Talk:Maharana Pratap/Archive 1

WP:INDIA Banner/Rajasthan workgroup Addition
Note: WP India Project Banner with Rajasthan workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under Category:Rajasthan or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate, please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article --  TinuCherian  (Wanna Talk?) - 08:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect statement
The page has this incorrect line: "Although the marriage of Rajput noblewomen to muslim grandees would shortly become a pervasive trend..."

There were no marriages of Rajput noblewomen with "Muslim grandees". The only marriages were of vassal kings into their emperor's family, which were politico-military alliances. Such marriages were actually rare and the Mughal Emperors married more often into the Persian royal family of Iran.

incorrect statement in this page the heading " Final days" the last line is incorrect " They are called Rors and settled mostly in Haryana, with some in Uttar Pradesh." ror are the next generation of Marathas of panipat battle who could not leave that area after the battle, and start living in dhaak jungle. -

This statement above is also not true. Both commenters are not very aware of what they are discussing, and seem to be basing their comments upon poorly written Indian govt. history textbooks. True, the practice of marrying Rajput women was confined mainly to Mughal Emperors, but the practice was actually quite common and, more important, crucial to the mutual ties between Rajput rulers and the Mughals. These ties allowed for significant cultural and military alliances. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.93.104 (talk) 15:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 01:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Pratap Singh of Mewar → — Common name.  Arjun  codename024 21:16, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Suggest move to Rana Pratap per WP:COMMONNAME. --RegentsPark (talk) 20:07, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Maharana Pratap as WP:COMMONNAME. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 02:25, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. Common name. utcursch | talk 06:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Copyright concerns
There is significant reason for concern that this article may improperly use content from the 1996 edition of the Encyclopedia Indica. While the book is only visible in snippet view, there are some direct quotations that Google book identifies as matches:
 * "Nearly all of Pratap's fellow rajput chiefs had meanwhile entered into the vassalage of the mughals" p.72
 * "Living a life on the run, the dream of reconquering Chittor (and thus reclaiming the glory of Mewar) was..." p. 72
 * "The third Jauhar of Chittor transpired, with the ladies of the fort finding "safety from personal dishonour in the devouring element (fire)," while the remaining menfolk sallied forth to certain death in the battlefield. Prior to this calamity, Udai Singh" p. 71
 * "Nearly all of Pratap's fellow rajput chiefs had meanwhile entered into the vassalage of the mughals" p. 75
 * "Pratap particularly insulted Akbar's special envoy, Raja Man Singh of Amber (Jaipur)." p. 75
 * "Although the marriage of Rajput noblewomen to muslim grandees would shortly become a pervasive trend..." p. 75
 * "While accounts vary a.f. to the exact strength of the two armies, all sources concur that th mughal forces greatly outnumbered Pratap's" p. 73

We can't leave an article published with this much substantial concern of copying from a copyrighted source. Its publication in 1996 would seem conclusive evidence that it predates our use.

Unless we can somehow prove the content is public domain (as if, for instance, both copied from a much older work), it will almost certainly be necessary for the page to be rewritten or reverted to an earlier version, such as this one.

Interested editors are invited to supply any information about the source and especially any older sources that may also use this text or to rewrite the article in the space for rewriting linked from the template on the article's face. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:35, 10 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, we can't really revert to the version that you linked above. That relies on James Tod, who is hopelessly unreliable (the bio article is my only FA). Tod, of course, is out of copyright but the content appears largely to be lifted from him, so we'd need an attribution statement even if he was reliable. - Sitush (talk) 12:47, 10 December 2012 (UTC)


 * ok if not Tod can we use that book as a source and do away with copy-vio? --sarvajna (talk) 13:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * In the absence of any alternative rewrite, I've restored the old text, but, Sitush, I've noted the reliability concerns and addressed the plagiarism. This content can of course be corrected and replaced with anything that better meets policies and guidelines. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. I'll be removing anything connected to Tod, who is utterly hopeless. - Sitush (talk) 13:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Got this one online but might not meet guideline, not sure though --sarvajna (talk) 13:29, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Author is an academic, although I don't know whether they are a historian etc. We've used Diamond Pocket Books elsewhere: quite often, they just rehash the old British Raj sources but they're sometimes ok. I can only see small portions of the thing & so cannot really form an opinion. - Sitush (talk) 13:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 June 2013
Final days Maharana Pratap's son, Amar Singh, fought 17 wars with the Mughals. After Mewar was depleted financially and in manpower he conditionally accepted them as rulers. their is mistake in second sentence,according to second sentence their should be written, his son Amar Singh managed to win that fort after Maharana Pratap Singh`s death.

