Talk:Meena/Archive 1

Archive 1

Error in External link

The first external link (http://www.lostbooks.net/cgi-bin/lbn455/17072.html) in the 'Reference' section doesn't work. It links to another book ! -- PFHLai 22:39, 2004 Jul 12 (UTC)

Spelling ....

Is it Rajput or Rajpoot ? Mina or Meena ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.229.230.70 (talk • contribs) 14:15, July 14, 2004

Mina is not so comman way to write these days but Meena is very comman.

if you like to hear how meena is actually called, Then click the link.

http://www.lifl.fr/~meena/meena_called/meena_called.wav

For Rajput and Rajpoot both are correct. And it pronounced same as written. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.206.11.73 (talk • contribs) 15:48, April 24, 2005

Question

In current days, how one can imagine the MEENAs, who were always part and with the social system of Rajasthan. Should be called tribes. History was partially re-written by Rajputs. Who are nothing but mix creed of these local tribes at that time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.206.11.73 (talk • contribs) 15:29, April 24, 2005

Taur

With regards to the sentence that refers to the Taur kings of Delhi.

Taurs= six-limbed creatures??!

Something doesn't seem right here.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maharaj Devraj (talk • contribs) 14:42, June 15, 2006

strange vagueness

"Toward the end of the century..." Which century? --Oop 13:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

According to Britannica, "the Minas are possibly of inner Asiatic origin, and tradition suggests that they migrated to India in the 7th century with the Rajputs

Forget about Britannica,many important scholars specially james tod described them as indigenous tribe in his book "anals and antiquities of rajasthan.It was the first book ever in which something was written about meenas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.180.118 (talk • contribs) 13:21, December 6, 2007

WP:INDIA Banner/Rajasthan workgroup Addition

Note: {{WP India}} Project Banner with Rajasthan workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under Category:Rajasthan or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 07:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

RE: The factual accuracy of this article is disputed

attn: Wikipedia:Administrators,

Dear Satyashodak

It would be very helpful, if you understand the difference between Indian mythology, religion and constitution. Today in Rajasthan, you have reservation for Bharmins, Rajputs and Jats also. Does it mean socially they are lower cast or discriminated? Same Meenas are in ST category in Rajasthan but in MP, UP, Maharashtra (pardeshi community) they come under General category. However, a small fraction of tribal Meenas come under ST in MP (in Sironj Sub-Division of Vidisha District) as well. Like Gujjars in India, they are OBC, ST and general category in different states of India and still mentioned mythological under “Kshatriya”.

Meenas are mentioned as ST over wiki pages (search yourself) which are under the category related to Indian constitution or administration. Reservation is a political issue in India, and definitely Wikipedia, at least this very page is not a place to discuss or mention it. You can start a page where you can write about reservation and Indian casts related issues.

Above all if you follow either of the logic, ethical or constitutional; constitutionally it is crime to address someone lower cast in INDIA Or promote cast based discrimination. Ethically, Meenas are human being and have their constitutional and social rights. I suggest you to know bit more about Meenas from northern part of Rajasthan and their counterpart from southern part.

This particular article is referenced, and up here more than FOUR years now. Most the referenced books are available to read over Google book. Editors have put all their known facts and information related to Meena community(different from koli community) backed by references. It is upto the reader, who has to build their opinion and understanding based on the presented facts. In this article, there are paragraphs where the fact of degrading Meenas social status is also highlighted. In fact, the opening paragraph of the article mentions about Meenas TRIBAL status. So what is the new you want to say here?

Regarding Meenas “Kshatriya” status. Historically they were rulers (read about Amber-Jaipur and Northern part of Rajasthan plus Bundi). Their main occupation was serving in the army and agriculture. Article also mentions about limited number of Meenas, who ever been involved in criminal activity. Try to read/know about JAGAs in Rajasthan, who hereditarily keeps the genealogical records of Meenas and Rajputs. Does any other cast in Rajasthans has Jaga? Jagas keep Meenas genealogical records because of their past history of being rulers. It is never late to learn good lessons in life.

If you have rational thinking, this article talks about all the aspect of Meenas history, including their different social status in certain part of Rajasthan. Why their status has been constantly changing over years? What was their situation when India was under British occupation? How British use to see Meenas then? and Problems they faced to control Meenas and rising Meena battalion.

This Meenas wiki page was created on 4 February 2004, since then it has been read, edited and enhanced by many Wikipedia editors. During the recent Meena and Gujjar conflicts, many news papers /blogs/TV channels have reference and quoted text from this very article.

Hope this make some sense to you, I am committed to help and support in building a balance understanding towards this article and following Wikipedia philosophy.

78.105.247.223 (talk) 22:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Jagas keep record of Ahirs (Yadav today) also, but, have you seen the page Yadav, they too are shown as to be a lower caste, their kingdoms ancient and modern political status is undermined by the jealous writers and unfortunately, Wikipedia rely only on reliable literary sources. What i can say, by experience on wiki is that, your complete narration or talk will be categorized as original research and discarded. However, be sure, and for updation of your knowledge, Meenas in no part of land are categorized as to belong to General or High caste category. They are in most of the cases ST and few are OBC, as all the agricultural castes are. Good Luck. Best Wishes, If Admins consider your view point.--Mahensingha 18:20, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree with mahensingha opinion.Do not try to mislead our reader by writing wrong facts Jalodiya (talk) 05:44, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I have added some new content in this page ,which is taken from the book 📚 'MINA:THE RULING TRIBE OF INDIA'.This book is written by Mr. S.H.M RIZVI.The facts which are written by mr.rizvi and examined duly by many of the writers.For ex-Ali,hashim amir the writer of 'The meos of mewat'.oxford,Delhi,1970. Jalodiya (talk) 12:38, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I have also provide the reliable link and sources to prove that the content edit by me is absoulutely correct Jalodiya (talk) 12:41, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I think mahensingha you might belongs to yadav community that's why you constantly editing this page to make sure that your community belongs to Kshatriyas Varna whereas other community like gujjar,jats,tyagi,and meenas belongs to lower caste. This very bad that people like u edit any page without having any specific knowledge about that topic,so that your caste is the best caste and rest are stupid that they belongs to different community or caste.please provide us valid facts before editing this page,else there is no meaning to have a talk with you on this topic Jalodiya (talk) 15:43, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

User Ashishmeena, please don't remove tags and edits without discussion

Please discuss on the discussion page before undoing edits and tags. This article has severe shortcomings with regard to its acccuracy as per wikipedia standards.

