User talk:Adipatil0909

Welcome!

Hi Adipatil0909! I noticed your contributions to Bijjala II and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! S Philbrick(Talk) 13:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. ~~~~ S Philbrick(Talk) 13:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. ~~~~ S Philbrick(Talk) 13:39, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Dilip Shanghvi. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Materialscientist (talk) 12:58, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did with this edit to Dilip Shanghvi. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Materialscientist (talk) 13:33, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Dilip Shanghvi. Materialscientist (talk) 14:01, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

@Materialscientist

sorry, now I have added sourced information Adipatil0909 (talk) 14:13, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

May 2025

Hello, I'm Jessicapierce. An edit that you recently made to Amoghavarsha seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Jessicapierce (talk) 18:49, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

@Jessicapierce

ok Adipatil0909 (talk) 18:57, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Please do not edit the page until you have working formatting for your citations, at the very east. Use your sandbox to practice. Than you. Jessicapierce (talk) 18:49, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Your edit to Bijjala II has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 19:41, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

@Moneytrees ok thank you Adipatil0909 (talk) 03:26, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

May 2025

Your edit to Dilip Shanghvi has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Jessicapierce (talk) 15:13, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

@Jessicapierce ok Adipatil0909 (talk) 11:49, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Indra IV. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 15:13, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 11:23, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

about adding new page

how can I add new page of any famous person Adipatil0909 (talk) 06:34, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

on article

I have created sanajay ghodawat wiki page why it's still not showing on wikipedia Adipatil0909 (talk) 05:05, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Adipatil0909. Thank you for your work on Shanatala devi. Another editor, Uncle Bash007, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Congratulations and Thank you for creating this page.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Uncle Bash007}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Uncle Bash007 (talk) 08:26, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

@Uncle Bash007 welcome 🤗 Adipatil0909 (talk) 08:41, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

Nomination of Sanjay ghodawat for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sanjay ghodawat is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sanjay ghodawat until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Junbeesh (talk) 09:34, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

@Junbeesh can I edit again if I did any mistake Adipatil0909 (talk) 11:29, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

That's a good question. The article is currently under AfD, but that doesn't mean improvements can't be made. If the subject is truly notable, you can still add strong, independent sources that offer significant coverage. Things like detailed profiles or feature articles in reliable media could help establish notability and improve the chances of the article being kept. Junbeesh (talk) 07:40, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

July 2025

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Hoysala literature. Jessicapierce (talk) 21:50, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

@Jessicapierce

sorry I was by mistakely remove while adding content acutully I did half work because of I have to sleep. i just want to continue the editing please could you recover that content that I added yesterday? Adipatil0909 (talk) 03:27, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

You can access your content in the page history. Jessicapierce (talk) 14:44, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

This new user has to first learn how Wikipedia works. You don't come to this forum without experience in editing, with a bent towards a particular religion, and start throwing all sorts of un-encyclopedic data without a discussion.Pied Hornbill (talk) 17:53, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

@Pied Hornbill

What did you mean by saying I don't have experience? I have already created many pages on Wikipedia for famous Jain poets, queens, and kings—before this, these famous people didn’t even have pages there! So what's wrong with creating Jain pages if they weren’t available on Wikipedia?

And you say I am editing with a bias toward a particular religion. First of all, the pages I am editing are about Jain kingdoms and kings only, so it’s necessary to include their Jain identity and and what's wrong in adding their contributions on those pages.? Isn’t it? Adipatil0909 (talk) 03:04, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

@Pied Hornbill

Thank you for your feedback earlier. I’ve made sure to update the edits so they are more neutral, balanced, and well-sourced, using academic references such as Altekar, Desai, Jaini, and others. My intention is not to promote any single view, but to ensure the article reflects all notable and verifiable information in line with Wikipedia’s standards. I’ve worked to improve both the wording and the sourcing to keep the content encyclopedic. Please take a look at the new version and let me know if you have any further suggestions. I’m happy to keep discussing and refining the edits here to make sure they fully meet Wikipedia’s standards. Feel free to share any ideas for phrasing or sources you'd like to see added or adjusted. Adipatil0909 (talk) 13:39, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Please do not use misleading edit summaries when making changes to Wikipedia pages, as you did to Ganga Dynasty. This behavior is viewed as disruptive, and continuation may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.  Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 06:39, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

@Sumanuil i just improved the page of ganga dynasty removed irrelevant links only if any problem? can I add it again?? Adipatil0909 (talk) 06:55, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

References are not "irrelevant links", removing them is not an "improvement", and categories that don't exist can't be "well-sourced". Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 07:00, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

@Sumanuil Thank you for your feedback. I now understand that removing references was not appropriate — that was a mistake on my part, and I appreciate your clarification. I was only trying to clean up what I thought were broken or irrelevant links and improve the formatting.

