Talk:Savarna (gotra)

Removal of sources
I have removed a majority of the original sourcing, and provided relevant pointers over the edit summaries. Plese engage over here, if you dispute any of my removals. Read WP:HISTRS and User:Sitush/CasteSources, as well. &#x222F; WBG converse 19:18, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
 * How did you determine that the sources were unreliable? Many of them were books from British authors proving the roots this specific gotra. I hope this isn't some personal quarrel of yours that is leading to indulging in edit-warring. I would rather prefer an explanation on specific sources that were removed. -TheodoreIndiana (talk) 12:43, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , which sources do you dispute? The explanations are in the edit-summaries. As to Raj-era books, they are not reliable for reasons described over User:Sitush/CasteSources and WP:HISTRS. &#x222F; WBG converse 12:57, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not disputing any sources, I wrote this article and cited those sources, you are disputing sources and repeatedly removing any modifications. Your claim that Raj-era (pre-1947) books are all invalid is truly preposterous. Do you have any specific points that prove that the scholarly books I used in the article are all unreliable? If you don't then I still stand firm on my that the article should be reverted. This is not only edit-warring but also abuse of power from your side, as the sources I referred to are compliant with WP:RS. - TheodoreIndiana (talk) 15:25, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
 * See Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_172.
 * Crookes was significantly better than the martial race theorists (Thurston/Riley); however it does not change that his scholarship had been since discovered to have suffered from significant defects. Quoting Crispin Bates on the issue:- Also, James Tod was a fellow civil servant with an extremely dubious record of scholarship (read our reception section) and C. Bates further notes:-
 * What does the book removed over this edit has about the subject? I have the book and there's nothing at Pg. 81. I have personal access to Cambridge Core, as well and their search function returns no hits.
 * How does the sites removed over these two edits qualify as a RS? The source removed over this edit is from a TOI blog; they have no editorial control -- the very feature that is an exclusive determinant of whether a source is reliable or not. Which part of WP:SPS don't you understand?
 * How does the source transposed over this edit support the later parts (as it stood earlier)? There's nothing in WP:INTEGRITY which is a difficult read.
 * The source removed over this edit source stuff from us. Have you read WP:CIRCULAR?
 * The source removed over here is iriginally over JSTOR, as linked in edit-sum. Pray inform me, what is there in the review, about the subject.
 * Sourindra Mohun Tagore's academic training was not remotely in ethnography/anthropology and his work was published by a non-notable press (which you, for some unknown reason, deem to be a wing of OUP). Not sure why it is a RS, either. &#x222F; WBG converse 15:58, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, there are some "facts" that are known among the people of this gotra. For instance, Savarniks being a follower of Sama Veda, Upveda being Gandharva Veda and Savarnas being one of the five Gauda Brahmins that migrated from UP to Bengal. But I'm unable to find any authentic English sources on the same. Can't these be put as "Citations Needed" or is it better to just not put them instead? -TheodoreIndiana (talk) 15:10, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The source removed over this edit source stuff from us. Have you read WP:CIRCULAR?
 * The source removed over here is iriginally over JSTOR, as linked in edit-sum. Pray inform me, what is there in the review, about the subject.
 * Sourindra Mohun Tagore's academic training was not remotely in ethnography/anthropology and his work was published by a non-notable press (which you, for some unknown reason, deem to be a wing of OUP). Not sure why it is a RS, either. &#x222F; WBG converse 15:58, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, there are some "facts" that are known among the people of this gotra. For instance, Savarniks being a follower of Sama Veda, Upveda being Gandharva Veda and Savarnas being one of the five Gauda Brahmins that migrated from UP to Bengal. But I'm unable to find any authentic English sources on the same. Can't these be put as "Citations Needed" or is it better to just not put them instead? -TheodoreIndiana (talk) 15:10, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Sourindra Mohun Tagore's academic training was not remotely in ethnography/anthropology and his work was published by a non-notable press (which you, for some unknown reason, deem to be a wing of OUP). Not sure why it is a RS, either. &#x222F; WBG converse 15:58, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, there are some "facts" that are known among the people of this gotra. For instance, Savarniks being a follower of Sama Veda, Upveda being Gandharva Veda and Savarnas being one of the five Gauda Brahmins that migrated from UP to Bengal. But I'm unable to find any authentic English sources on the same. Can't these be put as "Citations Needed" or is it better to just not put them instead? -TheodoreIndiana (talk) 15:10, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, there are some "facts" that are known among the people of this gotra. For instance, Savarniks being a follower of Sama Veda, Upveda being Gandharva Veda and Savarnas being one of the five Gauda Brahmins that migrated from UP to Bengal. But I'm unable to find any authentic English sources on the same. Can't these be put as "Citations Needed" or is it better to just not put them instead? -TheodoreIndiana (talk) 15:10, 9 March 2020 (UTC)