This is an encyclopedia not some caste promotion website. Please follow the rules.--Satyashodak (talk) 14:35, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Editor 143.117.38.118 is suppressing important facts and undoing edits without discussion

Editor 143.117.38.118 is trying suppress important facts about the Meena community. He is requested to present exact reference from the government records or other citable works which acknowledge Khsatriya status of meenas. He is also requested to explain with the help of credible citations why Meenas are listed as a Scheduled Tribe if they are regarded 'Kshatriyas' or equivalent to Rajputs by other communities . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Satyashodak (talk • contribs) 14:29, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Meena is a well-known Scheduled Tribe. Please don't mislead the readers by suppressing this fact

This article does not have any inline citations that prove what the author is asserting. A deliberate effort has been made to mislead the readers into believing that Meenas are an upper caste. Meenas are listed as a Scheduled Tribe because they are considered to be socially very low. The writer has taken great pains to suppress this fact but has still done the job poorly.

Meenas are regarded to be aboriginals and face caste based discrimination. This is the reason they enjoy the reservations provided by Indian govenrment to the lower castes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Satyashodak (talk • contribs) 02:21, November 13, 2008

For User:Satyashodak

Better discuss, than editing. I am ready to provide all citation on the arguments. However, if I will follow this parameter of citation, I wonder, how many Indian cast related pages will go-off? Especially from Rajasthan. Ashishmeena (talk) 14:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

User:Satyashodak yes we can discuss

So please do not edit this article before resolving the issues. You are right this article is not cast promotion and cast haterate. May be it’s a time to enhance scope of the article. The article talks about ups and downs of Meenas in historical context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashishmeena (talk • contribs) 14:50, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Request to remove one controversial section

{{editprotected}}

Section 'Scheduled tribe status in India after ndependence’

This section was added by User:Satyashodak and it is a part of controversy. The below section on this talk page was written for clarification. However, he or anyone else has not replied so far and I can wait. But in the mean time, I request administrators to remove the section 'Scheduled tribe status in India after ndependence’ from the main article “Meenas”. Even there is spelling mistake "(I)ndependence". However, page should remain in edit protected mode till it expires. Ashishmeena (talk) 20:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Done. Since no one disagreed with the request, I went ahead and removed the section. --Elonka 07:08, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Elonka, I think the following note needed to be put here in response to the deletion you made:

I see you have removed the section about the Scheduled Tribe status of Meenas in India. Please note that "Scheduled Tribe" is a constitutional term for socially undermined groups. The term is kosher in public discourse and is not derogotary. Meenas are the most widely known Scheduled Tribe of Rajasthan. Not to allow this fact to be documented in a clear manner in the wikipedia article makes it totally inauthentic with no reflection of the real world. If you want this article to have any semblance of crediblity , you need to restore that section (with spelling corrections, of course). All the references from reliable sources were provided there

--Satyashodak (talk) 22:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. To be clear, I have no preference what goes into the article either way. As an administrator, I respond to maintenance requests, such as the one above. If someone makes a request, and no one disagrees with that request after a few days, I will make the change. What is your request? --Elonka 22:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Elonka and Satyashodak,

The user Satyashodak, seems to have very deep interest in calling Meenas as lowest cast. Which is not true, Meenas eat and drink with all upper cast people like Brahmins and Rajputs etc; they attend each other marriages and other cultural occasion; All Meenas marriages, child naming etc. are performed by a Hindu priest. Brahmins eat food (Bharman Bhoj) on special occasions at Meenas home. Meenas are allowed to go any Hindu temple. May be Satyashodak comes from some remote area, where tribal Meenas are treated differently. BUT this article is about Meenas in general and nothing to do with Indian constitution and their local social status. Try to look on overall Meenas status; If we follow Satyaashok arguments, all the Indians who are living in WESTERN world should be deliberately mentioned PAKI, uncivilised and uncultured. As in West, Indian suffers with lower grade citizen status and never treated as locals in society. In past 4 years, I have not seen anybody making such discriminating and deliberating efforts to state Meenas as lower cast and have problems with that. Why only Stayashodak?

BEWARE : Admin and Elonka

Please have a look on Stayaashodak contribution page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Satyashodak He is intentionally and deliberately behind Meenas article and there is no other sign of his any other article contribution.

78.105.247.223 (talk) 23:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Kindly provide references and citations rather than personal attacks. Please rewrite this article with honesty and objectivity. This is an encyclopedia. I have already said that I am not going to edit this article even if the edit protection is removed. I have nothing against Meena community but was rather shocked to the see misrepresentation and obfuscation that has been presented in the article. Using ad hominem attacks further weakens your claim of being a neutral scholar. So if I were you, I would avoid them and get busy with looking for credible references. Thanks

--Satyashodak (talk) 00:17, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Dear Stayaashodak,

So you are suggesting that this article is not having references? Or after going through 20+ cited articles you still feel there should be more citation for 3000 word article? Or maybe you want to see every world of this particular article should have citation?

Well the latest you can read if cannot read all is,

“Kapur, Nandini Sinha (May 2008). Reconstructing Identities and Situating Themselves in History : A Note on the Meenas of Jaipur Region.”

Dr. Nandini Sinha Kapur is a Reader in History in PGDAV College of Delhi University. In her research especially in the above one, she has recorded all the issues related to Meenas identity in Rajasthan (mainly Jaipur region) and their Ups and Downs. She has also cited the supporting evidences.

Over this particular Meenas page we are talking about 'History of Meenas' not the contemporary issues. The core of the article is similar to any other wiki articles on Bharmins, Rajputs etc. Wikipedia is not a News bulletin dashboard.

Hope this helps you.

78.105.247.223 (talk) 11:38, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

The citations in this article appear without the proper context. What is the most dubious is the claim of being a kshatriya. If you believe that Meenas were ever regarded as Kshatriyas in Indian history and socio-polity, kindly provide references from reliable sources on the following points:

1) Which of the following lineages Meenas belonged to?

Suryavanshi
Chandravanshi
Agnivanshi

Unless Meenas belonged to one of the above lineages , their claim of being kshatriya does not withstand any textual scrutiny.

