Misplaced Pages

Talk:Marathi people: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 09:47, 21 September 2006 editHaphar (talk | contribs)10,958 editsm Improvement← Previous edit Revision as of 09:53, 21 September 2006 edit undoHaphar (talk | contribs)10,958 edits Stop removing tags: rockin !Next edit →
Line 52: Line 52:


::--<b>]]]</b><sup>]|]</sup> 04:18, 21 September 2006 (UTC) ::--<b>]]]</b><sup>]|]</sup> 04:18, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

::: Well North Indians while talking among themselves call all South Indians " Madrasi's". Which they might not find offensive but south Indians do. Since this is wikipedia and the word is being used in a discussion with a person who is a Kannadiga, restraint would help.] 09:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


==Sources required== ==Sources required==

Revision as of 09:53, 21 September 2006

Pl add brief biographies of prominent Maharashtrians. mahawiki 14:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Great work on expanding this article. The last time I saw this was a stub. Commendeble work indeed.

--NRS 13:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Credit goes to Arya Rajya Maharashtra.It is good to see Marathi wikipedians awakening and contributing finally.mahawiki 18:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Trivia section

Very POV. There are claims of Maharashtra being the most improtant contributor in cricket, film, etc, etc but where are the stats? Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 07:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I have removed all the POV sounding statements. I have also added references and citations, in case someone wants them. Also, Zaheer plays for Baroda team but he is originally from Maharashtra from a village in between Pune and Nashik. He speaks fluent Marathi at his home and many times with Marathi media as well. He has a restaurant in Pune as well.
--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 07:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Stop removing tags

Stop removing "citation needed" tags that other users add without providing citations. Also if I am right(admin:Bluguyen may please confirm), other WP articles are not supposed to be used as citations. Provide better citations and dont remove tags before providing citations. Also about Gururaj Deshpande, provide citation that he is Marathi. Sarvagnya 08:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Sarvagnya,we are not supposed to provide citations for each and every senetence here.Pl dont forget their's a article about Kannadi ppl also!Stop taking revenge of ur defeats!Grow up.mahawiki 10:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Nobody is asking for citations for each and every thing. I am not asking for citation to prove that Madhuri Dixit(incidentally my favourite actress of all time - Aishwarya is not in my list of faves) is Marathi. I am only asking for citations for borderline cases and cases where the Marathi roots are not commonly known. Sarvagnya 17:10, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
But, then again, what do you define by borderline and commonly known. These things are subjective. What is known to you may be unknown to other. Similarly, what is unknown to you may be well-known to others. Can you give a citation to prove that "Madhuri Dixit is Marathi is commonly known" ? Why are mongering a war out of nothin' at all ? Why are you acting so childishly, Sarvagnya ? Take my advice, just chill !
--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 17:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
So what is common for an Indian might not be for someone from say Iceland. a user from another location might not see it as common that Madhuri Dixit is from Bombay and ask for citation. Can be a citation for her place and date of birth.

