Jump to content

Talk:Maharana Pratap

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 14.139.60.13 (talk) at 07:45, 20 October 2014 (→Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2014: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Moving from Rajput page for use here

Incorrect statement

The page has this incorrect line: "Although the marriage of Rajput noblewomen to muslim grandees would shortly become a pervasive trend..."

There were no marriages of Rajput noblewomen with "Muslim grandees". The only marriages were of vassal kings into their emperor's family, which were politico-military alliances. Such marriages were actually rare and the Mughal Emperors married more often into the Persian royal family of Iran.


This statement above is also not true. Both commenters are not very aware of what they are discussing, and seem to be basing their comments upon poorly written Indian govt. history textbooks. True, the practice of marrying Rajput women was confined mainly to Mughal Emperors, but the practice was actually quite common and, more important, crucial to the mutual ties between Rajput rulers and the Mughals. These ties allowed for significant cultural and military alliances. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.93.104 (talk) 15:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INDIA Banner/Rajasthan workgroup Addition

Note: {{WP India}} Project Banner with Rajasthan workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under Category:Rajasthan or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 08:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality issues

This page clearly has a number of problems. The writing is often not grammatical, but more relevant, it is clearly biased and draws on questionable sources. For instance, it makes normative statements about the 'cruelty' of Akbar and the inherent and laudable heroic nature of Maharana Pratap - obviously the result of copying straight from 19th century colonial discourse. Which is also clear from the fact that the single 'scholarly' source is the 19th century Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, a questionable work whose drawbacks are mentioned in Dominique-Sila Khan's Crossing the Threshold, page 17. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.93.104 (talk) 07:08, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am removing the neutrality tag as the issue on hand, i.e., normative statements about the 'cruelty' of Akbar and the inherent and laudable heroic nature of Maharana Pratap, are not substantive. There are no factual errors in the narrative and while the tenor of the article is certainly glorification of Pratap, it is not a ballad like write up in any way. Other than the so called 'discredited' Col Todd's magnum opus, the Rana's heroics have been captured in laudatory terms in numerous sources, including Akbarnama. The neutrality tag is uncalled for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.245.70.190 (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 01:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pratap Singh of Mewar → Maharana Pratap — Common name. Arjuncodename024 21:16, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

There is significant reason for concern that this article may improperly use content from the 1996 edition of the Encyclopedia Indica. While the book is only visible in snippet view, there are some direct quotations that Google book identifies as matches:

We can't leave an article published with this much substantial concern of copying from a copyrighted source. Its publication in 1996 would seem conclusive evidence that it predates our use.

Unless we can somehow prove the content is public domain (as if, for instance, both copied from a much older work), it will almost certainly be necessary for the page to be rewritten or reverted to an earlier version, such as this one.

Interested editors are invited to supply any information about the source and especially any older sources that may also use this text or to rewrite the article in the space for rewriting linked from the template on the article's face. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:35, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we can't really revert to the version that you linked above. That relies on James Tod, who is hopelessly unreliable (the bio article is my only FA). Tod, of course, is out of copyright but the content appears largely to be lifted from him, so we'd need an attribution statement even if he was reliable. - Sitush (talk) 12:47, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ok if not Tod can we use that book as a source and do away with copy-vio? --sarvajna (talk) 13:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In the absence of any alternative rewrite, I've restored the old text, but, Sitush, I've noted the reliability concerns and addressed the plagiarism. This content can of course be corrected and replaced with anything that better meets policies and guidelines. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. I'll be removing anything connected to Tod, who is utterly hopeless. - Sitush (talk) 13:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Got this one online but might not meet guideline, not sure though --sarvajna (talk) 13:29, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Author is an academic, although I don't know whether they are a historian etc. We've used Diamond Pocket Books elsewhere: quite often, they just rehash the old British Raj sources but they're sometimes ok. I can only see small portions of the thing & so cannot really form an opinion. - Sitush (talk) 13:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 12 June 2013

Final days

Maharana Pratap's son, Amar Singh, fought 17 wars with the Mughals. After Mewar was depleted financially and in manpower he conditionally accepted them as rulers.

their is mistake in second sentence,according to second sentence their should be written, his son Amar Singh managed to win that fort after Maharana Pratap Singh`s death. Harshpoet (talk) 10:51, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Thanks. Begoon talk 13:04, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 January 2014

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maha_Rana_Pratap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maharana_Pratap Seems like two unique URLs for the same content. The two pages can be merged. 59.94.32.248 (talk) 01:31, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Maha Rana Pratap already redirects to Maharana Pratap. LittleMountain5 03:37, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2014

Died on 29 January and not 19 January 72.163.217.102 (talk) 11:30, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done We have in the article several reliable sources indicating the 19th. You will need to provide multiple reliable sources that indicate that a significant portion of the mainstream academics view the 29th as the date. We will then WP:UNDUE present both dates. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 11:45, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fantasy

Why the editors are adding fantasy stories in this, imaginary stories from a tv serial Bharat Ka Veer Putra – Maharana Pratap are being stuffed here specially about his wifes and here is the proof [1], more over the reference given hereRana, Bhawan Singh (2004). Maharana Pratap. Diamond Pocket Books. pp. 28, 105. ISBN 9788128808258. doesnot state names of any of his wifes, I request editors here to stop adding fantasy based on some TV serial. Sushilkumarmishra (talk) 17:00, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2014

please remove the line They are called Rors and settled mostly in Haryana, with some in Uttar Pradesh. because raja ror was in the early years in 13th century,raja ror was a rajputt king who leave rajputtana in 13th century due to refuse the conditions of kuttubdinebak the king of delhi, and then left the rajputana and went to maharstra.ror are next generation of marathas of panipat third battle.

14.139.60.13 (talk) 07:45, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Maharana_Pratap&oldid=630346156"