2) Provide a reference from a reliable textual source that proves that Meenas were regarded as a 'twice born caste'.

3) If Meenas were regarded as kshatriyas, provide a credible explanation with he help of textual sources as to why no Rajput ever inter-married with Meenas??? Mr. THE ANSWER IS OBVIOUS n KNOWN TO EVERYBODY THAT WHY PURE KSHATRIYA RACES GURJARAS,MEENAS,MARATHAS NEVER MARRIES RAJPUTS because Though the word "Rajput" is supposed to be a corrupted form of the Sanskrit word 'Raajaputra' which means a "scion of the royal blood" and that the word occurs in the Puranas and also in the Harshcharita of Bana, Mahajan is honest enough to accept that the word, in earlier times and in some areas even now, had an disrespectful meaning. The Vedic Rajas & old Kshatriyas(tribals),not satisfied with their married wives,had frequently children by their female slaves,who although not legitimate successors to the throne,these illegitimate children were styled Rajpoots,or the children of Rajas"The word "Rajput" is used in certain parts of Rajasthan to denote the illegitimate sons of a Kshatriya chief or Zamidar." [Mahajan: 1972: 550 ff.] The conclusion is obvious that they were not considered by the original residentsto be respectable, to start with. This is because "Raaja" means royal but "Raj" means semen. The progeny of mixed marriages is even now called by that name in some parts. The condition of woman was deteriorating. The question of women education was unthinkable. Obscene Art flourished during Rajput age. The originality of the ancient times was lost and the ancient culture degenerated. The country fell into the hands of Rajput barons, soon to be followed by the Mohammedan invaders who completed the work of annihilation. The combined army of Kachwaha Rajputs and Mughals defeated the powerful Meena Kings of Rajasthan by annihilating them. Rajput age was a Dark Age for masses of India.

4)Provide an clear explanation as to why Meenas got listed as part of the Scheduled Tribe category after the independence of India. Please do not suppress this fact as Meenas are pehaps the most well-known Scheduled Tribe of Rajasthan. If you do not highlight this fact in the wikipedia article, it is not authentic anymore.--Satyashodak (talk) 13:50, 22 November 2008 (UTC) authentic is —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigbrothersorder (talk • contribs) 04:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

IT is CLEARLY written in UNIVERSITY BOOKS..that Meenas(Mina/Matsya/Mena/Minout) is a aboriginal community means a tribal community.The Meena kingdom was known as Matsya kingdom in sanskrit was mentioned in the RIG VEDA.They decent from Lord Matsya/Meen or Meenesh and worships Lord Shiva.Also Matsya purana is the oldest puranas of India.The tribals religion is Aadim Dharma. Bhils and Minas are the oldest tribes of Rajasthan(India) since INDUS CIVILIZATION.Till 1400BC they ruled the land which is now called rajasthan,they were humbeled by the adventurous aryans but regained control and lived peacefully. Due to their war like characteristics they were Bhils and Minas were included in Agnivanshi kshatriyas(written in University book Rajasthan ka itihas),They were respected by Hunas,Kusans etc. Bhils and minas are poor agriculturist people of rajasthan.Only 2%of the mina tribe are graduate so far.According to news published in THE TIMES OF INDIA news paper dated 31august2010 even after 17years only 7%seats are filled of OBC(other backward classes of India) out of 27%seats reservation;Moreover only 2% of ST/SC are in class 1 jobs.In India for Equality there is a strong need of OBC/SC/ST reservation in billion dollor Corporate world and Private Sector.Then only the deprived and backward classes(more than 70%people/majority of poor people) will be able to compete higher and forward classes.There is a strong need of extending reservation policy in all sphers and jobs for equality among our people.Being a good human let us try for the wellbeing of crores of People..Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigbrothersorder (talk • contribs) 04:59, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Article needs be kept objective and factually acurate

I won't edit this article anymore and regret if somebody's pride has been hurt unwittingly. The popular perception and documented citabale government records all indicate a grossly socially undermined status of Meenas when compared to other tribes. Otherwise, they would not be classified as a Scheduled Tribe by the government.

With regard to Kshatriya status, the editors should provide some expanation of the fact as to why no Rajput tribe ever intermarried with Meenas.

Being a tribal ruling class was not enough to earn "kshatriya" status. The cast had to be a twice-born before it earned that status. Even Jats can't be classified "kshatriya".

If Meenas are both classified as Scheduled Tribe and General Category, then the editor can state both the facts with the help of citable works, rather than suppressing or highlighting any one of them.

It is important that wikipedia articles stay objective and are not used as means of caste based propaganda. Meenas are the most widely known Scheduled Tribe of Rajasthan. If the fact is suppressed or glossed over, then the article is not factual or objective anymore. This artcile would be no more guilty of any constitutional impropriety than constitution of India itself is so in having placed Meenas in Scheduled Tribe category. It is an academic truth. This article obviously needs a lot of work to make it objective but I will not edit this article anymore.--Satyashodak (talk) 16:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Please do not archive issue that are still unresolved

Please do not archive the controversial issues. That won't make them go away.--Satyashodak (talk) 02:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Nothing has "gone away". It is just that some of the older messages have been moved to another page. Everything can still be read here, at /Archive 1. Some of these messages were three or four years old, so there was no reason to keep them on the "live" page. If you think that anything is still unresolved, simply start a new thread. You can also provide a link to the older discussions from here. --Elonka 02:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for this note. I understand now--Satyashodak (talk) 22:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

SCHEDULED TRIBE status of Meenas

The 67.7 million people belonging to "Scheduled Tribes" in India are generally considered to be 'Adivasis', literally meaning 'indigenous people' or 'original inhabitants', though the term 'Scheduled Tribes'

I see you have removed the section about the Scheduled Tribe status of Meenas in India. Please note that "Scheduled Tribe" is a constitutional term for socially undermined groups. The term is kosher in public discourse and is not derogotary. Meenas are the most widely known Scheduled Tribe of Rajasthan. Not to allow this fact to be documented in a clear manner in the wikipedia article makes it totally inauthentic with no reflection of the real world. If you want this article to have any semblance of crediblity , you need to restore that section (with spelling corrections, of course). All the references from reliable sources were provided there.--Satyashodak (talk) 19:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Satyashodak, thank you for your message. Please note that I did not remove anything. I just moved things. I have placed the threads on this page in date order. The oldest are now at the top, the newest at the bottom. A very few threads that were very very old, have been moved to /Archive 1. Everything else is still in place. Did I miss anything? --Elonka 20:17, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

The 67.7 million people belonging to "Scheduled Tribes" in India are generally considered to be 'Adivasis', literally meaning 'indigenous people' or 'original inhabitants', though the term 'Scheduled Tribes' (STs) is not coterminous with the term 'Adivasis'. PLEASE note THATScheduled Tribes is an administrative term used for purposes of 'administering' certain specific constitutional privileges, protection and benefits for specific sections of peoples considered historically disadvantaged and 'backward'

All tribal communities are not alike. They are products of different historical and social conditions. They belong to four different language families, and several different racial stocks and religious moulds. They have kept themselves apart from feudal states and brahminical hierarchies for thousands of years.