So defining borderline or commonly known is not required. Even mainstream can be challenged if one wants to. The way mahawiki and Arya are going people will start to question mainstream too. Sarvagnya is sticking to a narrower no of issues, and if uncited he has the right to remove it, and it not called vandalism. Also mahawiki has been told in the past not to use kannadi- he persists. The right term is Kannadiga. To persist with Kannadi is rude and counterproductive and can lead to admin's taking action. Why don't you take it as a challenge and source the citations ? Will add to the quality of the article and ensure what you source stays on the article rather than it get deleted a few months later. Haphar 18:06, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Am I missing something here ? There seems to be a link. Haphar, how do you know Mahawiki has been told not to use Kannadi before. And were you checking and picking where and when mahawiki used that word ? Why would you do that ? And how do you know "Kannadi" is rude ? Give me a citation ! The link you gave proves nothing. It just shows that IMDB knows Madhuri is Marathi. But say one of my friends doesn't know it. Say most people in the West don't know it. Then ? By the way, you forget that I can tag many "Kannadi" articles if I want. I know Sarvagnya got a considerable "defeat" at the hands of mahawiki in the Belgaon article and that's the reason why he is trying to create bumps in this article. But what about you ? I thought you were assuming good faith. But I seriously doubt now.... As for Kannadi and Kannadiga. Well, Kannadi is Marathi for Kannadiga. We, Marathi people refer to "People speaking Kannada language" as Kannadi. So, there is nothing rude about it. As I said give me a citation that "Kannadi" is rude and another one that "Kannadi" is not Marathi for Kannadiga.
Go get it !!! Will be a great challenge for you :)) !!!!!!
By the way, Arya and Mahawiki, you are doing a great job, keep on rocking !!!!
Also, I would say that this is a nonissue being blown out of proportion. This article is just fine. Let it be.
Sarvagnya, you need to remain civil and there is no need for a "Tit-for-Tat" attitude. These things are actually proving counterproductive to Misplaced Pages. Again I would tell the same thing that I told Haphar - Assume Good Faith Keep Rockin' but No Messin' !!!
--NRS 18:19, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

So if you would go through the history of the dispute which has been fought here and on other pages you would not ask that question ( where mahawiki was asked not to use the word) so he knows, and if you can search you would know too. So that is how i know. And if you could do some research before coming in you would know too. I am in Maharashtra- I know Marathi speaking people and no one here uses the word Kannadi. So if you claim it is a word that is used please do get the citation. As Mahwiki has been told not to use this before ( by an admin) the onus is on him to get the citation. The good faith is there, which is why the citations are being asked for. Would request you to help in the same. About Madhuri and the link ? I gave it to show place of birth and date of birth. and that's what I mentioned ( if you could read it ). I have given it as an example to give for her place and date of birth, not for her language. So if someone of your friends does not know about place or date , that's the link to get. So as you said Do assume good faith ( plus read a little bit) to help with the rockin man. So keep rockin in those citations please as there is no info on Israel or Mauritius that i have seen in all this singing. Haphar 18:48, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, cool guys. Well, really ! Actually, Marathi people use "Kannadi" while conversing in Marathi with other Marathi people. Obviously, they wouldn't use Kannadi with you. It's only here that I find that Kannadi is rude ! Anyway, if people don't like it then all I can say is don't use it. As for Israel, see Bene Israel.
And Keep Rockin'
--NRS 04:18, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Well North Indians while talking among themselves call all South Indians " Madrasi's". Which they might not find offensive but south Indians do. Since this is wikipedia and the word is being used in a discussion with a person who is a Kannadiga, restraint would help.Haphar 09:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Sources required

Can we get sources on Marathi people being primary in Goa- ie is Konkani= Marathi origin as well as sources to say Marathi people are "significant" in Mauritius as well as Israel. I think the total jews of Indian origin are miniscule in Israel. And I have no clue as to the numbers in Mauritius, but as the claim has been made, i am sure there would be reliable sources to back the claims. Haphar 13:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Haphar firstly see Rashtrakuta Kaveri kannada and numerous other articles which have no sources.Ecah and everything cannot be cited (courtesy-a Kannadi wikipedian),on similar lines,each and every thing on this article cannot be backed by source.Few things are left for ur common sense.mahawiki 13:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

So let me tell you a few rules of wikipedia. If it cannot be sourced then a citation required tag can be put and then if the details are not provided the uncited comments can be deleted. for instance check the tag put in the start of this article:- Not my rules, not my interpretation, pls check with an admin if you doubt me ( and Blnguyen seems to be on a break so try another admin User:Gurubrahma, or User:Samir. Check the India article ( a featured article )- the Demographics section gives it's references . So another article NOT conforming to this rule does not allow for this article to not adhere to the rules. You can ask for citations on those articles, and unless reliable sources are given ( for instance a blog discussion is not a reliable resource, neither is an obscure website not known to anyone else) you can remove the uncited content there also. Which is why superlatives like "director extraordiare" are POV and to be removed. You might know a famous personality and write stuff based on your knowledge, but that too would not be acceptable on wikipedia unless it can be backed up by sources. Haphar 17:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Systemized Vandalism

Few users are resorting to systemized and synchronized vandalism here. Although User:Sarvagnya stopped adding senseless tags, few editors are still making statements before confirming facts. Anyways, I am not gonna waste time on that, but let me make a few points.