Harshpoet (talk) 10:51, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Thanks. Begoon &thinsp; talk  13:04, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 January 2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maha_Rana_Pratap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maharana_Pratap Seems like two unique URLs for the same content. The two pages can be merged.

59.94.32.248 (talk) 01:31, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Maha Rana Pratap already redirects to Maharana Pratap.  Little Mountain  5  03:37, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2014
Died on 29 January and not 19 January

72.163.217.102 (talk) 11:30, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ❌ We have in the article several reliable sources indicating the 19th. You will need to provide multiple reliable sources that indicate that a significant portion of the mainstream academics view the 29th as the date. We will then WP:UNDUE present both dates. --  TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  11:45, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Fantasy
Why the editors are adding fantasy stories in this, imaginary stories from a tv serial Bharat Ka Veer Putra – Maharana Pratap are being stuffed here specially about his wifes and here is the proof, more over the reference given here doesnot state names of any of his wifes, I request editors here to stop adding fantasy based on some TV serial. Sushilkumarmishra (talk) 17:00, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2014
please remove the line They are called Rors and settled mostly in Haryana, with some in Uttar Pradesh. because raja ror was in the early years in 13th century,raja ror was a rajputt king who leave rajputtana in 13th century due to refuse the conditions of kuttubdinebak the king of delhi, and then left the rajputana and went to maharstra.ror are next generation of marathas of panipat third battle.

14.139.60.13 (talk) 07:45, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done - Anupmehra - Let's talk!  16:14, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2014
Please REMOVE the following sentences in the "Personal Life" section of this article:

"Rana Pratap had 11 wives his first wife was Maharani Ajabde Punwar, Him and Ajabde were known to love each other even before they were married. Ajabde studied astrology to develop a 100 year calendar for Maharana Prataps life. Maharana Pratap was married to Ajabde when he was 17. Maharani Ajabde was the favourite wife of Rana Pratap. Maharani Ajabde was the biggest support to Maharana Pratap during his hardship days. Maharana Pratap loved Maharani Ajabde throughout his life. Maharani ajabade was Maharana's true love and Maharana Pratap married to all other princesses because of political alliances. Ajabde gave birth to Amar Singh Who was the successor of Rana Pratap.[9] Apart from Ajabde Punwar, he had 10 more wives [12] – Solankhinipur Bai, Champabai Jhati, Jasobai Chauhan, Phool Bai Rathore, Shahmatibai Hada, Khichar Asha bai, Alamdebai Chauhan, Ratnawatibai parmar, Amarbai Rathore and Lakhabai. Maharani Ajabde was a learned and level headed person. She always led Maharana Pratap to make the right decisions using strategic wisdom and her core values. She was the love of his life."

Please REPLACE those sentences above with these following statements:

"Pratap Singh had 17 sons[10] and 5 daughters from 11 wives. His first wife, Maharani Ajabde Punwar, gave birth to his eldest child and eventual heir to the throne, Amar Singh[11]. Little else is known about her."

This is IMPORTANT to correct due to recent vandalism and historically inaccurate changes being made in this article. A recent Indian television soap opera, titled "Bharat Ka Veer Putra- Maharana Pratap" has used creative license to portray a love story between Pratap Singh and his first wife before and after marriage- with which those people making the inaccurate changes have been influenced by, due to the show's long run and popularity. However, there is no evidence or any credible sources to support that this love story is true.

