Talk:Udal of Mahoba/Archive 1

Archive 1

Fake Information in this page

Udal and Alha were yadav soldiers and they fought with prithviraj chauhan and make him lose MahenSingha (Talk) 18:51, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

All the given information is not correct Manjityadav139 (talk) 03:05, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 August 2020

Alha and udal(alha's younger brother) are rajput warrior. Alha and udal were children of dassraj which belongs to Rajput clan.It is

wrote in the alha kand ( referring to poetic works in hindi which consists of a number of ballads describing the brave acts of banaphar heroes alha and udal) that alha and udal are rajput. Articles (reliable sources):1. https://books.google.co.in/books?id=ob7UAAAAMAAJ&q=banaphar rajput&dq=banaphar rajput&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwimrsOB6bbrAhWjyjgGHe4XAwg4ChDoATAFegQIARAB 2.https://books.google.co.in/books?id=pR5uAAAAMAAJ&q=banaphar rajput&dq=banaphar rajput&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwimrsOB6bbrAhWjyjgGHe4XAwg4ChDoATAEegQIAxAB 3.https://books.google.co.in/books?id=GQuNSQAACAAJ&dq=banaphar rajput&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwimrsOB6bbrAhWjyjgGHe4XAwg4ChDoATAIegQIBBAB Ultimate survi (talk) 17:04, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 02:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 October 2020

Udal was the younger brother of Alha and Alha was a Banafar Rajput [1], [2] Then why are they being told about the mixed background here? And the book given as reference to support the mixed background claim is totally nonsense because he clearly said that "banafar rajput", you can check:-[3] I see the article history and saw that for some 1 year people from other communities have been trying to tell all Rajput Heroes to be their own, without any fact and Wikipedia team not react at that time. And written in a line that ballads sing Ahir bravery and exactly one two lines ago it was written that they were of mixed background, isn't it stupid or isn't it not biases. I'm a Banafar Rajput myself and that's why I am saying all this. And this same mistake is in pages Banaphar and Alha,so I request you please correct it. Sumit banaphar (talk) 07:22, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 15:39, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Alha is banaphar rajput,and he belongs to rajput descent and this same mistake is in Alha and Banaphar so please correct there as well. Sumit banaphar (talk) 05:10, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Alha belongs to Banaphar community which is a rajput clan so please change Ahir and rajput to only rajput Sumit banaphar (talk) 10:17, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sumit banaphar: I am not able to access the cited Hiltebeitel source. Are you saying that he did not say that Udal and Alha were of mixed descent? If not, do you have a published reliable source that contradicts him? Wikipedia summarizes only what is published in reliable sources. —teb728 t c 22:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

In fact, Hiltebeitel says explicitly (on p.163) that "Udal (and the rest of the Banaphars) is susceptible to "mean caste" slurs and slights because of his combined Ksatriya (Rajput) and cowherd (Ahir) background". The page that Sumit banaphar links to above does include the phrase "Banafar Rajput", but the context is crucial here: Hiltebeitel is discussing various accounts of the deity Candra, who has male and female characteristics, and mentions "a composite of two oral accounts gathered by Crooke in and around Mahoba" about a mythical divine origin of the Chandelas of Jejakabhukti. A woman is impregnated by Candra and is sent into the jungle by her father, gives birth to a son, "and the two are brought home by a "Banafar Rajput"" (p.238). In other words, that phrase occurs in a paraphrase of a retelling of a couple of oral accounts, and is not mentioned in connection with Udal. --bonadea contributions talk 10:05, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes I have reliable sources for what I'm saying.you can see here:-[4],[5],[6]and[7]if you want more i can,and yeah bonadea sir but he clearly said that banaphar is Rajput tribe see here[8] Eroberar (talk) 16:01, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sumit banaphar, I'm also banaphar and I am a rajput that's why I comment here.Eroberar (talk) 16:09, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Their father was ahir from buxur It is biggest misconception in the history is that every kshatriy and every king were raajput, it is not soo. Rajput is mediaeval terminology.. Historians used common term rajpoot for various kings belonging to ahir, jat, gujar,bhar, gond, pasi kings. Satyitihas (talk) 23:27, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Archeological survey of india states that they were ahirs. https://books.google.co.in/books?id=WCArAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA73&dq=alha udal ahir&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiY1uK4usTpAhWMzjgGHXg_D7cQ6AEIFzAC#v=onepage&q=alha udal ahir&f=false Satyitihas (talk) 23:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Satyitihas,ASI is not a trustable source anywhere, even most of the historians decline that ASI was even a historical book and if you're talking about Alha's father so let me tell you that it is written in the Alha khand that they were Rajput.