As I said earlier, Zaheer Khan is from Maharashtra and is Marathi. Refer to my comment above. As for adding Farrokh Engineer and Karsan Ghavri, let me make it clear that this list is of Marathi people or people whose mother-tongue is Marathi or people of Marathi-origin, not of "people who reside in Maharashtra" or "Residents of Maharashtra". Farokkh Engineer and Karsan Ghavri, both do NOT speak Marathi. Their mother tongues are Farsi and Gujarathi respectively. Same thing applies for Shastri. If we include Residents of Maharashtra in this list, the list will become too long for Misplaced Pages. We would have to add Shahrukh Khan, Dino Morea, Shilpa Shetty (our Kannadi fanatic won't be happy then...;))...), Aishwarya Rai (I would be happy....;))...), Dilip Kumar and so on.... Tell me would they fit the definition of Marathi people. Also immigrants to Mumbai, never like calling themselves Maharashtrians or Marathi people. Another thing being this is an ethno-linguistic group, not a regional group.

As far as Norman Pritchard is concerned, he was not the first Indian to win medal. He won in 1930s when India was still a British colony. After independence Jadhav was the first Indian to win medal. Please do NOT belittle the great man's achievements.

I think most things are clear now. From now on, in future, please discuss on talk page before removing authentic information as POV or adding tags.

--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 14:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Norman Pritchard did win it for India. Please mention " Independent India" if you want to make a claim of "first individual medal" and Maj Rathore also exists as an individual medal winner. Ratan Tata is born in Mumbai as were as his ancestors, that is different from a Shah Rukh who was born in Delhi and lived there till he was in his 20's. Raj Kapoor was not born in Maharashtra, though he stayed here, but Rishi /Randhir was as are their children ( ie Kareena) so none of them may be of your "original marathi stock" but compared to a Shah rukh or a Dilip kumar those born here in the state have a stronger claim to it. As mentioned if those born here speak the language do they qualify even if they are Parsi ?

And I dont know why Haphar added Balwinder Sandhu. He removed it though.

Haphar, I know you are doing it in good faith, but the list should be limited to Marathi-speakers. If you want, we can create another article say "List of notable residents of Maharshtra" or something like that. You did a good job though.

--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 15:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Zaheer Khan is from Shrirampur.He is a Maharashtrian since his mother-tongue is Marathi.mahawiki 15:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

ettiquette

This is not a systemised vandalism. Someone with a POV that does not match yours is not a vandal. A vandal is someone who adds unrelated stuff which is not linked at all to the article. If you want to keep the article "ethno-linguistic" ,and if you want to keep people who have been in Maharashtra for some 3-4 generations out of your " Marathi People" article ( ie the Tata's) then please rename the article as Marathi "speaking" people. ( and if Farokh Engineer happens to know and "speak" Marathi despite being Parsi- does that still keep him out ?) I do not know of any other article on wiki that tries to be so parochial so I am not sure if it is the right way to go, but I am sure you will hear of it if such ethno linguistic cuts are O.K or not.Haphar 17:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Haphar, if they speak Marathi, I have no objection to them being mentioned here. But the people themselves do not want to be called Marathi themselves. I don't know much about Parsis, but almost all other ethnic people, then they may be Punjabi or Gujarati or Kannadi, they don't want to call themselves Marathi. Even Parsis use a dialect of Farsi, highly influenced by Gujarati, then how can they be called Marathi. It's a group of people whose "Mother-Tongue" (Maayboli in Marathi) is Marathi. Marathi is based in their ethos. And that's what this group is.
See, I have utmost respect for the Tatas. I consider them as fellow "original" Mumbaikars. But, they are still not Marathi. They haven't adopted the language or the culture as yet. As it is this group is defined by ones who are traditionally Marathi or whose mother-tongue is Marathi. For example Zaheer Khan is Maharashtrian because his mother-tongue is Marathi. But then Munaf Patel is not Marathi, although he stays in Mumbai and plays for Mumbai because his mother-tongue is not Marathi. Similarly for others in this list. Maybe after 4-5 generations more, when the Tatas become more Marathianized, then they will be automatic inclusions in this group. But now, it won't be correct to put them in this group. Even the Tatas themselves wouldn't like it. (Although Ratan Tata said he is a Maharashtrian, while accepting "Maharashtra Gaurav" award. But for that see Maharashtrian article - The word has two meanings.)
I mistook Sarvagnya's edits for you. Sorry, I called your edits vandalism. Which they were not.
--Arya Rajya Maharashtra 18:01, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
LOL. He thought I made those edits and called it vandalism. Once he realised that someone else did it, the same edits became good faith edits. Ha ha. Sarvagnya 18:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Call the article "People of Marathi origin " then. No cause for confusion then. Haphar 18:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Improvement

