Talk:Seuna (Yadava) dynasty

message: Please see Talk:Yadava Dynasty#Merge. utcursch | talk 11:29, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge rationale 

message: Any attempt to merge this page with Yadava dynasty page without broad consensus and any attempt to remove any material regarding Kannada on thsi page will go for arbitration. Please be adviced.
Dineshkannambadi
:There is no attempt to merge the page without broad consensus, and no material regarding Kannada has been removed.utcursch | talk 08:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: I have gone ahead and intimated Blnguyen, the admin, of behind the scenes edits that have taken place over the last day or two without discussion. Any attempt to do any reverts will bring in more admins if necessaryDineshkannambadi 01:58, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  intimated admin 

message: Let me first explain why the name "Seuna" was used. 
The word Yadava has a caste connotation. There are no shortage of kingdoms whose kings come from the Yadava clan. look at the book:Yadavas Through the Ages--from ancient period to date/J.N. Singh Yadav. 1992.
It claims there are so many kingdoms whose kings were Yadavas. So calling Seunas as Yadavas does not make them unique. Of course you could call them "Yadavas of Devgiri" but even that is not really accurate because there are other Yadavas like Satavahana-Yadavas who also ruled the same areas. 
I understand Muslim writers called them Yadavas, but my source said most inscriptions called them Seunas.
That was the reason I called the page Seuna. It has no Kannada connotation to it.
Also, I have gone ahead, revertde and provided citation for all the fancifull  put in there. Now we can start from the begining and see what is ok and what is not OK.
Dineshkannambadi
The fancifull fact tags were placed by a responsible person.I or arya did not put it.Walk before u run,dear Kannambadi.
Mahawiki 03:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seuna vs Yadava 

message: Seuna Yadavas of Devagiri sounds fine to me.
Dineshkannambadi Agreed. Seuna Yadava is the correct word and makes the article more meaningful in terms of history and also makes the page more approachable to the people seeking historical information on wiki. Thanks. --Mahensingha 18:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seuna merge 

message: I am communicating with the admin. Please refrain from making silly, uneducated statements in between. Your anti - Kannada prejudice is showing.
Dineshkannambadi
It is not addressed to u.Also learn to sign ur comments by 4 ~s.That too at the end of ur post.
Mahawiki 09:30, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  communicate  when communicated with 

message: Please stop meaningless removal of Kannada transliteration and harping on trivial issues. I don't see such edits adding any value to the article.-- Naveen (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of transliteration

message: The Seuna page was built at large by admin:Utcursch who has been intimated about the blatant tagging by this novice user "Mrtag". Lets hope you can explain your actons to him.Dineshkannambadi 21:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a pity that u deleted the fact tag and the other which asked more sources. Your actions speak in volumes about ur motive here. U know nothing of Yadavas. U r clearly 'novice' here. Unless u bring some sensible sources, the lies whoever has wrote here will be removed. Mrtag 02:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kannada citations 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Seuna (Yadava) dynasty. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927220913/http://www.maharashtra.gov.in/english/gazetteer/nasik/005%20History/001%20AncientPeriod.htm to http://www.maharashtra.gov.in/english/gazetteer/nasik/005%20History/001%20AncientPeriod.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:36, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Yadavas from the beginning of Yadu dynasty, always stayed one of the principle Hindu Kshatriya(Ruling) dynasty. Their history was always been with wars and political power. While Jainism religion is totally made up of Jain monks and business class people. The religion is made up on the very base of staying away from War and Political greed. Where does it mention that Seuna Yadava Dynasty were not a ruling dynasty or where Jains? HinduKshatrana (talk) 13:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  When did Yadavas became Jains??? 

message: Traditionally, Seuna Yadavas are called "Gavli Kings". Until Bhillama V (A.D. 1185-93) moved their capital from Sinnar, near Nasik,  to Devgiri. Like Hoysala Yadavas, Seunas Yadavas were also originally pastoralists or cattle-herders. The Yadavas often proudly claimed their pastoral ancestry. HinduKshatrana (talk) 22:11, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  In regards to this... And it should be added to the article. 

message: In the etymology section, Bhillama V is mentioned for moving capital from Sinnar to Devagiri, but for the reader its link with the previous sentence of Yadavas being called Gavli kings seems disconnected. That sentence needs more clarification, how is Bhillama moving capital connected to being called Gavli kings? Dhere's source, which is already cited, has explained this connection but editors have not added it. Here is what Dhere says:  We need to add one sentence summary in Etymology "Gavli kings" section from Dhere's source. Would like to hear other's opinion . Anthony gomes 92 (talk) 16:34, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  More information to add about the Gavli origin of the dynasty and their traditional name "Gavli Kings". This is in addition to other theories of origin in the article. From these sources:  Anthony gomes 92 (talk) 17:23, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:   I might have an answer for you over here ;) --HinduKshatrana (talk) 17:47, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, Sontheimer mentions (page 100 of the already cited source) that "Abhira Gavlis built fort of Songir at Dhule (Dhulia district) and the Hemand Pant temple (Gondesvara) at Sinnar, near Nashik, which is supposed to have been built by a Gavli King (Rav Govinda)". I think we need to summarize both the information about Sinnar and Devagiri, and the Gavli origin of the dynasty. All of these sources are from renowned researchers and publishers. Anthony gomes 92 (talk) 17:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:   Found more sources that might help with that over here and here. --HinduKshatrana (talk) 18:26, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  See if you can find Enthoven source being used as a secondary source from a reputed researcher/publisher. We cannot cite it as a primary source. Let's wait for others to weigh in and we can then add the content. Thank you! Anthony gomes 92 (talk) 18:55, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:   Look's like no one wants to weigh in for discussions. Well, I found history regarding a fort built by Devgiri Yadava Dynasty Family. Fort goes by the name of Gawilgarh or Gawilgurh and there are resources stating that it was built by a Gavli Yadava of Devgiri. If you want to research more, then this might help with the research. --HinduKshatrana (talk) 10:49, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology section - need more clarification