And yeah Rajput is a title which is given to all kshatriya's in Vedas,Purans and in many religious books and jaat,gujjar,Ahir etc all are in Shudra varna and Kshatriya is a different varna.So respect that Sumit banaphar (talk) 16:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@teb728:-[9],[10] and [11] please check these links Sumit banaphar (talk) 16:40, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@bonadea:-[12] and [13] please check these links Sumit banaphar (talk) 16:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

If you want people to understand and engage with your arguments, you will have to stop providing unexplained links to Google Books pages with or without searches for "banafar rajput". (This has nothing to do with understanding Hindi, by the way.) When you just post a link like that, you are essentially asking other editors to do all the work of checking what the source is, what connection is might have to your claim, whether it is a reliable source and why, and how it negates the existing reliable source in the article. Since we are all volunteers, doing this in our spare time, it is not reasonable to expect other editors to do that for you. Thanks, --bonadea contributions talk 14:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@bonadea: First of all they are not unexplained books.They are published by government and government is not going to publish something which is not sure.

And it is about understanding hindi language because Alha khand is written in hindi language. Sumit banaphar (talk) 16:48, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

1. Alha khand:- [14]

2. Alha Udal ki Veergatha:- [15] Sumit banaphar (talk) 17:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@bonadea:- Sir , Alf Hiltebeitel is talking about the Banaphar heroes (Alha, Udal, Malkhan and Sulkhan) not about whole Banaphar clan. And he clearly states that Banaphar is a Rajput tribe [16]. Sumit banaphar (talk) 17:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Since you seem to have missed what I posted above: "When you just post a link like that, you are essentially asking other editors to do all the work of checking what the source is, what connection is might have to your claim, whether it is a reliable source and why, and how it negates the existing reliable source in the article." Also read the response you got from another editor here, an hour before you posted the above – it looks like you did not see that, either. Regarding your claim about Hiltebeitel, let me repeat what I said a week ago about the exact page you are linking to: "The page [...] does include the phrase "Banafar Rajput", but the context is crucial here: Hiltebeitel is discussing various accounts of the deity Candra, who has male and female characteristics, and mentions "a composite of two oral accounts gathered by Crooke in and around Mahoba" about a mythical divine origin of the Chandelas of Jejakabhukti. A woman is impregnated by Candra and is sent into the jungle by her father, gives birth to a son, "and the two are brought home by a "Banafar Rajput"" (p.238). In other words, that phrase occurs in a paraphrase of a retelling of a couple of oral accounts, and is not mentioned in connection with Udal." Hiltebeitel does not state that "Banaphar is a Rajput tribe" – have you read pp. 130-133 in the book you are linking to? --bonadea contributions talk 17:48, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I have seen every single reply of yours,and yeah the phrase is not clearly saying that "Banafar Rajput" is related to Udal but at least if it is written in the book it make some senses. Sumit banaphar (talk) 05:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

And it seems like you didn't see the links I have given above but so let me tell you again. On the 2nd line of the page no.304 "a mixed form of dialect of Bundeli which derives its name from Banaphar, a Rajput tribe" please see here[17] Sumit banaphar (talk) 06:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that is the exact quote from the book that was discussed above. I won't repeat myself a third time. --bonadea contributions talk 08:46, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes i have read but I think you didn't because it is clearly saying what I am claiming. On the last 2nd of page no.132 to page no.133. please see here[18] And talking about the line of mixed background (Kshatriya and Ahir) in page no.163 so let me tell you again that they were talking about banaphars means Alha, Udal, Malkhan,Sulkhan not about the whole Banaphar clan. And again he clearly mentioned that Banaphar is rajput tribe in page no.304 Sumit banaphar (talk) 06:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

No, he did not "clearly mention" that, as explained (twice) above – but this this article is about Udal, and as a matter of fact there is no mention of the Banafar clan in it. (It is worth pointing out that discussions around this tiny detail – whether people 800 years ago belonged to one obsolete social group or another – has taken up a large amount of the time and energy of many people. Meanwhile, the article has not been developed in much more important aspects.) It appears that you now understand how this edit was not appropriate, so we don't have to carry on this discussion any longer.