In the Indian epics such as Ramayana, Mahabharata and Puranas (folklores) there are many references to interactions and wars between the forest or hill tribes and the Hindus. Endemic hunger and food insecurity were rampant especially in tribal dominated areas of Rajasthan. In October 2005, the New Delhi-based Centre for Environment and Food Security (CEFS) in its survey report revealed that 99 per cent of Adivasi households had lived with one or another level of endemic hunger and food insecurity throughout 2004 in the tribal dominated areas under Udaipur and Dungarpur districts.[39]

According to reports, about 80 persons belonging to the tribes had allegedly died of starvation and malnutrition in Baran district in September 2005. They had been allegedly deprived of employment and basic amenities including proper medical facilities.[40] However, a Supreme Court fact-finding committee had concluded that the deaths took place due to lack of proper health service in the area.[41]

Even in the 21st century, students and professionals belonging to tribals and Sudra communities are victimized by the Manuwadi teachers, bureaucrats, ministers, judges, doctors, and all other professionals. Brahmin, Shatriya, and Vaishya castes make up 15% of the population, yet claim about 65% of the upper-level jobs. In the first-ever statistical analysis of its kind, a survey of the social profile of more than 300 senior journalists at 37 Hindi and English language newspapers and TV studios found that "Hindu upper-caste men"— who form 8% of the country's population—hold 71% of the top jobs in the "national media." Hence, the media is biased and does not report the truth of suffering and discrimination by those in the scheduled castes and tribes. When SCs/STs asked members of the media to lodge a formal complaint, they said that "if we do that, our whole career will be finished by these professors who treat us worse than animals." Such is the terror of these Manuwadi professors. The SC/ST students prefer to swallow these insults and suffer silently Inequity has existed for thousands of years for the SCs/STs and has included educational discrimination, housing segregation, physical harassment and abuse, economic suppression and disenfranchisement, discrimination in medical care, religious discrimination, and violence (e.g., torture, murder,etc). Despite several Indian laws enacted for the protection and empowerment of the SCs/STs, Indian society still treats them as outcasts. The Indian government has passed laws to protect the Sudras, but failed to promote democratic principles, secular thinking, and progressive ethos. For instance, despite a constitutional mandate, India has repeatedly failed to fulfill the reservation quota for SCs/STs in faculty positions (saying suitable candidates are not available).

Recently, the Indian government created a committee—headed by Prof. S. K. Thorat—to investigate discrimination in the All India Institute of Medical Science (AIIMS), Delhi. The committee found widespread discrimination, harassment, torture, and abuse against SC/ST students and professionals, including examination assessment (theory and practical papers), consultation and interaction, discrimination in teaching, segregation in residential hostels, mess and dining discrimination, social isolation in cultural and sports events, ragging, anti-quota agitation, and hiring and promotion discrimination.

The AIIMS is a 100% grant-in-aid institution of the Indian government and should comply with all rules, regulations, and directives of the government to provide constitutional guarantees to the SCs/STs. According to the Thorat committee report, more than two-thirds of SC/ST students did not receive adequate support from teachers, which resulted in poor performance and psychological problems. A student at the AIIMS lost his eye due to ragging by upper-caste students, but had no forum in which to complain. There is no student representation for the Sudras.

In 2000,regarding iit's, the PDK published a book based on a study it did on the anti-Dalit attitude in the institute. The study noted that there were several departments at the institute where even after 41 years, “not a single Dalit student has been selected for doing Ph.D or has successfully completed his degree”. The study also stated that, “almost all M.Tech and ms Students in IIT were Brahmins.” The PDK is now demanding that the institute come out with a white paper providing details of the total number of Dalit students who have completed postgraduate and doctoral programmes. “The National Commission for SC/ST should closely monitor if reservation policy for Dalits is being strictly followed in student admissions,” says Viduthalai Rajendran, PDK general secretary

Private sector should reserve jobs for SC, ST,OBC.

Chandigarh, Feb 4 (PTI) Union Minister for Social Justice and Empowerment Meira Kumar today asked private sector to initiate efforts for reserving jobs for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes youth as part of its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).

"The government and the public sector provide reservation in jobs for SC and ST. But this kind of protection is absent in the private sector," Kumar said while addressing a programme on CSR organised by CII.

The caste system contains both social oppression and classexploitation. The dalits suffer from both types of exploitation in the worst form. 86.25 per cent of the scheduled caste households are landless and 49 per cent of the scheduled castes in the rural areas are agricultural workers. The dalits are subject to untouchability and other forms of discrimination despite these being declared unlawful. According to the 2001 census, scheduled castes comprise 16.2 per cent of the total population of India, that is, they number over 17 crore the problem of alienation of tribal lands. According to the 2007-08 Annual Report of the Ministry of Rural Development, a total of 2,084 cases of land alienation were filed in the Courts involving an area of 6,615 acres by 2007. Dalits and tribals remained vulnerable to discrimination and physical violence. Rajasthan was one among the worst states for recorded violence against Dalits during 2007 The failure to appoint sufficient number of judges contributed to increase in the number of backlog cases. There were 218,219 cases pending before the Rajasthan High Court and 11,80,334 cases pending before the District and Subordinate Courts as of 1 July 2008. Prison conditions also remained poor III. Violations of the rights of indigenous/ST peoples a. Atrocities The NCRB recorded 1,110 incidents of crime against Scheduled Tribes in 2007. These included 17 cases of killing, 25 cases registered under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, among others.9

b. Land rights The state government failed to address the problem of alienation of tribal lands. According to the 2007-08 Annual Report of the Ministry of Rural Development, a total of 2,084 cases of land alienation were filed in the Courts involving an area of 6,615 acres by 2007. 1,257 cases were disposed of by the Courts of which 187 cases involving 587 acres were decided in favour of the tribals, while 53 cases were rejected. Another 1,067 cases were pending in courts by the end of 2007.11 The state government failed to properly implement the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional [[Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.]] In tribal-dominated Udaipur district, the district administration allegedly issued a misleading circular which stated that the cut-off year for eligibility given in the Act was 1980 instead of 2005. This was allegedly intentionally done to deprive the tribals from their rights under the [[Forest Rights Act]]. On 21 September 2008, several tribals were injured and hospitalized after they were attacked by non-tribals at Jhala Pipla village under Jhadol tehsil in Udaipur district. The tribals were targeted after they filed their claims for land rights under the Forest Rights Act. Two of the tribals identified as Vera and Naro, sustained injuries in the attack.12