I also added a historical image related to the Ganga Dynasty to help enrich the article visually. My intent has always been to contribute constructively, not disruptively.

Going forward, I will ensure that all references are preserved and that I only add verifiable content with valid categories. I’d really value your guidance.

Thank you. Adipatil0909 (talk) 07:08, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

about removeing my content

I spent two days doing proper research before editing the Hoysala Kingdom page on Wikipedia. Why did you remove that content? I’m a historian, and I added that content with proper references.

Also, the content that was already on the Hoysala Kingdom page wasn’t accurate at all—it was biased and portrayed one religion in a negative light. I just corrected it with proper references. Adipatil0909 (talk) 03:40, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

now I've revised the edits to be more neutral, balanced, and better sourced (Altekar, Desai, Jaini, etc.). My aim is to ensure verifiable, encyclopedic content. Please review the new version and share any suggestions—I’m happy to keep refining it to meet Wikipedia standards. Adipatil0909 (talk) 13:55, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Sir, It does not matter how many days you took to study the material. Wikipedia has rules that need to be followed. First start a discussion section in the talk page. Call for a discussion. Then we can go one section at a time making edits with proven sources and no "point of view". It has to be general view and has to be summar like. For instance in the literature section, you dont throw the names of 20 poets and all their works in within quotes. Usually the top 4 or 5 poets are chosen. Which is why the article orignally had Janna, Kesiraja, Harahara and Raghavanka. Second in the architecture section, vast majority of the Hoysala celebrated monuments are related to Shiva or Vishnu with a few "not so well known Jain monuments" indicating a decline in Jainism from the time of Vishnuvardhana. You may be a historian, but I am fully aware of the history of Karnataka. Start a discussion.Pied Hornbill (talk) 18:23, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

@Pied Hornbill

Thank you for the detailed feedback and for clarifying the process for Featured Articles. I appreciate the need for careful, summary-style content and balanced representation.

I understand now that I should not be adding large sections all at once, and instead should propose smaller, concise edits here on the Talk page for review.

I'd like to start with one section at a time. My first proposal is for the "Religion" section. I can draft a shorter, well-sourced summary version (with references like Altekar, Desai, Jaini) that simply mentions the Jain patronage of the Hoysalas without overwhelming detail.

Please let me know if that approach sounds good. I'm happy to work collaboratively and revise based on feedback to ensure it meets Wikipedia’s standards.

Thank you again for your guidance. Adipatil0909 (talk) 04:54, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

I am glad we are on the same page. Please open a discussion topic on the talk page of Hoysala Kingdom and I will join you there. I have previously read books by Altekar, Sastri Dikshit and others.

Also one more thing about your edits to the Rashtrakuta kings. You claim that practically every Rashtrakuta king followed both Jainism and Hinduism, but if I recall, only Amghovarsha-I was completely influenced by Jainism and that too in the waning years of his life. It may well be true that the other kings gave patronage to both religions in varying degrees. Many Karnataka kings were tolerant and gave support to multiple religions, but that does not mean they followed both personally (despite having may Jain poets, ministers and commanders in their court). But we can approach these issues one at a time.Pied Hornbill (talk) 22:47, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Also, you have to show reliable evidence that the Kings of the Ganga dynasty before ~8th century followed only Jainism as it appears they were as much into Vedic sacrifices and Vaishnavism as into supporting Jainism, or include Hinduism to the list as in the case of the Rashtrakutas. But as I said we will get there one at a time.Pied Hornbill (talk) 22:55, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

@Pied Hornbill (About ganga Dynasty) Thank you for the follow-up. I’d like to clarify a few points with references and historical context regarding the early Ganga dynasty’s religious affiliation.

It is widely accepted among scholars that the Ganga dynasty had strong Jain foundations from the very beginning!

The ganga dynasty is traditionally believed to have been founded by "Dadiga" and "Madhava" under the spiritual guidance of the - Digambara Jain monk "Simhanandi", as noted by several historians including R. Sathyan in History of Karnataka and A.S. Altekar.

