Talk:Pratapaditya

Edit request from Novaresident95, 11 September 2011
The description of Pratapaditya, particularly the intro, is garbled and seem to be written by the proponents of rabid Hindu Nationalism. Pratapaditya came from an era where the Hindu and Muslim rulers were rather mixed and would not have fit the RSS agenda that seems to be behind the guy writing this article.

Pratapaditya's father was Srihari who was the prime minister of Daud Khan, the last Muslim Sultan of the Qarrani dynasty.

His generals and troops included both Hindus and Muslims, which the article does mention in the body unlike the intro.

He was defeated by the forces of Maharaja Man Singh who was a Hindu general sent by Akbar, the Mughal Emperor who was Muslim.

The primary reason for Pratapaditya's defeat (and death) is traditionally ascribed to the treachery of Bhavanand Majumdar, a Hindu Brahmin Priest in Pratapaditya's court. For his role, Bhavanand was made the Maharaja of Nadia by the Mughals.

Pratapaditya was one of the baro-bhuiyans, feudal lords, who included both Hindus and Muslims and allied and fought amongst themselves without much care about religion.

Novaresident95 (talk) 14:19, 11 September 2011 (UTC)


 * All requests to edit semi-protected articles must be accompanied by reliable sources  Chzz  ► 01:04, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Novaresident95 makes a political comment. Pratapaditya was an icon of Hindu sentiments as early as the 1880s when the Tagore family in Calcutta (Kolkata) and others started organising the Hindu Mela where Pratapaditya, Shivaji and Rana Pratap of Mewar were publicly praised.

Also, "Pratapaditya came from an era where the Hindu and Muslim rulers were rather mixed" -- this statement does not make sense as the only social interactions between Hindu and Muslim rulers were as rivals (baro bhuniyas were rivals). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.93.130.157 (talk) 08:20, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Neutrality and veracity
The neutrality and veracity of the article is disputed. No info should be taken for granted unless corroborated unanimously by the sources.Messiaindarain (talk) 11:46, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Issues
Message of a Wikipedian: I could write that Pratapaditya killed his uncle and took the kingdom by "treachery" and "deserved his fate"; but that's not neutral, not profesional and not worthy of a Wikipedian. Messiaindarain (talk) 11:46, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "Maharaja" is title, not a name.
 * Was Pratapaditya one of the Baro-Bhuyan?
 * Was he defeated by Raja Man Singh or by Islam Khan? (Even sources conflict with its own content besides conflicting other sources).
 * The sources are skewed and not neutral.

Verifying the Legacy
Editors, please consult page 83 to 84 of 'Memoirs of an Indian Woman' by Shudha Mazumdar for detailed information regarding Srihari and Pratapidtya's ancestry as well as legacy of descendants. Thank you. Semper Curious (talk) 16:34, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Constantly vandalization of this article 'Pratapaditya'
I have seen that some user id s are constantly vandalising this article for their bad intention and to introduce their own political racist agenda.