HISTORY OF STs The epic of Mahabharata refers to the death of Krishna at the hands of a Bhil Jaratha. In the ancient scriptures, considered to be sacred by the upper castes, various terms are used depicting Adivasis as almost non-humans. The epics of Ramayana and Mahabharata, the Puranas, Samhitas and other so-called 'sacred books' refer to Adivasis as Rakshasa (demons), Vanara (monkeys), Jambuvan (boar men), Naga (serpents), Bhusundi Kaka (crow), Garuda (King of Eagles) etc. In medieval India, they were called derogatorily as Kolla, Villa, Kirata, Nishada, and those who surrendered or were subjugated were termed as Dasa (slave) and those who refused to accept the bondage of slavery were termed as Dasyu (a hostile robber).

Ekalavya, one of their archers was so skillful that the hero of the Aryans, Arjuna, could not stand before him. But they assaulted him, cutting his thumb and destroying his ability to fight - and then fashioned a story in which he accepted Drona as his Guru and surrendered his thumb as an offering to the master! The renowned writer Maheshwata Devi points out that Adivasis predated Hinduism and Aryanism, that Shiva was not an Aryan god and that in the 8th century, the tribal forest goddess or harvest goddess was absorbed and adapted as Siva's wife. Goddess Kali, the goddess of hunters, has definitely had a tribal origin.

The invasion of Adivasi territories, which for the most part commenced during the colonial period, intensified in the post-colonial period. Most of the Adivasi territories were claimed by the state. Over 10 million Adivasis have been displaced to make way for development projects such as dams, mining, industries, roads, protected areas etc. Though most of the dams (over 3000) are located in Adivasi areas, only 19.9% (1980-81) of Adivasi land holdings are irrigated as compared to 45.9% of all holdings of the general population. India produces as many as 52 principal, 3 fuel, 11 metallic, 38 non-metallic and a number of minor minerals.

Of these 45 major minerals (coal, iron ore, magnetite, manganese, bauxite, graphite, limestone, dolomite, uranium etc) are found in Adivasi areas contributing some 56% of the national total mineral earnings in terms of value. Of the 4,175 working mines reported by the Indian Bureau of Mines in 1991-92, approximately 3500 could be assumed to be in Adivasi areas. Income to the government from forests rose from Rs.5.6 million in 1869-70 to more than Rs.13 billions in the 1970s. The bulk of the nation's productive wealth lay in the Adivasi territories. Yet the Adivasi has been driven out, marginalised and robbed of dignity by the very process of 'national development'.

The systematic opening up of tribal territories, the development projects and the 'tribal development projects' make them conducive for waves of immigrants. In the rich mineral belt of Jharkhand, the Adivasi population has dropped from around 60% in 1911 to 27.67% in 1991. These developments have in turn driven out vast numbers of Adivasis to eke out a living in the urban areas and in far-flung places in slums. According to a rough estimate, there are more than 40,000 tribal domestic working women in Delhi alone!

Denial of justice to dalits (scheduled castes) and scheduled tribes and violence directed at them continues in India today despite official policies and declarations to the contrary. Considerable physical violence is inflicted on members of these deprived and marginalised communities as substantiated by official reports. Policing, far from being ‘the professional imposition of a coherent moral consensus on society’ is an intensely political activity with policemen often facilitating and participating in the violence not just against these two communities but against minorities, other weaker sections and women “The quota students face discrimination everywhere, starting from the canteens, laboratories and classes. Such limited numbers in a class would make the students even more vulnerable as they are most often viewed as dumb heads who have made it to IITs because of the quotas,” says Narendra Kumar, general secretary of the SC/ST Welfare Union at IIT Delhi. There is a very very Strong need of OBC/SC/ST reservation in billion dollor corporate world and billion dollor private sector,then only the backward castes can compete with forward castes,Being a good human let us try for the wellbeing of 70% People..Thanks.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF RESERVATION IN BILLION DOLLOR PRIVATE SECTORS(CORPORATE WORLD):2011-2012.

If forward castes people really love backward classes(obc/sc/st)80 crore people of India..then the reservation should be given immediately in private sectors and corporate world.

1. More than a thousand years of discrimination has laid barren groups of people without education, hygienic and healthy living. People who were not given education could now sense a freedom that could come up to them. But then, they are not ready for the new responsibilities. At the dawn of independence and even before, forward looking leaders could see that the country could not progress unless the masses consisting primarily of these people could progress. Even today, the growing GDP has really no impact on the people who are going hungry to bed every night.

2. If 60 years of reservation could be so difficult to withstand and could make life miserable for the so-called forward classes, imagine what 1000 years of subversion with absolutely no choice and absolutely no voice, would have done to a human race.

3. The government at the time of independence could bring in only reservations on the education front and in a majority of the government offices. This does not have any significance beyond certain levels in government offices, military and other areas of work. Similarly, it does not have any significance when it comes to private industry which is the largest employer today. Contrast this with the affirmative action in other countries, say UK for instance. The population racial spread should match with the industry spread. That is to say, if the race is occupying 30% of the population, the same set or about the same percentage of people should be in every industry such as banking, media, etc., at all levels of management. If a company, be it private or public, if for any reason or not finding themselves in line with this concept will have to pay an additional tax to the government. Please see ethnic quotas in the UK's affirmative action bill.