Dika2eve (talk) 04:03, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: The section certainly needs rewriting but it's more informational than what your version is, Cheers – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  16:29, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2015
Dear Sir/Madam,

I think it would be injustice with this Page if we don't include "Battle of Dewar". If you allow I can write that section.

Best Regards, Prithvi

Prithvi rahul (talk) 18:45, 4 August 2015 (UTC) More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 18:51, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".

Neutrality issues
This page clearly has a number of problems. The writing is often not grammatical, but more relevant, it is clearly biased and draws on questionable sources. For instance, it makes normative statements about the 'cruelty' of Akbar and the inherent and laudable heroic nature of Maharana Pratap - obviously the result of copying straight from 19th century colonial discourse. Which is also clear from the fact that the single 'scholarly' source is the 19th century Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, a questionable work whose drawbacks are mentioned in Dominique-Sila Khan's Crossing the Threshold, page 17. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.93.104 (talk) 07:08, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I am removing the neutrality tag as the issue on hand, i.e., normative statements about the 'cruelty' of Akbar and the inherent and laudable heroic nature of Maharana Pratap, are not substantive. There are no factual errors in the narrative and while the tenor of the article is certainly glorification of Pratap, it is not a ballad like write up in any way. Other than the so called 'discredited' Col Todd's magnum opus, the Rana's heroics have been captured in laudatory terms in numerous sources, including Akbarnama. The neutrality tag is uncalled for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.245.70.190 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

In what way does this text qualify to be in a wiki article:

"Considering that both the armies of Akbar and Rana Pratap included Hindus and Muslims, considering that Akbar's army was led by Raja Man Singh, and Rana Pratap's army included an afghan contingent led by Hakim Sur, it would not be correct to view this battle as a fight between Hindus and Muslims. Nor can it be viewed as a battle for Rajput independence, since influential sections of the Rajputs had already cast their lot with the mughals"

Trying to tell the reader how to view is neutral? Besides, neither fact nor logic in the above is right. Majority of Mogul-native battles involved both Hindus and Muslims on both sides. Even Anglo-maratha wars had both natives and Europeans on both sides. That neither denies invasion nor native struggle against it. To plead that this "cannot be viewed" one way or the other betrays motivated propaganda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.254.136 (talk) 17:33, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2015
Blanked edit request that was a copyvio of http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/maharana-pratap-of-mewar.38277/ Cannolis (talk) 01:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Kdevarajan (talk) 00:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Moreover, edit request was a clear copyright violation. Cannolis (talk) 01:01, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

issues and general analysis
Maharana Pratap Singh fought with Delhi kings he might have turned his eye towards Pakistan and Afganistan. These are the territories near to Rajasthan even Britishers are unable to conquer except Akbar and then Ranjeeth Singh. British tried to conquer these territories and are unable to do it even after 3 times. It is the miracle of Ranjeeth Singh that made Pakistan and become India. He had handed over the Pakistan to East India company under some understanding along with huge amount of money including Kohinoor Diamond and at the time of India partition there is no evidence that Britishers or the Indians consulted Ranjeeth sigh or his heirs. Until and unless people know the understanding between Britishers and Ranjeeth singh no one will be able to say "pakistan is muslim country or a sikh country". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.6.57.119 (talk) 04:42, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 15:19, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Early life
This article lacks the section of his early life details. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec/?user=Capankajsmilyo&project=en.wikipedia.org count])  16:57, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Battle of Haldighati
The section is currently unsourced. I propose adding few sources and citations like and  -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec/?user=Capankajsmilyo&project=en.wikipedia.org count])  17:31, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Reason for revert
you just reverted my edits on this page. Will you please cite the content or reinstate my edit. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec/?user=Capankajsmilyo&project=en.wikipedia.org count])  04:57, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Rana source may be dubious
may be a poor source. Stuff published by Diamond Pocket Books has been identified as such in the past. It would be better if we could find a more reputable publisher. - Sitush (talk) 11:59, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Changing the article's name
I changed the name of this article from Maharana Pratap to Pratap Singh I because other kings are also named like this(e.g Udai Singh II, Amar Singh I, Selim II, etc). Please contact me on either my talk page or this article's talk page before renaming the article. Hagoromo&#39;s Susanoo (talk) 10:03, 1 January 2018 (UTC)


 * The move noted above was reverted. We really need to have a discussion about it first. - Sitush (talk) 18:23, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Death date
His successor was crowned on 19 January, and indeed our article says Pratap reigned until 19 January, but contains a source saying that he died 29 January. There has been a slow edit war with people inserting both 19 and 29 as the death date.