I have even added names to the lists of people on the page, so I am trying to "add" to the article and not take away from it. However the confrontational approach, not listening to others ( and the jumping in attacking comments by Rock Star) are not looking to resolve the issue but raise temperatures. So let me reiterate- there is a lot of good stuff in the article, and if the disputes go away you can work on adding even more to other articles you have interest in. But without citations there would be questions asked and the dispute would linger. Over the rest of the article and it's contents and disputes you all can continue. However I request that sources be given for the " significant population in Israel" as well as "significan population in Mauritius" claim. From the same logic you gave for Parsi's not being a part of Maratha people, Jews from Mumbai do not qualify as Marathi.Haphar 19:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Also pls check the following links to get more names to add to your lists. :- and . Haphar 20:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, Haphar, these guys, Arya and Mahwiki have done a really good job. I mean the last time I came here the article was a small stub. But they have really expanded it brilliantly. And if instead of appreciating their effort if we go on asking for citations and start finding small glitches then it certainly is not good. They deserve a good pat on the back. I mean, both of them seem to be new to Misplaced Pages and we must not sledge them rightaway.
As for Marathi Jews, Haphar, you don't seem to know about their history. No probs. I will provide some info. Bene Israeli Jews have been living in Maharashtra for more than 2000 years. That's a pretty long time. They have totally absorbed Marathi culture in them. Not only do they speak Marathi but they think Marathi. Their surnames are similar to those of Marathi Hindus (Cheulkar, Masurkar, etc..). In these 2000 years they have intermarried with Marathi Hindus and have adopted Marathi culture. But most of all, they refer to themselves as Marathi manoos (person). Tell you what there is a Marathi daily in Israel. For more information on Bene Israel (aka Marathi Jews) check the Misplaced Pages article on them. And all this info is from Misplaced Pages itself, the net and reputed newspapers like "The Times Of India". I think you must have confused Baghdadi Jews with Bene Israel. Baghdadi Jews are miniscule in population and very few of those are there in Maharashtra. Most of Baghdadi Jews are in Kolkata and Gujarat. So, one can't call them Marathi. Certainly, those haven't been mentioned in this article, I guess.
Last, but not the least, Keep Rockin' in Good Faith !!!!
--NRS 04:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Absolutely ! it's a good job and it can be made better by clarifying some facts so that they can withstand scrutiny. For instance Bene Israel can be mentioned in the article itself ! with the wiki link so that people know about this aspect. I think it should also be highlighted that Jews stayed in India ( and Maharashtra in particular) with NO prosecution ( except maybe by the Portugese) unlike most other places where Jews stayed.
However the Bene Israel article shows them to be about .08% of the population of Israel. I do not think that can be seen as "significant" marathi presence. So the way around it can be to reword the table and name it "Areas with marathi presence" rather than "Areas with significant Marathi presence". Haphar 09:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)