User talk:Deokalimuskabad
Welcome![edit]
Hi Deokalimuskabad! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! RFD (talk) 17:43, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
May 2020[edit]
Your recent editing history at Nanda Baba shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Contributor321 (talk) 16:55, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
June 2020[edit]
Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Nanda Baba—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 02:57, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
YADAV article is twisted and biased[edit]
Dear Deokalimuskabad - YADAV article is twisted , biased , one-sided and has wrong information 'It is not 99% which is in lower class category but it is only around 70% which is under lower class and around 30% is elite Kings and Zamindars The social status of Yadavs in Haryana and Rajasthan is totally different from UP and Bihar. The Yadavs of Rajasthan and Harayana are kings and come under Rajput category. The Yadavs of UP and Bihar are not. There is no caste glorification. You are refusing to state the facts based on books provided.''''' In Page 81 Lucia M states The status ambiguity of today’s Yadavs and their Rajput-like military culture and religious traditions can be plausibly traced back to the historical phases that witnessed the transformation of martial pastoralist communities into more defined caste-like groups. In Page 83 The history of the Rewari family is of particular importance for the present study. Their members were amongst the first promoters of the formation of a Yadav community and today they still represent Yadav-Rajput heritage and royalty. They were locally conceived as Yaduvanshi-Kshatriya. In page 302 Amongst the Yadav caste we find rajas, zamindars, sepoys and cowherders who have been conceived and categorised either as warriors and as belonging to the Kshatriya varna, or as lower-caste and belonging to the Shudra varna.I argue that the Ahirs’ ambiguous status and the fact that members of this large heterogeneous community were (and are) recognised as a Rajput-like community made it possible for all the Yadavs to think of themselves as a martial and valorous caste with a Kshatriya pedigree. So overall this article is one-sided, biased and completely ignores all valid books which talks about many Yadavs who are Kings and Zamindars. That is a significant portion which is ignored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinnerbanters (talk • contribs) 02:53, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
You are totally wrong and biased, almost all of them were pastrolists.even in Rajasthan and haryana and is supported by source. Having few kings is common,almost every caste have few kings , this article is unbiased and neutral and is right in showing the reality.don't be in false glorification India has risen above all such things. Deokalimuskabad (talk) 11:14, 9 June 2020 (UTC)