Amar Singh I says: "Amar Singh succeeded Maharana Pratap upon his death on 19 January 1597" and that seems to make the most sense, because it seems unlikely his successor would reign from before his death, but we have contradicting information as above.

For the moment I've changed all mentions to just January with no day, until this is resolved. -- Begoon 14:47, 20 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I've seen a source, which is so reliable that I think we should change the date. It is encyclopaedia Brittanica, which is a good encyclopaedia. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Rana-Pratap-Singh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hagoromo's Susanoo (talk • contribs) 16:03, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks. That's good enough for me, and ties in with what I expected the answer to be. -- Begoon 05:57, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

History Section
I think that we could merge all the subsections into one history section, and incorporate more sources to expand content. If someone can provide some sources that would be helpful. Vagbhata2 (talk) 19:11, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Right Rajput jagrutsinh (talk) 08:46, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Battle of Haldighati
The first sentence of the second paragraph states that "Akbar's forces led by Man Singh I of Amer" - but the fifth sentence has "the Mughals were led by Man Singh of Amber". If the repeat is necessary, can it be consistent? Besides, the second sentence is out of sequence: it mentions the result of the battle - but the third sentence reverts to the preparations for the battle! I suggest the following:
 * The battle of Haldighati was fought on 18 June 1576 between Maharana Pratap and the Mughal forces led by Man Singh I of Amer. The Maharana fielded a force of around 3,000 cavalry and 400 Bhil archers; the Mughal forces consisted of around 5,000-10,000 men. The battlefield was a narrow mountain pass at Haldighati near Gogunda, modern day Rajsamand in Rajasthan. After a fierce fight lasting more than six hours, the Maharana was wounded and the battle was lost. The Mughals were victorious and inflicted significant casualties on the Mewaris but failed to capture the Maharana[10], who escaped to the hills and lived to fight another day[11].

Prisoner of Zenda (talk) 12:17, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Rima Hooja
Hi, Rima Hooja is a well known historian who has a Phd from Cambridge. So I was just wondering why her citation has been labeled as Ranadhira (talk) 05:01, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2021
Take the reference from old hindus mythology, and also mark the correction on the Maharana Prataap saved his empire from mughals when mughals respect make a deep survey and mark correction and tone of speech as the are one of the greatest king of aakhand Bharat  i.e., India 2401:4900:51DA:BBE9:1F0:1E14:A874:A166 (talk) 14:34, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 August 2021
The below passage is gramitically wrong, it needs to be rewritten 2405:201:C02B:D811:155:D469:2B87:7D54 (talk) 14:56, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: what passage? For when you re-open the request, it will be more likely that the passage will get fixed if you make a suggestion for how to rewrite it. &#8209;&#8209;Volteer1 (talk) 15:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2021
Please remove the "citation" from the lead. It is a spam link added by an editor who's entire contributions have been to add links to the same website to random articles (Special:Contributions/&watiMi&hra). newsgram.in does not appear to be a reliable source for historical articles, and the content in the lead is not controversial enough to require a source per MOS:LEADCITE. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 16:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅. OhNo itsJamie Talk 16:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Beat me to it! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:59, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2022
I want to add one more nickname of Maharana pratap called hindua suraj Vikassirohiya1996 (talk) 13:16, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. &#128156; melecie   talk  - 13:18, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 May 2022
Many things in Military career are wrong. And does not match with souces quoted. And also the page do not provide enough and accurate information. 2409:4063:4C00:F9E2:A7B1:C0E:4DF5:4FAF (talk) 10:40, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

list of ancestors and descendants
Do we really need the whole list of Rana Pratap's ancestors and descendants to the present day in the article? Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 17:28, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * , I don't think the sources are WP:RS. Seems to be someone's personal page for his descendants.LukeEmily (talk) 19:11, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Request to change the name of article to 'Pratap Singh I'
I would like to bring it to the attention of the editors that Maharana is the 'title' given to the ruler. It was not included anywhere in his name. In certain Wikipedia articles, like Shivaji (a ruler whose name is always preceded and succeeded with the titles Chhatrapati and Maharaj respectively), the frequently used titles Chhatrapati and Maharaj have not been used there.