Early Ganga inscriptions, particularly those found at Shravaṇbeḷgoḷa, are written in Prakrit—a language heavily used in early Jain texts and inscriptions—rather than Sanskrit, further indicating a Jain milieu.

Some historians believe the Gangas migrated from Magadha (modern-day Bihar), possibly accompanying Jain monks during the southward migration of Bhadrabahu and Chandragupta Maurya in the 3rd century BCE.

The Gangas were responsible for establishing Sravanbelgola as a major Jain center. The famous Gommateshwara statue was commissioned by gangas, in the 10th century. A lesser-known Jain image at Aretippur was also built in the 5th century, showing continuous Jain activity since the early period.

now I'll come to you point-

Regarding Vedic sacrifices-

To my knowledge, there are no extant Ganga inscriptions explicitly describing or celebrating Vedic yajnas or animal sacrifices. If there is a specific inscription or secondary source mentioning such rites, I’d be very open to reviewing it. However, it's important to note that Vedic animal sacrifice is fundamentally incompatible with Jain doctrine, which the Gangas are known to have followed. let me clear you that they didn't sacrificeed any animal at all. could you tell me where did it written exactly and which page?

Additionally:

Several Ganga rulers, including King Marasimha II, are recorded to have undertaken Sallekhana (ritual Jain fast unto death), a distinctly Jain practice. Both Marasimha II and his nephew, Rashtrakuta King Indra IV, took Sallekhana at Bankapura, showing how deeply Jain values influenced both dynasties.

Multiple inscriptions from the 4th–6th centuries mention grants to Jain temples and monks, though many such temples were later destroyed or converted over time.

While the Gangas likely showed religious tolerance and may have supported other traditions in limited ways, the overwhelming epigraphic and historical record identifies them as primarily a Jain dynasty—at least from the 4th century onward.

References

[^1]: R. Sathyan, History of Karnataka, p. 85

[^2]: A.S. Altekar, Rashtrakutas and Their Times, p. 23

[^3]: Epigraphia Carnatica Vol. II: Śravaṇa Beḷgoḷa Inscriptions, ed. B.L. Rice

[^4]: J.F. Fleet, Early Dynasties of South India, Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society

[^5]: I.K. Sarma, Temples of the Gangas, Archaeological Survey of India

[^6]: D.P. Dubey, Early History of Jainism in Karnataka, p. 49

[^7]: R. Williams, Jain Yoga, p. 113

[^8]: Epigraphia Indica Volumes VI & VIII – Jain grants under the Gangas Adipatil0909 (talk) 09:54, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

@Pied Hornbill (About Rashtrakutas)

Hi, thank you for your thoughtful reply and for engaging constructively.

I'd like to respectfully clarify and share some historical details regarding the Rashtrakutas and their association with Jainism. While I agree with your broader point that Karnataka kings supported multiple religions, I think it's important to distinguish personal faith from religious tolerance.

You mentioned that only Amoghavarsha I was fully influenced by Jainism in the later part of his life — but several primary and scholarly sources indicate that he was a Jain by birth, not a later convert. He studied under the Jain Acharya Jinasena, and there's no record of him converting from another religion. His father Govinda III also patronized Jain monks like Jinasena and Virasena, and the famous Jain text Dhavala (a commentary on Shatkhandāgama) began under his support. Even earlier, Rashtrakuta rulers like Dantidurga bore Jain titles such as Dhavala and Vimaladitya, and under them Jain logicians like Akalanka Bhatta flourished.

It's also worth noting that Indra IV, the last Rashtrakuta ruler, performed Sallekhana (Jain vow of fasting unto death), which would be highly unlikely if he wasn't a devout Jain. Furthermore, the Rashtrakuta court was filled with Jain poets, acharyas, ministers, and military commanders. For example:

Jain texts like Harivamsha Purana were written under their patronage.

Jain poets like Pampa and Ranna flourished during their time.

If they were followers of another faith, would they have consistently supported the production of Jain scriptures and temples across generations?

You’re also right that many kings supported multiple religions — but support does not equal personal adherence. In fact, there is no single inscription that states the Rashtrakutas were Hindus. The use of "Hinduism" in their infobox is often a default assumption, as many people today think Jainism is a subset of Hinduism. So people usually mention in infobox Hinduism instat Jainism because they thinkbjainism is a part of hinduism. But as scholars like Paul Dundas argue in The Jains, this assumption is misleading.

