User talk:Mohanbhan/Archive 3

Banjara
You know that you are in breach of WP:BRD at Banjara. You know it because you actually cite it yourself in your edit summary after also being told about it by in their edit summary. You've been around for a long time now and should thus also be familiar with the various special regimes that apply to articles related to India etc, which make actions such as yours problematic.

What is it that you do not understand? - Sitush (talk) 06:51, 22 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I agree that I may have acted a bit hastily, and I am sorry about it. But Sitush I wish you were a little less acrimonious, and a little more understanding, with your edits and reverts. I know that "colonial sources" are regarded as unreliable on WP, and respecting that, I added a link to the external links section which is very much within WP policy. So when you removed it, I reinstated it by saying it was a document of historical and archival interest -- though I now feel I should have stated WP policy on EL which would have brought the matter to a close. -Mohanbhan (talk) 12:20, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Why you are not making a self-revert if you are really "sorry" or you "regret" your actions? Capitals00 (talk) 16:20, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Because the issue is being discussed on the talk page and WP policy permits linking to archival material under EL. -Mohanbhan (talk) 02:32, 23 April 2018 (UTC)



@mohanbhan I know you merged page in good faith. But before you did that you should have talked with me. ok. I see you are not satisfied with Maharashtra Gazetteer. ok its fine I will try to explain my point

1)"... a representation is made and a final decision was taken as aforesaid, Banjara and Vanjari shall be treated as synonyms of each other and the confidential circular dated 5th March 1986 shall not be acted upon..." you quoted this from State Of Maharashtra And Ors. vs Ganpat Pandurang Sankhe And Anr. on 24 July 1991 judgement. But in that same judgement, its said that a committee should be made to look into this problem.
 * 2) A committee is formed under DC Wadhva who submitted a report in 1993. (source)
 * 3) In the conclusion the committee reported that Banjaras and vanjari are not in synonymous. (page number 83 see conclusion)(please take a time and look into it)
 * 4) Finally we are talking about the community having a strong presence in Maharashtra. If we can have page upon small groups of people Vanjari community deserve a separate article.
 * 5) And Vanjari Community also have very strong religious and political presence in Maharashtra.
 * 6) and if you have problems with sources of the article you are free to modify it and make the good article .. but don't just merge it with another totally different article ok

so I am reverting the changes in good faith... u can discuss on this issue and if you are still not ok with it you are free to merge. I am here only to make information available to those who love wiki thank you India1277 (talk) 17:32, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * andsome more ref for you about vanjari caste = 1) people ind india

India1277 (talk) 18:40, 27 April 2018 (UTC)