Repeated attempts to include Chhatrapati as the predecessor and Maharaj as the successor to the article Shivaji have been reversed. If such is the case, then this rule should also apply to other articles as well.

I would also like to clarify the fact that I do not have any problem with the inclusion of Maharana in the name of the article. Like Shivaji, his (Pratap Singh I's) name is always preceded by the title (Maharana). But if certain Wikipedia policies prohibit its usage in other articles, then, in order to attain uniformity, I feel this change is necessary.

Meet Jagtap (talk) 15:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * , Agree with your request. You can change the title yourself, the justification being "no honorifics on Wikipedia".Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 21:18, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Do not agree, see WP:COMMONNAME. Sajaypal007 (talk) 04:21, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * See the archive discussion where it was moved to Maharana Pratap for WP:COMMONNAME. Sajaypal007 (talk) 04:24, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The name, Maharana Pratap gained popularity more recently. Prior to that Rana Pratap was how he was commonly known. Previously, user Sitush reverted the name change because there was no discussion.We should ask others such as, and  to weigh in. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 17:11, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * (responding to ping) No strong opinions on this except that given the likely clash of WP:COMMONNAME and WP:HONORIFICS, a move should be made only
 * after a proper survey of what 'name' is preferred in WP:HISTRS sources (not just Google hits or even ngram results), and
 * via a move request
 * Abecedare (talk) 17:25, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * , No strong opinion either. Please take opinions of other senior/expert editors as well like . Agree with Abecedare about the reasoning. As per this discussion, two admins who have expertise in India related topics had approved the name change to Maharana Pratap or Rana Pratap in 2010. Initially the page was called Pratap Singh of Mewar. Maharana Pratap or Rana Pratap are well recognized as opposed to Pratap Singh. IMHO, I would prefer Maharana Pratap or Rana Pratap but not Pratap Singh I. Pratap Singh I is not easily recognizable.LukeEmily (talk) 19:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * "Rana Pratap" is how I have seen his name in school textbooks, and that is also the clear winner in the Google ngram viewer.
 * I am afraid "Pratap Singh I" is completely unrecognizable, and shouldn't be used for that reason. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:54, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Isn't Rana Pratap tied with Maharana Pratap since last 20-25 years. Isn't common name supposed to change? Since the page is already named Maharana Pratap and that too by senior editors like 10-12 years ago, and not much has changed, or it may be argued that Maharana Pratap gained currency over Rana Pratap since last couple of decades, although they are tied now. To sum it up, I don't find any advantage in moving the page to Rana Pratap let alone Pratap Singh or Pratap Singh I. Sajaypal007 (talk) 20:02, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Also since when WP:HONORIFIC came in way of WP:COMMONNAME, there are hundreds of article named after Honorifics, a few comes to my mind, Mahatma Gandhi, Periyar, Rani of Jhansi, I can add more if someone needs more examples. Sajaypal007 (talk) 20:09, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The recent spurt in "Maharana" is likely to be Hindutva glorification of a Hindu hero. If you want to argue that there is actually a change in the WP:COMMONNAME, then you need to produce WP:HISTRS doing it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:36, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Historian SR Sharma, Bipin Chandra, Rima Hooja, RC Majumdar all used name Maharana Pratap in their works, I don't think it is due to hindutva glorification. Sajaypal007 (talk) 05:47, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Pratap Singh I is never the WP:COMMONNAME. It is either Rana Pratap or Maharana Pratap. As a school kid I was more familiar with the former, but it seems the latter is more common now. No move is required in my opinion. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * In my opinion Rana Pratap is the WP:COMMONNAME. Even his more successful ancestor is called Rana Sanga without the prefix "Maha".But then some of Rana Sanga's less illustrious successors before Rana Pratap are called Maharana. So basically there is no consistency on naming these rulers. Perhaps, this calls for a wider debate on naming of articles of Indian historical rulers. Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 15:13, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

