Archives

Index no archives yet (create)

This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Thanks for uploading File:Saga220.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:05, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kenfyre, can you take a look at my comments at the RFC you started. Albeit for different reasons, I believe both of us are on the same page as to whether the content under discussion should be included in the article (it shouldn't, and I have already removed it as a BLP vio). If that is the case, the RFC can be closed. Let me know what you think. Abecedare (talk) 21:35, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What dispute? You do not seem to have specified anything. And your tags are wrong: the stuff is sourced in the body of the article as per WP:LEAD. The lead section, by the way, was written almost entirely by one of our most experienced contributors but they were otherwise uninvolved with the article, which means that it must indeed reflect what the article says. Please self-revert. - Sitush (talk) 09:44, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can't self revert. This article contains original research. Opinions of other scholars do not belong in the header. Please refer to the talk page. -Kenfyre (talk) 09:52, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for at last explaining your rationale on the talk page. That's a start. You are wrong, of course: even an elementary reading of the article would show you this. If you think that there is a valid alternative perspective then the way to deal with it is to raise that perspective, not tag something that is valid. - Sitush (talk) 10:26, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am tagging it for a different reason. I don't claim to have an alternative perspective. Please refer to my reply on the talk page.-Kenfyre (talk) 10:30, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please take a look at this article: Caste system in India and its talk page. I am writing to you because i happen to agree with your edits on the Risley page and this has a direct bearing on the page on the Indian caste system. The disputed edit is: Caste is often thought of as an ancient fact of Hindu life, but various contemporary scholars argue that the caste system as it exists today is the result of the British colonial regime, which made rigid caste organisation a central mechanism of administration.Soham321 (talk) 23:36, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It seems some editors are cherry-picking scholars who support their point of view. It also seems to have been written from a Hindu-apologist point-of-view. We could include more diverse views, and expand and clarify upon their views, like which scholar said exactly what. It would take time. It is seems even the simplest edit would be fought over. They have purged all references to castes from Rig Veda, Mahabharata and Sutrakara Baudhayana. I will try to support the above issues and the genetic studies edits proposed by you.-Kenfyre (talk) 07:47, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Kenfyre: your name was mentioned by Soham321 in that you might be interested in a recent attempt to inflict a ban upon me for trying to improve the Caste System in India article. Also, here is a chronology of my attempted edits and of the talk page discussion. I will be opening a rfc in the next few weeks and would like to keep you informed as an interested party, regards. Twobells^t@lk 20:06, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Twobells: From reading the talk page and the Admin noticeboard page, it seems that you were reported for throwing a spanner in the blame-the-British game. It is not a hidden fact that caste system was a part of Hinduism for centuries before the arrival of British. I am also having my edits reverted, on this and a few related pages. I oppose your ban, but here we will have to use a different tactic. Find solid citations, put them on the talk page, invite people to look them and cause them edits to be committed, just like Soham321 is doing with the genetic studies. It is also important that we check their citations carefully. For example, I found the parts of the Herbert Hope Risley article were slightly but significantly different from what the citations said. -Kenfyre (talk) 09:09, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]