As for the Mahalakshmi temple in Kolhapur, often cited in the story of Amoghavarsha offering his finger, Dundas notes that it was originally a Jain temple during Amoghavarsha s time -but today's it's converted into Mahalaxmi temple and even today, Jain sculptures are visible on its outer walls.

Additionally, the Rattas of Saundatti, and shilahara dunasty are the Rashtrakuta branches, were explicitly Jain. Their inscriptions show strong Jain affiliation. You are welcome to verify these claims — I’d be happy to provide primary inscriptional references as well.

The truth is, Jainism was the majority faith in Karnataka before the 11th century, before the large-scale conversions initiated by Ramanujacharya and Basava. The historical decline of Jainism in the region is a complex topic, but the early Rashtrakutas and their legacy were clearly tied to Jainism more than any other tradition.

On what basis people say and mention them as a hindu i don't no. but I’m not objecting to including “Hinduism” in the infobox if sources clearly show that some kings followed it. But Jainism must also be included, and their deep and consistent patronage of Jain institutions must be reflected in the body of the article- which is currently missing or downplayed.

Let us correct this respectfully and with good sources.

Suggested References-

Paul Dundas – The Jains

P. B. Desai – Jainism in South India and Some Jaina Epigraphs

B. L. Rice – Epigraphia Carnatica, Vol. III (Shravanabelgola)

A. S. Altekar – Rashtrakutas and their Times

R. Shettar – Some Aspects of Jainism in Karnataka

Survey of the Medical Sravakacharas – William R.

Nrupatunga – historical novel by Ta. Ra. Su. (T. R. Subba Rao)

Looking forward to your thoughts, and thanks again for the scholarly discussion. Adipatil0909 (talk) 09:19, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate your detailed reply and can relate to most of your statements. Lets continue with your edits one article at a time.Pied Hornbill (talk) 19:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

@Pied Hornbill Thanks for your support! Adipatil0909 (talk) 06:14, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

i'll start with the articles and also ensure edits are sourced and neutral Adipatil0909 (talk) 06:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

I have copy edited the Hoysala kingdom. Please write summary sub-articles, put italics and quotes only where needed only. Don't stress too much on less important matters and characters than the kings themselves (such as commanders).Pied Hornbill (talk) 17:29, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

@Pied Hornbill Thank you very much for your copy edits and helpful guidance. I understand now to keep sub-articles concise and to avoid overusing italics or quotes. I’ll also make sure not to overemphasize less important figures and will focus more on the main subjects like the kings. I appreciate your time and help—I'll keep your advice in mind for future edits. Adipatil0909 (talk) 09:43, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Holenarasipura, I just wanted to clarify that I had already discussed this content earlier with @Pied Hornbill on this same talk page. My edits were based on a wide range of reliable sources, including:

Jaini (2000)

Epigraphia Carnatica (B. L. Rice, ASI)

Shettar (Jaina Art and Architecture)

Altekar (Rashtrakutas and their Times

P. B. Desai – Jainism in South India and Some Jaina Epigraphs

B. L. Rice – Epigraphia Carnatica, Vol. III (Shravanabelgola)

R. Narasimhachar

Nrupatunga’s Kavirajamarga

Nrupatunga by Ta.Ra.Su

Dobbins (2019), etc

Paul Dundas – The Jains

All these works mention strong Jain influence at the Rashtrakuta court — especially under rulers like Dhruva Dharavarsha patronised acharya virasena the dhavala stared during his time, Amoghavarsha I and Govinda III — as well as patronage of Jain acharyas like Jinasena and Gunabhadra. And gunasena techar of krishna II, and The production and preservation of Jain texts during this time (e.g., Adipurana, Mahapurana) are well documented epigraphically.

Could you please clarify: on what basis you removed this well-sourced content? Are there specific inscriptions or scholarly works that contradict this view? I’m happy to engage in constructive discussion and refine the content further if needed.

Thanks! Adipatil0909 (talk) 04:37, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Lint errors

Please be careful when editing to use the correct format and correct parameters in source wikicode. In one article alone, several people have had to clear up five separate lint errors in content you added in the last couple of days. Please review the edit history to see those corrections. -- 92.21.137.132 (talk) 20:50, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

@92.21.137.132

Thank you for your message and for pointing that out. I appreciate your effort in fixing the formatting issues. I’ll review the edit history to better understand the corrections and make sure to follow proper citation and wikicode format in future edits.

