Talk:Parmar (clan)

message: Rajput Sikhs  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:28F:2D4B:A5C0:1EE:257:624D (talk) 16:58, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sikh Parmars 

message: "Caste designators, such as Jat and Rajput, were status-based titles to which any tribe that rose to social prominence could lay a claim, and which could be dismissed by their peers if they declined."
Consider rewording as follows:
Clan designators, such as Jat, Rajput, and Maratha, were attributed to tribes, families, or communities of various origins, which rose in prominence and could lay claim to membership in one of the principal clans of western India. A group's clan status could also be revoked by a consensus of other groups in the clan. Clan formation in India is little understood, and seems to be a function exclusively neither of race, tribe, class, caste, nor of geographic origin. Clan is not to be confused with caste, which is the system of hereditary social rank across all of Hinduism. Membership in a Rajput clan might confer status, but as a separate matter from one's caste, and without the religious connotations.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethanpettit (talk • contribs) 08:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Clan and Caste

message: I've tried to tidy and structure the article. Please check through for any accuracy that may have been lost in correcting the syntax. Cheers.
Myrtlegroggins (talk) 04:24, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The royal family of Phaltan, (located in present day Maharashtra), also trace their decent from the Parmar dynasty. The family  which settled in Maharashtra in the 12th century has the probable distinction as being the oldest dynasty in Maharashtra. The current surname of the memebers of this family is Naik Nimbalkar. I do not know why but nobody except professional historians even know about that this family was originally part of the Parmar dynasty. The Naik Nimbalkar family is very intimately related to Chatrapati Shivaji, as both his maternal and paternal grandmothers were from this family as well as his daughter was married to a Naik Nimbalkar. The last Adhipati (King) of Phaltan was a very popular ruler and played a prominent part in the post-independence politics of Maharashtra. The current head of the family is also very socially active. 
I would welcome any comments/contradictions about this information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.47.166.113 (talk) 19:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Descendants of the Parmar dynasty in Maharashtra.  

message: Those of you located in maharashtra are requested to post web-material or photostate copies of material cited in [][]on Thakur Sher Singh Parmar:
The Citations
Gallant Acts- 
1. The Article titled "Custom inspector wa shipai yaa doghaani 40-50 taskar palwoon lawley" in Nav Konkan, marathi daily,registration number REGD NO. RTG-15/34, issue number 141, dated first of February, 2005, Ratnagiri, Maharashtra, India.
2. Sagar, marathi daily, dated 7th of April, 2005, Ciplun, Ratnagiri, Maharashtra, India.
3. DRI-2 Report on Anjarla-Sawani Silver Seizure Case issued vide letter f.no.VIII(CUS)10-1/91/123 dated 3rd of February 1991 by the Superintendent of Customs, Dapoli, Pune Commissionerate.
His role in Sawani-Anjarla Silver Seizure Case- 
1. The Article titled "Custom inspector wa shipai yaa doghaani 40-50 taskar palwoon lawley" in Nav Konkan, marathi daily,registration number REGD NO. RTG-15/34, issue number 141, dated the first of February, 2005, Ratnagiri, Maharashtra, India.
2. Sagar, marathi daily, dated 7th of April, 2005, Ciplun, Ratnagiri, Maharashtra, India.
3. DRI-2 Report on Anjarla-Sawani Silver Seizure Case issued vide letter f.no.VIII(CUS)10-1/91/123 dated 3rd of February 1991 by the Superintendent of Customs, Dapoli, Pune Commissionerate.
4. Certificate dated 4th of November, 1996 issued by S.N.Parwal, the Assistant Commisioner of Customs Division, Dapoli.This certificate says:"...Shri Sher Singh Parmar then Inspector of Customs Harnai Port...booked a seizure case of smuggled silver worth Rs. 2.50 Crores ( Approx. ) displaying exemplary bravery, resourcefulness and boldness on 30-1-1991 at Anjarla - Sawani (Taluka Dapoli, Dist. Ratnagiri) a remote western Indian Sea-Shore."
5. Confidential Note dated 15th of October,1999 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Pune-IV Division, Pune.
6. Letter f.no.III/Presidential Award/98/Pune dated 12th of November,1999 written to the Chief Commissioner, Pune Customs by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Pune-I Commissionerate, Pune.
Bankot Creek Saved from RDX landings- 
1. Confidential Note dated 15th of October,1999 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Pune-IV Division, Pune.
2. Letter f.no.III/Presidential Award/98/Pune dated 12th of November,1999 written to Chief Commissioner, Customs, Pune by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Pune-I Commissionerate, Pune.
Honest and Simple Life- 
1. Confidential Note dated 15th of October,1999 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Pune-IV Division, Pune.
2. Letter f.no.III/Presidential Award/98/Pune dated 12th of November,1999 written to the Chief Commissioner, Pune Customs by issued by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Pune-I Commissionerate, Pune.
3. Diwas-Ratri, Hindi daily, dated 22nd of May, 2000, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
4. Navbharat, Hindi daily, dated 26th of March, 2000, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Literary Contributions and Dr. Manibhai Desai Rashtraseva Puraskar- 
1. Diwas-Ratri, Hindi daily, dated 22nd of May, 2000, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
2. Navbharat, Hindi daily, dated 26th of March, 2000, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
3. Diwas-Ratri, Hindi daily, dated 26th of March, 2000, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
4. Diwas-Ratri, Hindi daily, dated 19th of July, 1999, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Also , do same for TEJASWANI UDAY PAWAR & Ramesh Pawar
Kushwah 12:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Get involved in digging out references. 

