Talk:House of Scindia

Untitled
They were not "slipper bearers" or shudras as the article mentioned. "Slipper bearer" in the local language means someone who rules when the ruler is absent ie elsewhere ie rules in the name of. The post is usually given to sons of kings. The Scindias were not Shudras. They were kshatriyas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bart101simpson101 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Moving comment from elsewhere
Makes sense. Go ahead and merge Shinde_Family_of_India and Shinde

Sisodia 06:42, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

AN INFURIATED BRAHMIN SHINDE
HOW DARE YOU WIKIPEDIANS WRITE FAKE NEWS ABOUT US HIGH CASTE SCINDIA'S, DON'T DARE TO REVERT MY EDITS. OTHERWISE WE SCINDIA'S WHO ARE KINGS AND POLITITIANS WILL BAN WIKIPEDIA IN INDIA....JAI SREE RAM...JAI BJP...RSS THIS IS WRONG INFORMATION SPREAD BY THE CONGRESS.....WHO WANTS TO PORTRAY US HIGH CASTE BRAHMINS WITH THE POOR SHUDHRA KURMI COMMUNITY!!!! VERY VERY ANGRY WITH WIKIPEDIA.....#BOYCOTTWIKIPEDIA!!!! Vidyanand Raja Scindia (talk) 11:03, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , Wikipedia works from reliable independent sources. The problem with your edit is that you did not cite any source for the changes you made. Guy (help! - typo?) 11:11, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Lineage section and origin of the dynasty

 * User:Gayming lover638, LukeEmily:

To elaborate on my edit summary: 1. If the editors care to read the lineage section, no source is added for "Sir John Malcolm" records. In Lineage of Scindia, why Holker and ritual status of Shudra is added, again with no reference. 2. Missing information (including sources) about Rankojirao’s patel-ship and upbringing as a playmate of Bajirao, in addition to the conflicting accounts of hereditary patel-ship and lower social status. 3. Importantly, the anecdotal/mythological origin of the dynasty is literally CONFIRMED here, although even the SELECTED sources state that it’s hearsay. Thus, in addition to being not verifiable ("WP:V"), "sleeper-bearer" term is misleading as it wrongly points to lower social status; however, as discussed by Bart101simpson101, historically it has different connotation, and possibly dates back to how Bharata places Rama's paduka (footwear) on the throne.

In summary again: in the present form, the article appears with the tampered information, misinterpreting the sources, which points to partisanship.

Akaalaa (talk) 07:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Akaalaa,


 * 1. The Shudra and Kunbi are well sourced. Please see the source.
 * 2. There is no conflict. Multiple sources say that he rose from a low social status as a servant to a high position.
 * 3. The comparison with Bharat and Rama is not correct. Ranoji was a menial servant who carried the Peshwa's shoes. It is confirmed by multiple sources and you can also search on google. Please see WP:OR. The story about him sleeping with the slippers may be an anecdote. But his occupation as well as Kunbi origin is confirmed by multiple scholars.


 * I am not understanding why you keep replacing high quality academic sources(historians, oxford university press) by some regional "Sarup & Sons" publication. Please see WP:NPOV. LukeEmily (talk) 12:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)


 * LukeEmily,

It is not a constructive discussion. Again, if you care to think about my points above, I am not replacing "your" quality academic sources. I am pointing to misleading and misinterpretation of sources WP:NPOV.

Anyways thanks ! Considering your western username, I am impressed with your contributions to Marathi Brahmin, Saraswat Brahmin, as well as the critical work on Rajput.

Akaalaa (talk) 13:04, 9 April 2021 (UTC)