Talk:Bhat

Unsourced content
Hi, the sections on Gujarat, Nepal and Karnataka are unsourced. Should we remove them or keep them with a CN tag? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:21, 15 August 2020 (UTC)


 * my preference would be to use cn because it seems plausible that they are present in those states. If the tags are still there in 6 months' time and we can't verify it ourselves, then maybe that would be the time to remove. - Sitush (talk) 12:15, 15 August 2020 (UTC)


 * That's what I was thinking sir. Just a question, the Koeri article seems to have a lot added after your last edit. Is the latest version up to the standard set by you? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:31, 15 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I have seen changes happening at the Koeri article but haven't looked at them. Not got a great deal of time at the moment but I think there are quite a few people watching it because it has been so troublesome over the years. - Sitush (talk) 12:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 20 March 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. Request withdrawn by nom, no consensus to move from other participants. (non-admin closure) – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 14:19, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Bhat → Bhatt – per WP:COMMONNAME. Мастер Шторм (talk) 12:48, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * By WP:COMMONNAME/WP:UCRN, I mean to say that "Bhatt" returns larger number of internet search results than "Bhat" in a Google search. The difference is very large in this case. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 15:24, 20 March 2021 (UTC) [edited comments] Мастер Шторм (talk) 16:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Pinging some Wikipedians who fix disambiguation pages with links for participation. Pinging —, , , , for opinion. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 06:07, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment I'm not sure if the number of Google hits should be deciding here. Looking at the list of notable people with this surname, Bhat is clearly in the majority (disregarding the Butts, that is), so the current title seems to be more appropriate. Lennart97 (talk) 11:53, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * thank you for your comment. I understand and will answer your concern. Actually, that seems the case only because we have more Wikipedia articles on people using that version of the surname. Please note that, at the moment, this article's title is not List of Bhat/Bhatt people. We have articles with lists of notable people, e.g. List of Rajputs, List of Jat people, etc. As per the title of article, it concerns a much larger population (possibly several millions) which uses both versions. This article is on the Bhat/Bhatt people, in general. And, the very large difference between the number of Google search results is a clear indication that "Bhatt" is a far more common then "Bhat" in the community as a whole. Kindly continue to discuss. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 12:44, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * That seems alright then. You might also want to check if anyone from the WP:INDIA project has an opinion on this move proposal. Lennart97 (talk) 12:56, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * thank you! I had posted at WT:Wikiproject Disambiguation. Based on your suggestion, I will also post request to hear from editors at WP:India & WP:Pakistan. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 13:25, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Support WP:COMMONNAME seems to apply here, based in Google searches of "Bhat/Bhatt" and "Bhat/Bhatt surname", still I agree with that an opinion from someone familiarized with WP:INDIA on this would be very helpful. Excommunicato (talk) 14:21, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * thanks! Along with WT:Wikiproject Disambiguation, I have notified other editors about this discussion at WT:WikiProject Jammu and Kashmir, WT:Noticeboard for India-related topics, WT:WikiProject Pakistan also. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 14:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment I wonder whether it is necessary or productive to distinguish between Romanisations of a single root word. The popular variant described here is भट. In terms of pronunciation, spelling it Bhat or Bhatt makes no essential difference because both words are pronounced the same. In terms of spelling, since most holders of the surname live in India or Pakistan and understand their name as it is spelt in their native language, it doesn't matter what Romanised spelling we use as long as the other is indicated in the lead section. I think the bigger kahuna is the regional versions, which do sometimes operate on different spellings, pronunciations and meanings. (For example, the article refers to the Kashmiri variant Butt, which is the same word but with B instead of Bh, and which is also the Kashmiri word for Kashmiri Pandits.) I don't know how that should be resolved, but the Agrawal article seems to have tried to solve it by listing out all the variants it can conceive. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 17:00, 21 March 2021 (UTC) CE'd at 17:03, 21 March 2021 (UTC). Striking one part of the comment as I see there's discussion above that the Kashmiri Butt has an independent lineage from the Indian Bhatt.
 * thank you for your comments. Well, since it can be clearly seen that people using "Bhatt" are very large in numbers than the ones using "Bhat", the WP:COMMONNAME/UCRN policy shall be followed. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 02:52, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose. I agree with Lennart97 that looking at Google searches is an unscientific method of determining which is more common. The following issues come to mind:
 * Surely one doesn't expect that every person (or even most people) with the surname is represented on Google.
 * A single person may be overrepresented in Google searches. For example, given the fame of the Bhatt family, there are several pages of hits on them alone, possibly creating the misperception that the Bhatt spelling is more common.
 * "Bhat" and "Bhatt" can refer to other things in Indic languages. In Nepali, Bhat and Bhateni refer to two deities, and things like Bhat-Bhateni Super Market and Bhatbhateni Durbar are named after them. "Bhat" here is भाट: a completely different word. Who's to say how many of the hits on Google refer to things other than the surname, and what proportion of those things are spelt Bhat or Bhatt?
 * As I said in my comment above, I think it doesn't matter either way, but I'm voting "oppose" because if this move goes forward and more reliably sourced information later emerges, it will be more difficult to put that into effect on grounds that there is "consensus" in favour of "Bhat". I strongly support leaving things status quo, and returning to the matter when reliable information emerges. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 03:38, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No one has said that "looking at Google searches is an unscientific method of determining which is more common". Anyways, as you have made clear your reason for opposing the move in your words — "I'm voting "oppose" because if this move goes forward and more reliably sourced information later emerges, it will be more difficult to put that into effect on grounds that there is "consensus" in favour of "Bhat"" — I would simply say that nothing is set in stone by a consensus. Nothing is frozen!