message: Wikification (and clean-up) of this article has been completed. During this, a lot of information was removed that was either written in unencyclopedic prose or that was relevant to another article. The former, related to "Modern history", is retained as an editor's comment, and can be reintroduced with proper copy-editing and balancing for NPOV. The latter, related to the Ponwar article, has been removed from this article entirely. Links and references relating to Sharad Pawar have also been removed, although I'm not sure whether or not he deserves a mention in this article.
Also, in this article, "Paramara" and "Ponwar" are treated as two different clans of possibly similar descent. This is primarily based on the information in the latter article, but I would appreciate some clarification on the exact differences between the two names. Cheers. – Liveste 05:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikification and clean-up

message: Low cast Parmaras - the origin can be observed in that the teaching of the learned Parmara kings. When we can see the Masjid erected in period of the King 'Udayaditya'. I have this opinion that when sufis came to Dhar region they might have created impact of equal social status by preaching the Koran. As king himself admired the Dharma, this is quite possible that some of the social elements might have turned to the new dharma teachings and may be converted to Muslim.
Another point is that the Paramara controlled area people might have started some movement in which when they are asked who you are - answer might have been - from Paramara region; finally coming to claim that from Paramara lordship. Result claiming - Paramara clan membership.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.80.57.2 (talk) 01:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social Status - wrong information.. 

message: Many clans in west punjab are descended from Panwars.  One village called Mori who are all Panwar rajputs. They are well to do and many are abroad and take active milltary service. Some Panwars became zameendars and stopped using title rajput and are called chaudhry but still active in milltary service.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.15.165.55 (talk) 20:16, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Muslim Panwars/Paramaras 

message: (Dhudhi are a parmar rajput)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.187.213 (talk) 04:23, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Narendra.cca, 30 January 2011 

message: These three articles seem to be about the same group of people (though the perspective/slant varies by article), under different spellings.  Does anyone have a clear objection to merging the other two articles into this one? MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:38, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Panhwar specifically stated that said group was a Muslim subset of Paramara.  Given that once I removed all the non-cited or non-credible/legendary data, there was little info left, I moved what remained over to this article as ==Muslim Paramara== to avoid repetition.  Looking to do similar with Ponwar, as a gBooks search seems to indicate tons of resources identifying the two solely as alternate spellings.  I note there seems to be some divergence based on religion/clan, but rather than have POV forks all claiming separate views of the same history, better to bring them all together here. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:16, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I chunked all of Ponwar over here, so it's a big and sloppy merge at this point.  The article was just barely similar enough for me to fill assured they're the same thing; it appears there are a dozen ways to spell these people.  The article is now in dire need of cleanup, copyedit, and proper references. MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with [[Panhwar]], [[Ponwar]]? 