The legitimate sources of the article were provided. Please look into the matter. I think these elements are harmful for the neutrality of this platform. Dahir Sen (talk) 10:33, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 September 2021
The page of Pratapaditya does not represent majority or minority views of reputed writters and Historians and authors like Ram Ram Basu, Dinesh chandra sen, Nagendranath ray and their works regarding Raja pratapaditya. Political manipulation of any kind is against the neitrality policy of wikipedia. There are enough witters who have documented the life of Pratapaditya in details and there are books of different authors who have argued differently. All of that should be on display for others to see and not deliberatle downplayed or exaggerated which is being done right now.the cuurent page is disproportionate and deliberately downplayed ehich is unjust, partisan and does not represent neutrality of wikipedia's policy. Samx don (talk) 19:17, 9 September 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) 19:21, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * We will depend on the critiques of these works by modern historians like Aniruddha Ray or literary theorists like Clinton B. Seely. TrangaBellam (talk) 19:43, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * How do you decide a selective quoting of sources, modern critiques of any work does not cancel the former , anirudha ray does not have the academic reliability of Dinesh Chandra Sen or R.C mazumdar. If the decision of sources is hegemonic and not based on scholarly concensous of different sources then the discourse is hegemonic and does not represent the neutrality policy.thanks Samx don (talk)
 * How did ascertain the relative reliability of Ray? Consult WP:HISTRW. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:40, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * How did TrangaBellam (talk) asertain the higher reliability of Ray? over Rc Mazumdar ,Dinesh Chandra Sen, Jadunath Sarkar and how do you disregard these sources? first consult at WP:HISTRW yourself as you have tried to create a hegemonic discource by citing only the sources you like and not mainatain neutrality. Samx don (talk)
 * Throwing words like hegemony won't convince me. Recent sources get maximum priority — especially, when recommended by one of the most distinguished historians of India. HISTRW states, consult the following sources in order. TrangaBellam (talk) 07:34, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Throwing panegyrics about favoured historians won't convince me either There are more than Recent sources who are reliable and credible and have academic value in the field of history . The historian that you named is not the only historian who has worked on Pratpaditya and the idtinguished person you named has propounded a fringe theory (which is aginst the policies of wikipedia ) and on the other hand sources like Baldeo Sahai who specialises in naval history and trade has documented about Pratapaditya's navy though recent sources have more preference in wikipedia, there are many reputed historians who have worked on the primary sources of Dinesh Chandra Sen and R.C Mazumdar . Ignoring such diversity of sources with the same creditials of your preffered historians which in turn goes against the policy of neutrality. There have been consistent threats, war edits both individually nd collabaratively from your side and rude behaviour as well . This is a matter of conscent for us . Samx don (talk)
 * Sahai is hardly cited by anybody. I don't find any historian (other than Ray and Seely, whose conclusion I quote above) within the last four-five decades, who has worked on Pratapaditya. That I cannot read Bengali, I remain unaware about recent vernacular scholarship.
 * Pratapaditya was not a petty zamindar of nuisance-value, as Sarkar claimed and Ray rightfully criticizes him for subscribing to the Mughal-imperial perspective. However, Pratapaditya was neither some kind of Hindu liberator from Moslem rule. Thanks, TrangaBellam (talk) 12:13, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The point simply is that I do not wish to portray Pratapaditya as a liberator though he was in many respects, his forts are there and I will shortly provide archeological citations of The revival of Shakti-worship in his tenure of 13 years of his rule , jadunath is a primary source believe it or not but yes his academic contributions does not get cancelled by aniruddha ray or anybody. The sycreticism of hindu and muslim communities of bengal during his reign has to be included and the clinical descriptions of Dinesh chandra sen and the validity of Ram Ram basu's work has been acknowledged by the then colonial dispensation and many historians which you cannot find but they are there and as far as anirudha ray  is concerned there are no wikipedia restrictions on R.C mazumdar and Anirudha has not commented on R.C's scholarship of Raja pratapaditya and definately there is no scholarly concensous regarding both the critique of R.C or the arguements proposed by any other historian on R.C . If Jadunath is a doubtable source that has to be contested in wikipedia not by the cognitive bias or personal prejudice of any Individual , and then there is a possibility that jadunath himself could be cancelled but until then he is valid . There are many other sources than jadunath or anirudha taking for granted that we are on either side of the spectrum when concerned about our preferences, which are published from reputed publications and are from differenet countries . There is no way according to wikipedia's policy that such sources can be discarded without due reason and is against the spirit of cneutrality as well. The disregard for vernacular scholarship is lingustic facism which hurts people from all creed, caste and religion who uses this particular language given that such works are translated in english which you are ignorant about but they for sure exist and scholars more qualified and trained than yourself have knowledge about such sources. Baldeo sahai is not a historian who specializes in medival history but he specialises in naval history and have written important woks which are being studied and taught in reputed universities. The books such as the ports of India,  Indian Shipping -A Historical Survey are reputed books on a scepic type of history , naval history in this case and that should be cited as the naval history of Pratapaditya.
 * I do not wish to make this a hindu-muslim issue neither I want any adventurism in his page, and I would be happy to block the id's that do such stunts . I wish to provide the evidences of R.C mazumdar, Dinesh chandra sen , vernacular scholarship of many authors which are translated and I do comply to contest the wriitings of jadunath before presenting the legacy of Raja Pratapaditya and without using slurs or ad hominems while doing so.
 * The article on the wire is an informed article which also suggests to not make this a hindu-muslim issue but to recognise his contributions as an independent King for which the writter of that article has also provided sources. That is the course I wish to take of standing up to the ideal of neutrality, without either exagerrations or downplays and of course no right wing nationalism or left wing bias . I would hap[pily write contested legacies of both Raja Pratapaditya and Siraj-ud daula without favouring either of them even if I want to.ThanksSamx don (talk)
 * You cannot go on accusing people of linguistic fascism or else you will be blocked. If you wish to have some content included, propose at the talk-page with citations.
 * Any citation to D. C. Sen or R. R. Basu will be rejected, unless covered by recent sources. TrangaBellam (talk) 17:57, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * You cannot go on threatning people of accuses as I have proposed a situation and not accused per se or else you will be reported to wikipedia for harrassing fellow wikipedians.
 * Any citation to D. C. Sen or R. R. Basu will be will be presented by me which are covered by recent sources as both dinesh chandra sen and r.r basu wrote in Bengali most of the time so they had to be covered by recent sources and have been by credible ones.The hierarchy of sources does not cancel the principle of neutrality.If sources are presented which are credible in nature and still a favoured writter is imposed by yourself and the edits are removed even if they are not against wikipedia's policy then, I would request wikipedia to look into the matter and solve it.Samx don (talk)

I won't be commenting further unless you manage to propose some addition with reliable sources. TrangaBellam (talk) 06:30, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Protection
This page needs protection. It was far better when I visited it last. So many important details and pictures are removed. Constant vandalism of the page needs to be stopped. Somebody please push for high level of protection. 2402:3A80:198F:16E1:878:5634:1232:5476 (talk) 04:30, 8 October 2022 (UTC)