Bottom line: It is obvious from several reliable sources that the ancestry of the Banafar clan has been a contentious matter, and that should be discussed in the article about that clan, but not all over Wikipedia. Remember that cherry-picking isolated phrases is never going to be a valid form of sourcing. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 08:46, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@bonadea:-First understand what I am saying, check the link and than reply me, Please!

And you're talking about "Banafar Rajput" phrase and I am talking "a mixed form of dialect of Bundeli which derives its name from Banaphar, a Rajput tribe" line.Because it's seems baseless while you're not getting what I'm saying and point just i thing again and again. Sumit banaphar (talk) 09:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

And No, they clearly mentioned about banaphar clan in it and if I'm saying the books using as reference on the article is saying something else so now you're saying that "Remember that cherry-picking isolated phrases is never going to be a valid form of sourcing" but first understand that you're using that phrase as a reliable source in this article. And if you're too busy than sorry for wasting your time and thank you for giving your time. I would ask any other helpful administrator for help. Sumit banaphar (talk) 09:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Again, you have not actually read the book; the quote is attributed to someone named Jaiswal, and the context is in no way discussing the origin of the Banaphar. This does not definitely "prove" that the Banaphar were not Ahir. This discussion is not going anywhere unless you can provide better sources and give a clear reasoning why we should make this change, other than showing every instance of "Banaphar Rajput" on Google Books (which means nothing). ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:27, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

And I am also saying this again that you are talking about "Banafar Rajput" phrase and I am talking about this "a mixed form of dialect of Bundeli which derives its name from Banaphar, a Rajput tribe" line in page no.304

please check page no.133 where he is saying that according to Grierson (who translated Alha khand) there is no proof that their mother is Ahir. Sumit banaphar (talk) 18:13, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Alha khand

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=ZOPUZo4fNLAC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:"Asha Gupta"&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjAs73n8tfsAhVPfisKHcNPAOIQ6AEwAXoECAIQAg#v=onepage&q&f=false Sumit banaphar (talk) 18:16, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Rajput OR Ahir

Hello, Udal was a banafar rajput and there is many references available on internet. His father was Dasraj, he were also a rajput. I accept that his mother was belongs to ahir community, and at that ahir ahirs were called shudra, but alha and udal called rajput and accepted their father's caste.

Reference #1 :

References

Reference #2 : पं० ललिता प्रसाद मिश्र (2007). आल्हखण्ड (15 संस्करण). पोस्ट बॉक्स 85 लखनऊ 226001: तेजकुमार बुक डिपो (प्रा०) लि०. पृ॰ 1-11 ( महोबे का इतिहास). पाठ "आल्हा ने 52 लड़ाईयां लड़ीं और जीती कभी कोई आल्हा को नहीं हरा सक " की उपेक्षा की गयी |

Kindly edit the information, and remove the confusion of ahir and rajput. I can also edit this but i dont want to do vandalism.

Thanks, अभिषेक सिंह चन्देल (talk) 11:22, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

They were ahirs the fake information should be removed Manjityadav139 (talk) 03:04, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Alha and Udal are Ahir.

1. banfar is a subcaste of ahir/yadavs Communities, Segments, Synonyms, Surnames and Titles (Anthropological Survey of India, 199) page no.1293[1]

2. also in Archaeological Survey of India Reports 1862-1884 · Volume 19 page no.73 Alha udal are referred as Ahir chiefs[2]

3. Sons of Krishna: the politics of Yadav community formation in a North Indian town, Lucia Michelutti, London School of Economics and Political Science University of London.[3]

here Alha is referred as Ahir hero and yadav wrestler.

Alha Udal ji are Ahir! — Preceding unsigned comment added by History1nerd (talk • contribs) 04:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

more proofs of Alha udal being Ahir

1. Report of a Tour Through Behar, Central India, Peshawar, and Yusufzai, 1881-82, page no.73 Alha udal were Ahir warriors. pls consider our proofs! thank you History1nerd (talk)History1nerd

References

Consider WP:RAJ. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:12, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Only one and the other sources easily mention him has kshatriya or Rajput. Other sources say that their mother were Ahirs. RS6784 (talk) 12:03, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Edit warring

Reverted to clean version by Bonadea. Both contested version suffer from POV and sourcing problems. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)