Thanks again! Adipatil0909 (talk) 09:39, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Invasion of Anuradhapura by Rastrakuta empire This draft is one sided not based on Rashtrakuta sources

Hi @Adipatil0909, I saw this draft is created based on Ceylon sources not based on Rastrakuta. Both Rastrakutas and Anuradhapura claimed victory but that draft says Anuradhapura won and Rastrakutas lost. Can you take a look at the draft?. Also some of the sources that user used for this draft doesn't even mention this invasion but he still used those to claim the victory for Anuradhapura. 2409:40F4:100E:D30A:F8FC:41FF:FE50:388D (talk) 15:15, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. I agree that if both Rashtrakuta and Anuradhapura sources claim victory, the article should reflect that balance rather than favoring one side. I’ll review the sources currently used in the draft and cross-check with Rashtrakuta inscriptions and Indian scholarly works.

I’ll make sure to balance the content using both Rashtrakuta and Anuradhapura sources. Could you please let me know which specific section you’re referring to, so I can review and update it accordingly? Adipatil0909 (talk) 04:50, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Jain Brahmans moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Jain Brahmans. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it consists of machine-generated text and it contains hallucinated references. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 08:30, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

I would like to clarify that my intention was not to promote any religion. The article Jain Brahmans is not religious advocacy — it is focused on the historical and sociological aspects of Jainism.

It is a well-established fact that before the 11th century, there existed a caste or social group within Jainism known as Jain Brahmans. They were distinct from Vedic Brahmans. Jain Brahmans were integrated within the Jain tradition and were referred to as pandits or Brahmans in both inscriptions and literary sources. Several early Jain scholars, poets, and temple priests — such as the Kannada poet Pampa — are identified as Jain Brahmans.

This article aims to document that historical category, based on academic references. I am open to improving the citations and wording to ensure it fully complies with Wikipedia's content and neutrality policies. Kindly consider this a good-faith effort to highlight an underrepresented but historically documented community.

Thank you. Adipatil0909 (talk) 09:53, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged in, have 500 edits, and have an account age of 30 days in order to make edits related to two subtopics: (1) Indian military history, or (2) social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 09:04, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Rashtrakuta Kings

Your edits to these sub-articles show your intolerance of well rounded and broad opinion about the faith of these kings. If you continue to revert the views of well established historians while pushing your own citations as valid, this discussion will have to involve wiki administrators as mediators. Hope you learn quickly how an encyclopedia works and correct yourself accordingly.Holenarasipura (talk) 23:23, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I respectfully disagree with the broad claim that "almost all Rashtrakuta inscriptions begin with references to Vishnu"—that’s a significant generalization not supported by inscriptional evidence. — and Every inscription starts with the name of the institute or donation purpose, and accordingly they show gods related to that institution, not a single fixed deity. I have personally read all their inscriptions — I am a historian — and most of them start with Swasti Sri or Om Namo.

Also, the common misconception that Amoghavarsha taken to Jainism later in his life, is not true — there’s no reference supporting that. He was Jain by birth, and all his ancestors are known for patronising Jain monks. Under their rule and support, many important Jain texts were written. And All monks mentioned their name in those texts. Right from their earliest kings to the last Rashtrakuta king Indra IV, Jainism was patronised. Indra IV even became a Jain monk and took Sallekhana in 982 CE at Shravanabelagola, which is clearly mentioned in the Shravanabelagola inscription.

Their Hindu connections are minimal and mostly appear in later records. The 9th-century Ganita-sara-sangraha by Mahaviracharya clearly refers to the Rashtrakutas as Jain kings in its Mangalacharan. Even earlier 8th–9th century texts mention this.

It’s also worth noting that related branches such as the Rattas and Shilaharas continued this Jain legacy. While I’ve made sure to present the article content neutrally, removing these well-documented facts would be a disservice to the historical record. If you have any specific concerns and doubt, I’d be happy to discuss and clarify them.

Also, I have previously discussed this with other Wikipedia editors — please check the article history or earlier Talk sections before raising the same point again. Thank you! Adipatil0909 (talk) 05:42, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

You may be a historian and you may have read their inscriptions, but all that is primary source info that is not allowed in wikipedia. As such many of the sources you used are actually from direct primary sources such as epigraphica carnatica etc. I suggest you call a administrator or a mediator to assist in this effort you have undertaken before your account is blocked for edit warring. Also you categorically have rejected the views of highly respected historians and reverted my addition and sources. I see that you have been warned before already.Holenarasipura (talk) 03:45, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

August 2025

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Chanakya, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 04:50, 2 August 2025 (UTC)