 * The changes made by a consensus can be changed in future by building a consensus in favour of the proposed change(s) but of course in the light of the policies and guidelines. If, in future, it could be established that "Bhatt" has been outnumbered by "Bhat", please ping me and I would give a very truly honest opinion. Though, seeing how large the gap there is at present, it would be interesting to see if "Bhat" ever outnumbers "Bhatt".
 * Of course, I won't oppose the idea that "Bhat" refers to other things (or people) than a surname, in fact before starting this move proposal, I had thought that even with that situation, all the combined results displayed for "Bhat" are so largely outnumbered by "Bhatt" is a clear indication that it is the WP:COMMONNAME. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 04:40, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The question really comes down to whether the Google search results indicate that Bhatt is the more common spelling. For the reasons I said, I am not persuaded that since there are more Google hits for "Bhatt" than "Bhat", that it is the more common name. That's what I meant when I said that the method is unscientific. In any event, what's wrong with just leaving it the way it is? Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 04:52, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , adding to what I have already said in several comments in this section, there is a situation here and there is a Wikipedia policy for this situation. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 05:18, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The objective of the policy you reference is to aid articles in fulfilling WP:CRITERIA. Whether the article is titled Bhat or Bhatt makes no difference to these criteria. And aside from that, a Google search is an unscientific and unreliable method of determining what a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources spell the name as. I'll rest it here. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 07:10, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * forgive me, but I feel I should reply to your above comments. Please note that WP:UCRN also says A search engine may help to collect this data; when using a search engine, restrict the results to pages written in English, and exclude the word "Wikipedia". When using Google, generally a search of Google Books and News Archive should be defaulted to before a web search, as they concentrate reliable sources (exclude works from Books, LLC when searching Google Books). I understand that a search for "Bhat" would naturally include the results for surname Bhat, the other things named Bhat, and the social groups named Bhat (proclaimed genealogists and bards). But, even when we click on the "news" icon (to see news only at Google), "Bhatt" gives astronomically larger number of results than "Bhat" (even when Bhat refers to multiple things or people). You agree that "Bhat" and "Bhatt" both would be appropriate titles for this page but question the way WP:COMMONNAME is being tried to be decided, so if I may ask, can you suggest an alternative mechanism to check the WP:COMMONNAME (provided we want to verify the COMMONNAME). Also, the results for "Bhatt surname" are also much higher than "Bhat surname" in a simple Google search.
 * Also, humbly requesting advice from, , on how to decide the WP:COMMONNAME, as I may not be doing that in the best manner myself. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 08:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:COMMONNAME is worded very broadly, which to me suggests that one is meant to consider all the circumstances of the problem at hand. Sometimes you will have more or fewer sources of particular types. Some sources may be more or less appropriate to the name being discussed. Some methods may be more or less appropriate than others for particular names.
 * In relation to this problem, I have listed what I consider the imperfections of the Google search method. I acknowledge that on some occasions, it may be necessary to make a decision with incomplete information, but this doesn't appear to be that type of situation because the page seems peaceful and the "Bhat/Bhatt" matter is causing no practical problems.
 * To your last line, I would add that the breadth of the policy makes this a question of judgment and discretion, which means that two well-intentioned editors like us may reasonably disagree on the right way to apply WP:COMMONNAME. It is not the case that one of us is wrong and the other is right. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 09:29, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * from your wonderful words above, I can sense that you would make a great lawyer { I already feel adviced {
 * The editors I have pinged, all three of them, are heavyweights. I mean, they have vast experience in editing the contentious subjects. So, I will happily accept what they would advice for this one. Soft and warm bear hugs, Мастер Шторм (talk) 10:02, 22 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment I don't feel any need for the move. Keeping in view that there is no way to find correct title. I personally know the family name all around the Kashmir is referred as Bhat that Bhatt. However, In othere states the opposite of this is true. Since we already have a redirect link to this article from Bhatt I think there is no need for the move. Also we can't guess from the google search results which one of these names is popular. Iflaq  (talk) 13:49, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * if we take 's all comments into account then, yes, I'm also inclined to believe that a simple Google search cannot be universally applicable, in every case/situation, to decide or verify the COMMONNAME. So, I don't really have much to offer in response to your comments despite the recognition by you that Bhatt is more popular in other states with the exception of one. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 07:09, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose. The surname, throughout the Indian subcontinent, is usually "Bhat", with "Bhatt" and "Butt" being alternative spellings. The article should stay as "Bhat". Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 16:43, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * isn't it a matter of perception. People may say that Bhat not Bhatt is the alternative spelling. After all, some academics do believe that it's derived from the word "Bhatta". Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 07:09, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Withdrawing move proposal: after taking into consideration all the comments by as a whole, and after getting them through my head, it has become clear to me that the use of simple Google search to decide/verify the COMMONNAME is not applicable in every case/situation. So, I'm withdrawing this move proposal.
 * If others editors including, , may have any advice to share regarding this subject, in addition to what Kohlrabi Pickle said, please do comment. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 07:09, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Discussion remains open as remains as a supporter, unless they re-consider.—Bagumba (talk) 09:37, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Poor Article
Iam a Muslim Bhat in the Lakshmipur district of Bangladesh. There are no Hindu bhats in Bangladesh. Akram Bhat (talk) 19:21, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Are there more
, I was on the verge of removing this addition, but then digging a little I found this, so not only the Hoysala Brahmins, there are many from other states including Gujarat, West Bengal, Odisha, Andhra Pradesh, etc bearing the surname. Please have a look. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:39, 8 June 2023 (UTC)