4. It has never been possible for India to bring any standard reservation policy with a clear cut end marked out. This is so because, people who are anti to reservations and who occupy the top positions in the hierarchy are not allowing census to be taken on a caste basis. Secondly, data pertaining to caste wise hierarchical data is not specifically made available for public consumption. The current census looks forward to make good this lacuna at last.

5. Reservations can end only when the population map of the castes match with the caste wise industry map. That is if a specific group forms 12% of the population, then they should be occupying more or less the same percentage in, say, banks at all levels, in top management map, middle management map and in lower levels as well. Only then, it can be said that equality has reached. Instead if you take media today, be it government or otherwise, one would only find the upper class domination and naturally, no other idea gets spread as well.

6.There is a general perception that the quality of education is compromised when reservations are in place. But there are many instances where it has been disproved. In India, particularly, there has been mushrooming of education institutions across the country. Where there were only 2000 seats in a state (Tamil Nadu Engineering in 1970s), now offers more than 100,000 seats for similar programs. Even with reservations, the number of seats for forward caste students and for others have increased by more than 50 times. But still, upper castes remark of insufficiency of seats to the upper castes! This is happening all over the country. The same is the case with government jobs.

7.Poor people from "forward castes" do not have any social or economical advantage over rich people from backward caste. Counter Point: Reservation is a tool to improve representation. It is not a poverty alleviation program.

8.Providing quotas on the basis of an accident of birth and not on the basis of competitive merit will be discriminatory to talented students, and weaken the country's competitive edge. Counter Point: Merit is an abstract notion and a social construct.

9.This policy of the government has already caused increase in brain drain and may aggravate further. Under graduates and graduates will start moving to foreign universities for higher education. Counter Point: Upper caste Indians were well known for the immigration pattern even before the dusk of the British Raj. Celebration of golden jubilee of IIT was celebrated in San Jose, California not because the they couldn't make it to the IIT but only after there graduation. In contrast Tamil diaspora to nations like Malaysia and Singapore at the end of the Slave trade was made possible due to the suppression of this population as lower caste and their look for greener pastures.

Therefore, reservations are a political necessity in India because vast influential sections of voting population see reservations as beneficial to themselves. All governments have supported maintaining and/or increasing reservations. Since there is a wide spread support to reservations, even if the governments are not sincere about the purpose of the reservations, they make it appear as if they are for reservations. And this has been happening in this country resulting in a half-hearted implementation of reservations that has not produced any worthwhile results even after 60 years of implementation.

Reservations are legal and binding. As shown by Gujjar agitations (Rajasthan, 2007–2008), increasing reservations is also essential for peacekeeping in India.

Quality of education and quality of government service has fallen not because of reservations but because weak leadership and management capability and a systemic failure of government machinery which does not know how to manage its own staff. A bad policy in the initial years when the government instead of being a servant of the public turned to be the biggest employer in the country, resulting in gross under employment and mismanagement. That weakened the system and therefore, service quality.

One of the biggest difference of affirmative actions in the west and that of the Indian Government is that the people who suppressed the others never acknowledged the same. In the west, whites acknowledged that they are subjecting the blacks to mistreatment and slavery and that this has resulted in a situation that where the growth of blacks have been affected. In India, till today, never have the leaders of the forward castes ever expressed any apology for 2500 years of suppression. Nor have they expressed that these suppressed castes should be brought up for the growth of the country. Even if any one makes such a statement, it is more a lip service than real concern. There has never been a Lincoln in India who would take guns against his own race or caste to fight for the freedom of the oppressed.

Affirmative Action schemes are in place in many countries including USA, South Africa, Malaysia, Brazil etc. It was researched in Harvard University that Affirmative Action programmes are beneficial to the under-privileged.The studies said that Blacks who enter elite institutions with lower test scores and grades than those of whites achieve notable success after graduation. They earn advanced degrees at rates identical to those of their white classmates. They are even slightly more likely than whites from the same institutions to obtain professional degrees in law, business and medicine. They become more active than their white classmates in civic and community activities.

Affirmative Action has helped many - if not everyone from under-privileged and/or under-represented communities to grow and occupy top positions in the world's leading industries. (See the Section on Tamil Nadu) Reservation in education is not THE solution, it is just one of the many solutions. Reservations is a means to increase representation of hitherto under-represented caste groups and thereby improve diversity on campus. Reservations are needed to provide social justice to the most marginalized and underprivileged is our duty and their human right. Reservation will really help these marginalized people to lead successful lives, thus eliminating caste-based discrimination which is still widely prevalent in India especially in the rural areas. (about 70% of Indian population stays in Villages)

Anti-reservationists have made a gross mix-up between brain-drain and reservation. Brain-drain is mainly attributed to the "want" to become more rich very fast. Even if we assume that reservation could be a fraction of the cause, one must understand that brain-drain is a concept which is meaningless without nationalism, which is separatism from humankind as a whole. If people leave the country whining about reservation, they don't have enough nationalism and brain-drain does not apply to them.

There are concerns among anti-reservationists about meritrocracy and aptly so. But meritrocracy is meaningless without equality. First all people must be brought to the same level, whether it elevates a section or delevels another, regardless of merit. After that, we can talk about merit. Forward pople have never known to go backward due to reservations or lack of "meritrocracy". Reservations have only slowed down the process of "Forward becoming more richer and backward becoming more poorer". In China, people are equal by birth. In Japan, everyone is highly qualified, so a qualified man finishes his work fast and comes for labour work for which one gets paid more. So the forward people must be at least happy with the fact that they are white-collared throughout their life.

The current idea of meritocracy is highly indignant. Merit today is scoring high marks in an examination and education system that is best described, insipid. Educationists have grown to see that one cannot train or educate every one the same way. And every education system should find out what is the person good at and educate him accordingly. A sweeping education system which does not differentiate the requirement of an artist and that of an engineer cannot be called the right education. Meritocracy based on such an education system cannot be called the ultimate guide to identifying the good, bad and the ugly.

Though its true that poverty exists among the people of the so-called higher caste too,but their poverty is only economic poverty,and still they are at par with society.Whereas people from the so-called backward caste are not only economically poor but also socially backwards.Still untouchability and caste based discrimination is rampant in India,especially is Villages.And 60% of India is rural based.