The honorific "ji" behind the name of Shiva"ji" was also not present in his authentic histories. The Satara Rajas never held the title of Maharaja either, from Nizam-ul-Mulk Asaf Jah I's letters, it's quite evident that the designation even after Mughal elevation was limited to 'Raja' only. That he is called Shiv'rai' etc. also supports this part that the 'ji' is an honorific not part of his name. Yashasvipratap (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Honorific can be part of the WP:COMMONNAME, which is the case with Shivaji. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:55, 5 May 2022 (UTC)


 * As, I can see from this thread that some editors made unrelated comments like Hindutva glorification which are clearly politically motivated comments.

Jonathansammy Your point about Sanga being commonly known as Rana Sanga & Pratap as Maharana Pratap got nothing to with more successful in term of kingdom expansions. Infact, tittle of Rana/Maharana or earlier Rawal/Maharawal for Mewar rulers has nothing to do with who was more succesfull. Even a ruler like Ratan Sen (who hold Chittor for a year) was recorded as Maharawal in Mewar annals, same goes with powerful monarch like Rana Sanga. The Mewar kings refrained themselves from tittles of Raja/Maharaja as compare to other Rajput kingdoms because (per their tradition), they never considered themselves as kings but Eklingji as the lord of state. Thus, tittle of Rana/Maharana or Rawal/Maharawal in their case actually means a warrior who defend his state. PS:- IMHO, no need for any move, Thanks. Packer&Tracker  «Talk»  03:48 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * As per, contemporary records, all Mewar rulers in annals were called as Maharana's/Maharawal's including Sanga. (Rana Sanga was used by Persian authors); In Pratap's case, Persian chronicles called him Rana Kikka not Rana Pratap or Maharana Pratap. (See, Badayuni description of Haldighati 1576)
 * There is big difference in Shivaji Maharaj and Maharana Pratap; Chhatrapati is a tittle like Rana/Maharana/Raja/Maharaja but Maharaj is clearly a honorifics. In North, people simply adress him as Shivaji.
 * , Please provide a relaible source that corroborates your statement that the title of Rana/Maharana or Rawal/Maharawal actually means a warrior who defend his state.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 17:53, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with 's arguments, I would also point out that WP:COMMONNAME may come into play here, for example Aurangzeb's article is "Aurangzeb", a regal and honorific title as opposed to his birth name, as is the case with many other medieval Indian figures. IIBxtrerII (talk) 19:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * To be more precise, my main argument was that tittle of Maharana/Maharawal has nothing to do with honorific suffix. Infact, it was their modesty that they never called themselves as Raja/Maharaja. Let me repeat again, Mewar rulers call themselves just custodians of their deity Ekaling (Lord Shiva). This is well known in popular traditions of Rajasthan & anybody who has decent command on this family history knows it for sure. I also contested your point about use of tittle Maharana for Pratap and not for Sanga though Sanga undoutbtley was more accomplished ruler. Their legacies are different from each other, Sanga was 40 km away from perhaps doing What later Marathas did after death of Aurangzeb [despite being a physically challenged person], while Pratap legacy is the mastery over guerilla warfares against enemy far far stronger then him. Pratap can't hold candle to Sanga or even Maldev Rathore's (Two highly recognised Hindu rulers of 16th century by Persian authors); milltary carrers. To conclude it, all rulers of Mewar were adressed as Maharana's/Maharawal's in the annals while Persian authors differs greatly here.
 * You want source for my previous claim, Please take a look here:-
 * Page:-187
 * Packer&Tracker  «Talk»  15:54, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Packer&Tracker  «Talk»  15:54, 11 May 2022 (UTC)