Talk:Chudasama dynasty

Notes

Chudasama Graharipu-Chaulukya Mularaja war

• Articles checked to gather info: Chudasama dynasty#Graharipu_I, Graharipu#Battle with Mularaja, Mularaja#War_against_Graharipu_and_Laksha, History_of_Kutch#Samma_rule, Kera, Kutch, Paramara_dynasty#Early_rulers, Atkot.

• • Graharipu's allies: Medas (possibly Mer people or otherwise), his friend's son Laksha (must not be similar to Lakha Phulani as mentioned in Atkot as he is placed around 1320 and an earlier Lakha may have existed who fought for Graharipu) of Kutch, and a king named Sindhuraja (possibly a king from Sindh/Samma king)
  • Mularaja's allies: Gangamaha of Gangadvara (?), Mahirata (?), Revatimitra (?), and Shailaprastha (?); Paramara king of Abu and Srimala (a Paramara dynasty king who is sometime named Krishnaraja and identified with /Vakpati (I)/Vappairaja/Bappiraja but uncertain. Bard tale of Kavat (king) refer to revenge from Abu chief who is sometime referred as Ano. Another tale of Uga Vala refer to Viramdeva Parmar or Meghanand Parmar who seems Paramara chiefs of Shiyal island.); Bhillas (?) and the Kauravas (?). After the battle began, several others including the king of Saptakashi (?) and a number of Gujarati soldiers, joined him. Majumdar opines that several kings are fiction.

• It seems that war was between Graharipu Chudasama and Mulraja Chaulukya. Chudasama supported by Lakha of Kutch and Samma of Sindh. Chaulukya supported by Parmara. Lakha's paliya (memorial stone) is at Atkot so was it faught at Atkot?. But he is mentioned as Lakha Phulani. Can we call it Battle of Atkot?.

Is there anybody interested in detailed research of this battle and create article? @Utcursch: and @Sitush:. --Nizil (talk) 22:12, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

@Nizil Shah: I don't really have any good sources on this. But feel free to move content from Mularaja#War against Graharipu and Laksha to a new article. A short summary of that article can be added to the articles on Mularaja and Graharipu. utcursch | talk 15:52, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

I have expanded the sections in Graharipu and Mularaja articles with some possibilities of separate article titled Battle of Jambupali (not Atkot huh!)--Nizil (talk) 12:09, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Reverting to older version for rewriting with new source

Sitush, I am pinging you before I revert to older version because I have found new reliable source in Gujarati regarding Chudasama dynasty. The source Gujaratno Rajkiya Ane Sanskrutik Itihas (Vol. 5) : Saltanat Kal (pp. 157-167, 516) was published in 1977 B. J. Institute; edited by R. C. Parikh and Draft:Hariprasad Shastri. Both are noted historians. It is fifth of nine volume series on history of Gujarat and considered as the most authentic and well referenced work on history of Gujarat. This source covers history from Mandalika I to Mandalika III who were 14th century kings during the Gujarat Sultanate era. I will revert and go ahead following discussion with you. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 14:00, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for pinging me but I am really not very active at the moment due to health issues. I tend to be wary of itihas stuff, which is often grossly opinionated, and have never heard of the B J Institute, nor indeed the editors even though you think they are noted historians (Parikh seems far too much of a gadabout to be reliable, in my opinion, but what do I know? some polymaths really are polymaths, although most are just people who get involved in a lot of stuff and use their reputation in one area to further an agenda in another). Perhaps stick a note at WT:INB inviting comments? - Sitush (talk) 01:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Itihas means history in Gujarati and has nothing to do with Sanskrit Itihasa literature. The book above is well referenced (with inline citations) and has good discussions of topics with differing opinions. You may find other publications by B. J. Institute of Learning and Research cited in many works. It is reputed institute for studies on Indian history and culture. Parikh and Shastri were reputed historians and I have no doubt about it (you may search their names in Google Books to know their contributions). Anyone can look at the above Gujarati work and tell about its reliability. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 06:59, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

• Parikh, Rasiklal Chhotalal; Shastri, Hariprasad Gangashankar, eds. (1977). ગુજરાતનો રાજકીય અને સાંસ્કૃતિક ઇતિહાસ: સલ્તનત કાલ [Political and Cultural History of Gujarat: Sultanate Era]. Research Series - Book No. 71 (in Gujarati). Vol. V. Ahmedabad: Bholabhai Jeshingbhai Institute of Learning and Research. pp. 157–167, 516.

Sitush I am going ahead with above source. -Nizil (talk) 12:45, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed your earlier message. No problem if you think the sources as ok. - Sitush (talk) 13:17, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@Nizil Shah: I have a physical copy of the above book. Actually, I have all 9 volume series. -Gazal world (talk) 10:36, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

@Gazal world:, Wow. Currently I have access to two volumes on Archives. I will ask for relevant parts on WP:RX from other volumes. History article need many more/better sources. It could be very helpful. Regards,

-Nizil (talk) 10:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

References

people removing information

Is there any control mechanism in Wikipedia ?? people are removing my information without giving any proper reason , recently Wikipedia user @vedantisen removed my edits because my edit source was not from Harward University , Is Wikipedia only allowing only Harward University sources ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raakuldeep (talk • contribs) 09:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Need semi protection

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.61.181.211 (talk)

 Not done: requests for increases to the page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. That said, page protection is typically only granted in the case of repeated, ongoing vandalism, which is not happening on this article. Can you explain more about why you think protection is needed? ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 13:02, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Source/content issues

@HinduKshatrana: and @Raakuldeep:, please stopping edit warring over reference issue. The "secondary" scholarly sources are considered most important and reliable. Any language sources are OK if they fulfill the criteria of reliable source. Rasdhar by Meghani was a "primary" source and he was not a scholar of history so his work is better not cited. Hemchandra's work Dvashraya is "primary" source but we had not cited Dvashrya directly but the commented "secondary" sources written by history scholars Shushil Kumar and Harald Tambs Lyche. Primary sources are used in very limited cases. See WP:HISTRS for more detailed info. I hope that I have accurately explained the difference. I request you two to sort out content disputes here instead on reverting again and again in the article, See WP:3RR rule.-Nizil (talk) 13:27, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Please just add edit protection on this page. HinduKshatrana (talk) 15:02, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

If you two are discussing issues here, there is no need for page protection. If you two are edit warring, I need to ask for protection.-Nizil (talk) 06:05, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

I have just removed a bunch of Raj era sources. They are not reliable. I also think we need a deep check of the remaining sources because I suspect some POV pushing by the Ahit community, who have operated numerous disruptive sockfarms etc across a swathe of articles for years. - Sitush (talk) 13:08, 12 June 2020 (UTC)