User talk:Rajat Ghai
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Home |
 Talk |
 New message |
|---|
 Archives |
|---|
|
|
Contents |
[edit] Moved your userpages
Hi, Hope you don't mind, but I've moved all your user pages across to your new username. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 12:31, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your message
Rajat, nice to hear from you. Regarding your problem: many people seem to regard Wikipedia as some sort of certificate-provider of social status. It is nothing of the sort; it is in fact one of the most unreliable sources on the matter, since anyone can change content at a moment's notice, as we saw yesterday! I was just thinking of this two days ago, when trouble ignited on the talk:Maratha page on precisely the same point, as a result of the infoboxes. Anyway, here is my suggestion.
On the Rajput page, I handled a bad situation by wording the issue in terms of "self-describe," saying that according to the 1931 census, there were X number of people who described themselves as being both Muslim and Rajput. This is NPOV and does not affirm or deny their claims; that is beyond the scope of the WP project. Maybe you can figure out something similar, perhaps using the formula "A says X and B says Y." Be sure to use this formulation only where reputable citations are available. Please read WP:NOR, discuss references with Satbir and other people, and include information from scholarly works that confirm to WP:RS.
This is not easy to do in a template, because (as I said in previous messages) the scope for nuance is severely limited in a black-n-white tabulation. It may be a good idea to create a much smaller template which provides links to lists of clans. Thus, the proposed template will consist of only the links on the left-hand-side column in your present template. For instance, a link from the template will take you to the List of Jat clans page, or the Kukhran page, and the argument (if any) of which clan is a Kukhran clan and which one is not can be settled on that page. This formulation will make it possible to embody nuance and negotiate wording on those pages, in case of disagreement. It will limit disaffection from spreading on Wikipedia in two ways: firstly, readers on 100 different pages will not be outraged to find a classification that they do not agree with, so they will not find their way to the fracas and join in; secondly, since controversial pages are already quarrel-prone, it is not be as though any new quarrels are being kindled by the template 
even if amity is not actually promoted. Another desirable side-effect: It will reduce the sheer physical size of this template. Regards, ImpuMozhi 17:03, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hi mate
Well I don't know if I can be of any real help as I am not that well aware of the subject. I don't have any verifiable source but from my background (I am a Hindu Ahluwalia), I know that Khatris are a Kshatriya sub group, bit more elitist than others in Punjab at that. I really don';t care what most of the weirdos such as SanjayMohan post on WP ashalf the time they seem to have some ridiculous propaganda and they have no idea that this is just not the medium to do this on. I haven't yet taken the look at the template which I will do in a minute. I hope you still get this work done the way you think is proper. Unitedroad 08:12, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] You're leaving...
I hope this is not a permanent goodbye. I will probably be in a situation such as yourself soon enough, but I am not to completely stop contributing. Please come in every now and again and see if you can help :)
Take a Wiki Break to unwind and forget about the template. When you come back, you'll probably realise it's nothing to get too worked up about. I'm sorry I could not help further in this instance - I just don't know enough background on the situation to make a sound judgement. I guess I'm privileged in that sense that I grew up in the west. I've never had to deal with caste politics and it's never been an issue for me or anyone I know.
You're intelligent, patient, polite and friendly - Wikipedia needs more people like you! So please don't go for good :)Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Hi Rajat
Just came to say thank you for your template. It's an excellent idea and helps non Asian readers understand our wild and whacky tribal systems, lol. Thanks again and keep up the good work bro - Raja
[edit] Nice work on articles
I have seen several of your articles. You have done great work. Thanks for your contributions.--ISKapoor 18:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Userbox template page
I moved Template:Rajat Ghai/Userboxes to User:Rajat Ghai/Userboxes, and deleted the redirect left behind at Template:Rajat Ghai/Userboxes and also at Template:Rajatjghai/Userboxes. I also updated any links referring to the deleted templates to point to User:Rajat Ghai/Userboxes. Single user templates should be kept in that user's userspace. All the best, --Durin 13:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC) {{User:Seadog.M.S/Diwali}}
[edit] List of famous Jats
Hi Rajat,
You created List of famous Jats. But it is listed for deletion. Kindly go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_famous_Jats and vote. burdak 15:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] for wp sikh editors
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/2006/December#.7B.7BSikh-bio-stub.7D.7D.2C_Category:Sikh_religious_figures The stub people wanted input from WP Sikh editors. While you're at it please check out {{User WikiProject Sikhism}} as well.Bakaman 04:57, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cast System in Sikhs
Although Sikhism preaches "Ek noor tey sub jug upjeya, kaon bhaley-kaon mandey" Our first Guru, Guru Nanak Dev Ji started with this beautiful philosophy of equality, no discrimination, common kitchen,secularism, mutual respect for other's relegious faiths and so many other amazing values. But the fact of the matter is totally differnt. Sikhs are so much in to Cast System. I want to have an open discussion with all those who preach all these values, are them selves in to differnt directions. I personally endorse and believe in cast system. My scientific analysis is that "No body created these casts or groups. These groups got formed by themselves. Birds of similar feathers-flock together.Basicaly they are categorized by thier level of dignity / self respect / commitments to any act, e.g., accepting responsibility and consiquences of thier actions / so on and so forth. One can write volumes on this subject." Every one is so differnt in his / her approach. The world is, and was so much materilistic and is divided (Cast) on these basis. I fully agree with Castism. It is totally scientific / logical /intelegent and practical.
hi Mr Rajt ghai may name is RAJA Farooq Khan Ghai from pakistan can you give me som information about ghai clan ,iam liveing in danmark from last 20 eyer,and ihave may famly tree wich can go back 250 eyer ,at that time we became muslim,befor that wher vi came from i dont knwo?.all that i now about my famly that is we came from rajputana and we are ghai rajput.farooq Khan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.184.107.142 (talk) 10:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