message: 94.173.227.188 (talk) 14:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: What edit are you requesting?  Hit "Edit" on this page, look where it says "Begin request" and type in your request there.  Make sure to include a clear source (and if possible) link for your information, as a request without any evidence supporting it is unlikely to be approved. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:56, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 94.173.227.188, 9 February 2011 

message: http://books.google.co.in/books?id=wT-BAAAAMAAJ&q=Raja+bhoj++abhira&dq=Raja+bhoj++abhira&hl=en&ei=kjGHTde4G4jlrAeNr-gr&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA
Raja Bhoj belonged to parmar dynasty of rajputs C2parmar (talk) 12:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Raja Bhoj belonged to Abhira dynasty 

message: Why do we treat as a reliable source someone whose primary field has been as a novelist and short-story writer and who holds an opinion concerning "Brahmanical bias" in Indian history writing? I refer, of course, to Naval Viyogi. - Sitush (talk) 15:13, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naval Viyogi 

message: In my view and according  to my knowledge the Ancient Origins section of Paramara page need major edits because whats written there now is somewhat wrong(about 90%).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.96.107.37 (talk) 18:18, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately we cannot accept your own knowledge but if you can explain what it is that you think is wrong and provide some reliable sources that verify your position then, sure, we can try to seek consensus for change. - Sitush (talk) 01:08, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restructure 

message: The "See Also" section currently provides links to 'Ror' and 'Solank' wikipages. The four main Rajput Dynasties (See Encyclopædia Britannica Agnikula link) are Parmara, Pratihara, Chauhan, and Solanki -  I suggest the "See also" section be changed to reflect this.
Parmark (talk) 07:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "See also" section 

message: There are two problems with the current statement on Moslem Parmars :
i) There is no source citation, regarding if/when the Moslem Parmar conversions happened. Not disputing this - just want a 'requires citation' statement added
ii) The "Moslem Parmars" wikipage redirects back to this Paramara page.
Parmark (talk) 07:50, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Muslim Parmars 

message: Hi there, just wanted to explain a couple of things so that this article can move forward. People with limited English skills add (in good faith) information at various times and when I see that I try to make sense of it, do a copy edit and then when it can be read, I try to source appropriate references. So, I guess I'm for inclusivity and improvement in the paedia, not against. Having said that, it's clear that I don't have any point of view about Paramaras, just a wish to see an interesting and accurate and helpful and well written article. I agree the current revision that we keep going back to is technically the best, but it is of little interest or inclusivity as it stands. I'll continue to reference whatever is contributed but it might take a little more time. If anyone wants to help then I'm happy to discuss. Kind regards, Myrtle G. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 05:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:GS/Caste and the logs for this article. This is a very awkward topic area and, basically, no source = no mention. Interesting-ness and accuracy are not mutually exclusive but the latter is a pillar and the former is not. You'll also have to accept that sourcing articles such as this is often fraught with problems; for example, you can forget using practically everything published in the British Raj period and also The People of India. You'll also likely need a thick skin because edit wars, abuse, threats and socking are commonplace. - Sitush (talk) 05:36, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thankyou, Sitush, very much for replying. I'll keep working on the article, with your advice very much in mind, and I'll make sure the references are solid before adding anything. I'm not sure that I have a thick skin but I'll keep trying to get on as best I can. Thanks again, Myrtle. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 07:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. You might find WT:INB useful on occasion. - Sitush (talk) 08:04, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major copyedit 

message: I have just reverted here. I can only see a snippet view of the cited source but it appears to be quoting British authors from the pre-independence era and those people are not reliable. Can we have some context, please. Are they just quoting or are they agreeing? Is theirs a statement or a speculation? - Sitush (talk) 10:46, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agnikul 

message: School books such as this are not reliable sources. In fact, many in that series have the appearance of using material gleaned from Wikipedia at some point in the past. - Sitush (talk) 05:22, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable sources 

message: Since the page is moved from Parmar to Parmar (Rajput clan), then there should only be information related to Parmar (Rajput clan). Any other community which is uses Parmar title should not be available on this page and there should be a separate page related to that community. Parihar Piyush (talk) 17:31, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 00:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 October 2023 

message: I propose to merge Panwar here. These on the surface appear to be different way to spell the same clan name. If I am wrong, the  shall be used to avoid the confusion. See also #Merge with Panhwar, Ponwar? above. Викидим (talk) 20:39, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal