Talk:Marathi Brahmin/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Marathi Brahmin. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

non Brahmin castes on this page

Hi Sitush, There are no citations on this page when a caste name is added. I am looking at page 26 of the book "The Chitpawans" by Sandhya Gokhale. She has given a list of Maharashtrian Brahmin castes. Many of the names on this page are not even listed there. Looks like people are just adding random names of communities here.Thanks -Acharya63 (talk) 06:02, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

I lived in Maharashtra for 20+ years before moving to the US but have never even heard of some of the names mentioned here as being brahmins -Acharya63 (talk) 06:13, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Agree it needs to be sourced. - Sitush (talk) 17:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Plagiarism videos - please avoid copying sentences/phrases verbatim. Please paraphrase or use quotation marks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ly_AeHl4t5M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JwFWbPotBA (see part after 5 minutes to hear about quotation marks. This video is for kids but it applies to us as well :-))

Above videos explain how to avoid Plagiarism while writing. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 04:53, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

please fix links to Gordon and Britannica

@AR767:, Thank you for your recent edits. Please fix the URLs. They do not seem to take us to the correct page. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 17:49, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Alcohol consumption

Hi Jonathansammy, I am afraid you are synthesizing or assuming stuff. We can discuss it here but it is very obvious from the second source Gupchup(name of the book is also "Bombay Social change") that the alcoholism issue is about Bombay presidency that included Pune in the British era and a law that was implemented before. The British used Hindu laws for Hindus including allowing child marriage. On page 166 she clarifies what she is referring to by Prabhus by saying she is referring to both ckp/Pathare(most sources clarify if they are referring to only CKP or Pathare or other) - then she proceeds to say on page 167 by calling them Prabhus. So I do not see any embellishment. Please can you clarify your modification? Please review the quotes. She is talking about both. Also, 99% of people (including in Maharashtra) will get confused by the name prabhus as most people use either CKP or Pathare Prabhu these days. Second, Ghurye's book is available on archive.org. He has cited (JBBRAS) "Journal of Bombay Branch of Royal asiatic society" for that quote. I am usually very careful when the name Prabhu is used and avoid google books completely for that word (as they could be referring to anyone or both and we cannot see all pages). But in this case it is clear. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 19:29, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Acharya63, Pathare prabhu lived in British controlled Mumbai during Peshwa rule so the alcohol ban would not have applied to them.ThanksJonathansammy (talk) 21:21, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jonathansammy, Gupchup's book is about Bombay from 1813 to 1857(see the full title of the book). Ghurye is not very clear about what happened after Peshwaii ended. Also, British had Brahmin administrators(for example Natu, Thatte ) so that they could implement caste based laws when they started ruling Bombay. Since Gupchup is clear but Ghurye is not - I just added the details from Gupchup and simply mentioned Ghurye. Gupchup does not mention Pune at all in that section. Now it exactly reflects the sources exactly. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 22:03, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

page is a mess

IP editors have literally modified quotes and inserted text before citations, deleted citations etc to push their agenda.. There is no point reverting their changes since the version will be modified again by tomorrow morning so I am no longer working on this now. Good luck to the other editors. Maybe I will come back later but will take Sannyasa from this page for now :-) Acharya63 (talk) 09:31, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Today it is 30 th Joshi punekar (talk) 07:28, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

racism or whatever it is

I've protected this as it looks like a battleground for cast warfare or something. Just reading the edit summaries is nauseating. Figure out a way to craft a neutrally worded encyclopedia article and leave your differences out of Wikipedia. There is no room for this here. @Bishonen: if you can shed some light on this little corner of darkness, it'd be appreciated.17:41, 31 July 2018 (UTC)-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:41, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

See, this is what happens when Sitush is off sick! Thanks for applying first aid, Dlohcierekim, but it's not "editing disputes" so much as caste promotion in defiance of reliable sources, and full protection doesn't seem the best remedy, especially for two whole weeks. Since you've called on me, I've removed the protection, blocked the most disruptive editor for a week, and handed out a couple of discretionary sanctions alerts. If more "new " editors arrive to promote their caste, I'll semiprotect. Does that sound good to you? Bishonen | talk 20:31, 31 July 2018 (UTC).

Thanks, @Bishonen:, for fixing this. Figured it was more caste warfare stuff, which I did not feel suited to sort. The full protection was just a stop-gap-- like a first aider making a splint out of boards and string. thanks again.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 22:25, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Right, Dlohcierekim, protection is like our duck tape! Are you a Mythbusters fan? Teach you all about the uses of duck tape. (Reading our article Duct tape now, it looks like "duck" is at least as correct as "duct". I had no idea.) Bishonen | talk 23:00, 31 July 2018 (UTC).

Majority of this books are not research oriented,that too some books are written by biased writers.Reason is quite simple firstly Madhwa and smartha disagreement in AKBM,secondly pancha Dravida and pancha Gaud division in which all south brahmins unite just saraswat Brahmins remains out. I can give books which have good projection of saraswath Brahmins written from research but not required I guess.If you quote 10% negative stuff I can post 90% positive once again it’s difference of perceptive. When coming to elelction matter just type “return of Peshwas” you will understand what actually it is.what ever may be perspective when shastras support this caste I guess no need to give other reference of biased writers. Connection is simple existence of Saraswat Brahmins,karade And Chitpavan are united by ksanda purana! Fine my intention is not to target ckp with negative stuff(Hope you know what happened to daivadnyas in gramanya?How Peshwas grated them?).If you want I can arrange negative citaions for Chitpavan ,deshastha and karade but do it really really required? That’s what I mean. I believe in constructive method not destructive Joshi punekar (talk) 03:24, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

You have replaced saraswat with saraswath Brahmins that’s fine.The main intention was to avoid selective picking of citaion.Once again I am telling saraswath Brahmins means (Kashmir pandits,bhatta Brahmins,GSB ,RSB,CSB etc) basically they are not dravidas they are panch Gaud Brahmins(I can give dozens of research books for their arrival to south and social status in Goa then Portuguese attack ,leaving Goa moving towards other state including Maharashtra(Here where local Brahmins due to jealousy about their origin and success they started creating hatred comments but failed due to shastra support!))

Joshi punekar (talk) 03:30, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Fine I guess we have come to conclusion so better wind off ! I think this issue is dragging too much. Nice to meet you! By the way I am kobra not SB and I am from Pune too but socialist researcher.Just surname is Joshi I am not doing any sort of priestly work.But the existence of ours is dependent on saraswat Brahmins (Refer Skanda purana or konkan mahatmya) . Thank you,

Joshi punekar (talk) 03:35, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

• Summary of discussion that was long winded and WP:OR wtc(matrimonial sites) was summarized in the next section along with resolution.

not a disambiguation page - can we change the page info?

This link shows that it is a disambiguation page which is no longer true?(it was true earlier this year). Please can we change this? Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 16:28, 3 October 2018 (UTC)