Misplaced Pages

:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-18 Indian caste system: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

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.
< Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal | Cases Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:06, 19 October 2006 editBakasuprman (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users19,844 edits →Discussion← Previous edit Revision as of 04:06, 19 October 2006 edit undoBakasuprman (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users19,844 edits →DiscussionNext edit →
Line 62: Line 62:
* Could be but I am not one :)] * Could be but I am not one :)]


:I find the actions on the part of the ] disconcerting. Also, bringing up past actions for the sake of context is perfectly fine, especially rabid deletionism and historical whitewashing.] <font color = "blue"><sub>]</sub></font> 04:06, 19 October 2006 (UTC) :I find the actions on the part of the ] disconcerting. Also, bringing up past actions for the sake of context is perfectly fine, especially rabid deletionism and historical whitewashing.] <font color = "blue"><sub>]</sub></font> 04:06, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:06, 19 October 2006

Misplaced Pages Mediation Cabal
Statusnew
Request dateUnknown
Requesting partyUnknown

]]

Mediation Case: 2006-10-18 Indian caste system

Please observe Misplaced Pages:Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Misplaced Pages talk:Mediation Cabal.


Request Information

Request made by: Hkelkar 18:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Where is the issue taking place?
... in Talk:Indian caste system
Who's involved?
... Me User:Hkelkar, User:BhaiSaab,User:TerryJ-Ho
What's going on?
... The dispute is over the Caste System among South Asian Muslims, the relevance of the same and the relevance of Islamic scripture in the mandate and implementation of the same.
What would you like to change about that?
...I would like to emphasize that there are two perspectives regarding the origins of the Muslim Caste System. Bearing in mind that Muslims in South Asia have several caste systems per the sources that I have stated in the article and the talk page Talk:Indian caste system. The Muslim editors allege that the entire South Asian Caste System is borrowed from Hinduism. My sources suggest a more complex dynamic. Some of the Muslim Caste Sytems were adaptive, done so by Hindus who were forcibly converted to Islam. Others were sanctioned by Islamic Fatwas by Islamic clerics based on their interpretation of Quranic verses.I believe that the objections of the Muslim editors are more motivated by religious zeal than by cool objectivity and are an attempt to whitewash the issue of Caste among Muslims.
Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?
...Contact me whenever you want and I will respond as promptly as I possible can. Reach me by talk page or by email from the wikipedia interface .

Mediator response

Compromise offers

This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.

Discussion

While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Misplaced Pages is based on consensus.

"Others were sanctioned by Islamic Fatwas by Islamic clerics based on their interpretation of Quranic verses."
They may have been sanctioned - Hkelkar is unable to prove the fatwas established the system, which is currently what's written in the article. BhaiSaab 18:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


  • The issue seems to be different: The article is about Indian Caste System and as per the prevalance and history it should include a major portion on the development of Hindu caste system and its religious validity.Kelkar instead is bent on including a major element in this article on stratification in other religions specially Islam and downplaying the existence of caste whose origins are enshrined in Hindu religion.
  • As a serious and non persistant editor I take offence to attributing the tag of religious zeal this editor has levelled above - these comments are antiWP:AGFTerryJ-Ho 23:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


Ah! The wonderful world of WP:NOR violation above. Misplaced Pages is about WP:V and all of my edits are scholarly and verifiable per WP:RS. Some of Terry's edits are verifiable (most are from unreliable sources or misquoted/mis-cited from reliable sources as I see it). I have no objection to him putting the adequately sourced parts of his perspective, However,Terry wants to go Ahmadinejad on my edits and censor them altogether. He refuses to admit even the possibility that some scholars assert that the Muslim Caste System was promulgated by the interpretation of Quranic scripture and not a Hindu xerox copy (see my refs to Habib's book on the islamic Caste System and the Research paper by Y.Sikand+ the works of Bhimrao Ambedkar I have cited). Terry responds by character assassinations of the authors and trying to divert the issue by some good-old-fashioned Hindu-bashing and conflating unrelated issues to try to color the perspective of viewers.
What I suggest is that the mediator judge ONLY the reliability and content of the sources and not the rhetoric and dialectic of users like Terry (or even that of mine if you feel that I am using rhetoric). If the mediator can bring himself to do that then dandy! I have had a decent experience with mediators (see my AMA mediation regarding Tipu Sultan where Terry tried to fire up some anti-Hindu sentiments and failed User:Martinp23/Desk/Archive/Three; also see his AfD nom on Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Anti-Hindu) and so am, as always, happy to follow the sacred WP:AGF with any mediator whjo bravely volunteers to resolve this hideous mess.Hkelkar 00:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Raking up past issues to influence future ones could possibly be treated as a bad practice..Kelkar, it is time you did away any historical baggage and take edits on Case by Case basis.Abstain from attacking the authors and their motives and focus on the article itselfTerryJ-Ho 00:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
We are not discussing Hindus here. We're discussing Muslims.Hkelkar 00:50, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
You wrote your responses to my initial comment "The article is about Indian Caste System and as per the prevalance and history it should include a major portion on the development of Hindu caste system and its religious validity".Basically we are studying the article caste system in India and my point is that you are underplaying some elements and overplaying others and affecting the article by doing so.TerryJ-Ho 00:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Ahmadinejad is awesome. BhaiSaab 00:43, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I find the actions on the part of the Muslim Guild disconcerting. Also, bringing up past actions for the sake of context is perfectly fine, especially rabid deletionism and historical whitewashing.Bakaman Bakatalk 04:06, 19 October 2006 (UTC)