Talk:House of Scindia

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

India: History Mid‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance).

Moving comment from elsewhere

Makes sense. Go ahead and merge Shinde_Family_of_India and Shinde

Sisodia 06:42, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lineage section and origin of the dynasty

User:Gayming lover638, LukeEmily:

To elaborate on my edit summary: 1. If the editors care to read the lineage section, no source is added for "Sir John Malcolm" records. In Lineage of Scindia, why Holker and ritual status of Shudra is added, again with no reference. 2. Missing information (including sources) about Rankojirao’s patel-ship and upbringing as a playmate of Bajirao, in addition to the conflicting accounts of hereditary patel-ship and lower social status. 3. Importantly, the anecdotal/mythological origin of the dynasty is literally CONFIRMED here, although even the SELECTED sources state that it’s hearsay. Thus, in addition to being not verifiable ("WP:V"), "sleeper-bearer" term is misleading as it wrongly points to lower social status; however, as discussed by Bart101simpson101, historically it has different connotation, and possibly dates back to how Bharata places Rama's paduka (footwear) on the throne. In summary again: in the present form, the article appears with the tampered information, misinterpreting the sources, which points to partisanship. Akaalaa (talk) 07:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Akaalaa,

1. The Shudra and Kunbi are well sourced. Please see the source.

2. There is no conflict. Multiple sources say that he rose from a low social status as a servant to a high position.

3. The comparison with Bharat and Rama is not correct. Ranoji was a menial servant who carried the Peshwa's shoes. It is confirmed by multiple sources and you can also search on google. Please see WP:OR. The story about him sleeping with the slippers may be an anecdote. But his occupation as well as Kunbi origin is confirmed by multiple scholars.

I am not understanding why you keep replacing high quality academic sources(historians, oxford university press) by some regional "Sarup & Sons" publication. Please see WP:NPOV. LukeEmily (talk) 12:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LukeEmily,

It is not a constructive discussion. Again, if you care to think about my points above, I am not replacing "your" quality academic sources. I am pointing to misleading and misinterpretation of sources WP:NPOV. Anyways thanks ! Considering your western username, I am impressed with your contributions to Marathi Brahmin, Saraswat Brahmin, as well as the critical work on Rajput. Akaalaa (talk) 13:04, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]