born in ratnagiri,and i think he would still be speaking marathi,you cant just selectively exclude people who you dont like,even if many gujarati's wont like jinnah,he is still in the gujarati people list125.63.91.11 06:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] disagreement regarding related ethnic groups
An anonymous user has left this comment on my user page [6]. I am copying it here to carry on with the discussion:
With regard to Marathi People -related ethnic groups , you "strictly speaking people can only be linguistically related". On what basis, you make this assertion ? i am a Maharastrian Deshastha . However, Kannada speaking Deshastha are so closely related that we never had problems getting married to each other !!.
I have requested 74.9.96.126 to continue the discussion here. There seems to be some confusion(to me or to him/her?) regarding the edit under question. So this has been my reply so far(on my user page):
OK first thing the edit summary you have written to me about "strictly speaking people can only be linguistically related" wasn't written by me but by User:AMbroodEY in this edit: [7] If you are talking about my revert of your edit [8] then that was because related peoples section usually refers to the ethnic-racial categories to which a community belongs.
Request 74.9.96.126 to add his points here so we can discuss the issue. Thank you --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 13:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Related ethnic groups: Indo-european & Indo-iranian now refer to language group rather than ethnic. As a Marathi man, I believe, I have stronger links, ethnically and culturally to the Dravidian population of Andhra, Karnataka , Kerala or Tamil Nadu than to Europeans such as Russians, French or German or even to the Iranians. I am a Maharastrian Deshastha brahmin. Kannada speaking Deshastha brahmin are so closely related to us related that we freely intermarry !! 24.187.26.104 23:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)Shakher59 22:04, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Even Lingayts across the borders intermarry. I am not sure as to whether the related categoies should include only linguistic categories or also (geopgraphically) neighbouring groups. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 05:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Lingayats and Deshahtas make a very small percentage of Marathi population like the Bene Israelis... Plus Kannada Deshashta Brahmins were originally Maharashtrians who moved south. The question is not what you feel but facts. Most Marathi population has Indo-Aryan origins, and the template must reflect that. Konkanastha Brahmins are said to be descedents of West Asian immigrants while Bene Israelis are decendents of Hebrews... Should we put that in the template? No.... It is inevitable that given the geographical proximity there are bound to be communities that are heterogenous product of the two... Amey Aryan DaBrood© 11:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
The other contested area is that of the dravidian lineage of the maharashtrians. Maharashtrians do not have any genetic similarity to the dravidians though culturally some habits might be dravidian influenced such as coconuts and rice being included in the diet. This too, is limited only to to the konkan and southern regions of maharashtra. I'm a deshashtha brahmin myself and my great grandfather was C.Hayavadana Rao who who was an eminent historian and wrote the mysore gazette and did extensive research on south Indian history as well as maratha History. He has personally stated in his works that Maratha or maharashtrians are in no way genetically related to the dravidians. They are more closely related to the Indo greek tribes who moved south during the second wave of greek incursions. Greeks are not distant to Indians and most of us have greek lineage and they have contributed considerably to the north indian and west indian genetic pool. Coming to the huns, the Huns left a mark when they arrived in India during 4th century. Indo Scythian lineage needs no explanation. And maharashtrians do not resemble kannada or telugu people physically. Though there might be similarities among kannada deshastha and marathi deshasthas, we must remember that the kannada deshastha brahmins were originally maharashtrians. It is not one's feeling of nearness to an ethnic group that proves the basis of the ethnic origin but genetic tests and historical facts. I hope that settles the issue.Jcavale 09:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
-
- OK it seems that the related groups category has become a very contested entry; so the editor of the template have removed that section. [9]. So I guess that ends this issue.--Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 05:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "related groups" info removed from infobox
For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 17:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)