Talk:Origin of Jat people from Shiva's Locks

Removed titles as per Wikipedia Manual of Style
I have just been through the article removing the academic titles as per the "Wikipedia Manual of Style" - see:. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 00:03, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Respected Sir, I personally feel that this article should be merged with the main article highlighting Jats, and I support the merger proposal. I think so because of several reasons, one of them being that it is a part of ancient Indian literature, which had been recorded in Sanskrit; the readers should also go familier with the ancient Indian point of view. Another considerable reason is that it is a very old reference regarding the Jat people, and even the collection of these old ancient Sanskrit Shlokas was done centuries back! So, I personally say 'YES' to the merger proposal. Thanks! Abstruce (talk) 20:26, 21 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I am looking forward to a healthy discussion here! Thanks! Abstruce (talk) 20:46, 21 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Against. I for one, am against the merger because, if this article was merged with the main article on Jats, it would either make that article too long or this material would have to be condensed to the point where it would not get the full attention the myth deserves. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 23:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Support. Reply to John Hill: Respected Sir, I respectfully disagree with You. If this article would be on the main article on Jats, then it will certainly get more attention than ever before. Also, this article is of very ancient nature (originally written in the form of Sanskrit Shlokas that has been explained here), which I consider as a positive factor. As it is an important information related to the historical events related to Jats, whether a person considers it a myth or reality, it can never be overlooked. So, one more time, I personally say 'YES' to the merger proposal. Thanks! Abstruce (talk) 21:08, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I feel this article should be submerged with Jat People because user should know the origin of Jat People. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.203.133.232 (talk) 08:37, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. Respected Sir,


 * On further reflection, my opinion is that a brief description of this account of the origin of the Jats does deserve to be included on the main Jat page with a clear link to this page where the interested reader can easily access the full details. However, I do think that it is far too long to just add it to the main article. Respectfully, John Hill (talk) 10:09, 11 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Support. This article is not detailed enough to have its own page. It is better to merger it with main article about Jat_people. 14:00, 21 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.40.10.178 (talk)


 * Strongly Against. This article have own importance, there is no need to merge with Jats article. This article merged in past but without adding its content to main Jats article. I strongly against to merge this article. 157.37.60.184 (talk) 13:38, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Recover request
Dear Wikipedians, please recover this article as before merged in Jat people article. This article merged with Jat people without adding its content to the Jat people article, so we lost some important stuff from Wikipedia. I request you to recover this article as this revision or add content of this article to the main Jat people article. Thanks Ashok Todawata  Talk  06:25, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

I want healthy discussion here. Ashok Todawata Talk  11:55, 16 June 2018 (UTC)