1000yrs ago, castes were created and continued till now. And due to this people from backward castes were ill treated and exploited to the point of untouchability which still exists now. They were not allowed inside educational institutions nor inside the places of worship(Temples).They were forcibly cut off from mainstream of the society.Various restrictions were imposed on them and were deemed as lower caste and subhuman.For further reference,take a look at Caste system in India

To understand this better take a hypothetical example of a family-: If a person is cruelly ill-treated and badly exploited and rendered untouchable,then that person obviously lags behind in the race of success and better life style,as he was never allowed to get education nor was he allowed to enter the temple,nor allowed to use the same well for water,and many such restrictions imposed on him,which resulted in his being cut off from the main section of the society.The same was imposed on his family too.Due to such restrictions and oppression,he wouldn't be able to give a better life to his children.Obviously he would fail to do so because if he spent all his lifetime toiling hard for other people of so-called higher section of the society for negligible wages and due to the oppression had to be trodden under huge debt.So his children and grandchildren faced the same discrimination by the society and this cycle continues for many generations of that family.Continuous discrimination and ill treatment to the generations of that family would generally make them backward and create a huge gap between them and the rest of the society.So obviously they would be poor and backward and cut off from the main section of the society,because they would have never known what is it to have a life with the kind of benefits that the remaining families of the society enjoy. Suddenly one day,this discrimination is made illegal by law but still it remained in the people's psyche.And then the current generation of that family are told that discrimination is made illegal now by law and that now they can compete with others but how could they compete as they have never been provided with the kind of facilities that their other competitors had.Obviously they would lag behind because they never had the same facility which others had,not only financially but also socially.So now the equality given to that family becomes meaningless,because they are struggling hard for just two square meals.So this equality meant nothing to them even to the brightest of their lot because they were busy struggling for basic amenities.

So they lag behind inspite of the equality given because a history of discrimination has made the family poor and cut off from the mainstream of the society.So they lag behind and could not make any use of the equality given to them by law.So for their benefit,special chances were given to bring the family into mainstream and some members of that family struggled hard and made only one of their son educated now.But still he could not go far as the social barriers still existed and alone he could not go far due to the poverty and social backwardness that still existed in his family. So to make sure that if some members of that family join the mainstream then maybe then they can be uplifted.So special provisions were made till maximum members of that family comes forward and join the mainstream of the society.And when maximum members join the mainstream of the society then that special provision would be cut off.

This hypothetical example explains the reason and cause for the special provisions for the people from the backward caste.The situation of the hpothetical family shown in the example is the reality of the of the so-called backward section of the society.To remove this discrimination,and to bring them at par with the rest of the society,special provisions for them is a necessity.’’’ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omkara1188 (talk • contribs) 05:15, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Scheduled Tribe is not a pejorative

Here is the wikipedia article on Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. It is not a derogotary term like "Paki" as is being alleged. It is part of the terms of reference of the Indian constitution.--Satyashodak (talk) 02:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

The status of Zamindar Meena or Chokidar Meena

I strongly recommend to remove the status comparison of Zamindar Meena and Chowkidar Meena because both of these groups claim to be superior than others. It would be better to remove the line about Zamindar Meena highest status.

The Zamindar Meena are traditionally connected with farming profession, and most of them are economically good. According to the book "People of India" By Kumar Suresh Singh, among all Meena groups, Zamindar Meena enjoys the highest status. They claim a Kshatriya status equivalent to that of the Rajputs. In the local socio-ritual hierarchy they enjoy a clean cast status.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.161.11 (talk) 01:05, 26 December 2008 (UTC) 

Please follow the link below:-

Studies In Indian History: Rajasthan Through The Ages The Heritage Of ... Page 66,73
Thank God the page does not contain this, otherwise imagine the degree of discontentment.--Mahensingha 17:28, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Word meaning of Meen

As per my understanding the fish in sanskrit is matsa. In south indian languages meen is fish http://www.harappa.com/script/diction.html

So Meen might be pointing to something else. Tho quite confused. someone please throw some light

Daya Anjali (talk / contribs) 17:43, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

social change of bhils and meenas of rajasthan

With the onset of the policies of liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation by our country during the last decade and a half, the problems of dalits, adivasis, other backward castes and the working people as a whole have greatly aggravated. The drive to privatise the public sector has directly hit reservations for the SC/STs. The closure of thousands of mills and factories have rendered lakhs jobless and this has also hit dalits and other backward castes. The ban on recruitment to government and semi-government jobs that has been imposed in several states has also had an adverse effect. The growing commercialisation of education and health has kept innumerable people from both socially and economically backward sections out of these vital sectors eenas of rajasthan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.177.78.170 (talk) 03:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit request from 24.233.219.240, 4 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} This whole article is fake. It tells wrong things about origin of Rajputs.

24.233.219.240 (talk) 11:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

 Not done no requested edit. CTJF83 chat 16:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

EVERYTHING THAT IS WRITTEN IS RIGHT: Meenas are warrior tribe of Rajasthan ennough clue has been given by someone above so there is no need to further discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maheshjagarawal24 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Tagging NPOV and Cleanup

NPOV and Cleanup policy of wiki should be maintained throughout this article.I've tagged these tag many times.But some editor is too impatient to read wiki policy and removed tagging always without doing significant changes in article.I think we should make this article good according to wiki standards.Please avoid disruptive editing. I am tagging related template,please don't remove until article is significantly improved.Please avoid having biased view in any direction and have neutral point of view.--abhishek (talk) 13:07, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree this article has lot to clean.Its good if article does maintain neutrality.--202.174.93.214 (talk) 03:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

This article is one of the most well cited article among Indian communities. As far as it is biased or neutrality is concerned(as said by abhishekitm),Truth is never biased,understand. I wonder if we provide every line a citation..then how many old Indian articles will go blank.Oldestkshatriyas (talk) 04:22, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Would be good if you mention specifically the articles.If any article is not fulfilling criteria for POV or cleanup,it should be wikified or tagged.I would really appreciate if you spend more time on this article to make it better,rather than keep on removing tags.--Sandy (talk) 07:01, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

whether you are sandy or abhishek(which is only the same person)..there is lot of improvement is going on already..you are intentionally tagging again n again..if you are really worried about this article truth n cleanup..then do some efforts in adding truthful facts with citations rather than tagging n distorting the article.Oldestkshatriyas (talk) 14:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Well,if you have any doubt of my intentions look at my contribuations you are welcome.You may notice that I've edited 607 unique pages so far.Tagging a page doesn't make it bad.It just makes another editor notice that something should be improved.You may notice by yourself,there has been lot of improvements since I tagged,but surely not enough to remove the tag.Tagging is for betterment only,nothing personal.I changed my signature from abhishek to sandy later.--Sandy (talk) 14:43, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The edits of the last few hours are in many cases very problematic and are restoring content that was previously removed with good reason. It is quite likely that I will revert them while we discuss the issues, since many of them are heading towards the pov zone and the article is destabilised when that happens. - Sitush (talk) 14:47, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I've reverted the lot. It was reinstating old content that had been removed for what appear to be valid reasons. Two obvious examples are that Kapur is not a reliable source and nor is James Tod. I suggest that any reinstatement should be preceded by a discussion on, say, a paragraph-by-paragraph basis. There is far too much puffery in Indian caste articles and we have been tightening up on this for some time now. - Sitush (talk) 14:55, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with sitush.Please have a paragraph basis discussion,so that a consensus is reached.Otherwise this restoring content/deleting content would go on,that's been happening for a long time on this article.--Sandy (talk) 15:07, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

What is the need of tagging..when we can improve the article without tagging..it is looking odd and very bad after tagging. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldestkshatriyas (talk • contribs) 15:01, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Tagging highlights issues and causes the article to appear on various maintenance lists, which can sometimes attract new contributors who are willing to assist in improving it. Further, it alerts the reader to that fact that the article is in poor shape. The tags do not make an article bad: the article is bad in the first instance, due to its content etc. - Sitush (talk) 14:30, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

The sources mentioned in the reference list at serial No. 8 and 9 need to be verified. I searched all the snippets but found no match for the referred contents of the article. Thanx.--Mahensingha 14:11, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Recent restoration of content

I have just reverted what looks to be a big restoration of prior content that said in its edit summary that old Hindu texts are "valid", presumably as sources. Can we please discuss this issue. - Sitush (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

dear Sitush...Am just trying to Restore the imporatant historical events in sequence..Please dont revert again and again peoples edits..further cleanup doesnt mean..that you blank the article in half 14:51, 15 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldestkshatriyas (talk • contribs)

But all of the content that you have added is invalid for one reason or another. This is why it was removed in the past. For example, James Tod is not a reliable source, nor are the Puranas and similar ancient texts. I would urge you to self-revert and continue discussing if you disagree with this. Perhaps go through it here section by section? - Sitush (talk) 18:02, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

If you click here then you will see short summaries for most of the removals and can step through them. - Sitush (talk) 18:36, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, cleanup does mean that you can "blank the article in half". If an editor cannot provide a reliable source for a claim that they wish to include, the information may be challenged and removed at any time, by any editor. JanetteDoe (talk) 21:13, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Stop User:Sitush

User:Sitush has some serious issues particularly with Meenas wiki page. This article has been evolved, corrected and referenced over last 7 years and User:Sitush has not provided any evidence to counter any of the facts presented in this article. Simple deleting some text does not make article valid or correct. Put some efforts and ready history books, gazette letter found on Google book related to Meenas past and history. All I can see from Sitush is biased and unfair text removal from this article. Someone need to stop user Sitush, and I also see his own page is full of complains. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.185.136 (talk) 00:34, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

The problems are manifold but to address your immediate point, in many cases the so-called "facts" are not supported by reliable sources. You cannot just stick any old source on the end of a statement and then say that "it is a fact". If we did that then, for example, the views of David Irving on Adolf Hitler and The Holocaust would have a prominence here that is not accepted in the general academic community. Similarly, as an example in this article, you have just reinstated some content that is sourced to James Tod and to websites that were once hosted on tripod.com - no can do: they are not reliable. - Sitush (talk) 00:51, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I left your revert for > 24 hours & did some checking of my previous removals. I stand by them and it is clear that this article needs a lot of work even in its pruned state. I will try to do some of that work over the next few weeks but, as always, constructive contributions by anyone are welcomed. I would urge people to be aware of our policies etc for [[WP:RS|reliable sources[[, verifiability, [[WP:NPOV|neutrality, and balance. There are plenty of other issues, but those will do for starters. If needs must, the article will be stripped right back and rewritten. - Sitush (talk) 11:05, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

It is now confirmed that sitush is intentionally behind Meenas article..he is continuously hiding the well known Truth and distorting the article since 1 month. if varna is complex ha..then why did he failed in rajput article to hide varna???? because other editors there are not allowing him to edit there. We are here to represent the correct facts and truth and not the half hided distorted history. the article was best in december last year but he is continuously behind this article I dnt know what his actual interest in distorting this article.Oldestkshatriyas (talk) 11:37, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Oldestkshatriyas, you are now blocked for 48 hours for that personal attack. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:48, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

IT is 'SAD' to see that true people like oldestkshatriyas who were always supported truth and ground reality are harrassed and treated like this. User: Boing! said Zebedee has blocked a truth lover,shows that he is misusing his administrative powers. Have to Report highest Authority if need,about User:Boing! said Zebedee for misusing his powers against Indian editors here.(A prejudiced mindset).; Instead of bolcking Sitush for meenas,he has blocked an editor who has done much for this article. oldestkshatriyas was right in inserting the historian Col James Tod books "Annals and Antiquities of Rajast'han , the Central and Western Rajpoot States of India, 2 vols. London, Smith, Elder (1829, 1832); New Delhi, Munshiram Publishers, (2001), pp. 83-4. ISBN 8170691281". but sitush removed it unnecessarily. Sitush is thinking that he is the only authenticated user here to edit this article. He is just distorting and hiding the well known facts,without any knowledge of ancient Meena kshatriya community,leading the article to deterioration.

A true edit by Sitush in rajput article dated.....Revision as of 18:23, 17 January 2012 (edit) (undo) Sitush (talk | contribs) (give the whole story, please - [2] was being grossly misrepresented)

A Rajput (Hindi: राजपूत, from Sanskrit raja-putra, “son of a king”) is a member of one of the patrilineal clans of western, central, northern India and in some parts of Pakistan. They claim to be descendants of ruling warrior classes of North India, although this has to be tempered with knowledge that they have been considered to be the illegitimate children borne of relationships between the ruling rajas and their female slaves. They rose to prominence during the 6th to 12th centuries, and until the 20th century Rajputs ruled in the "overwhelming majority" of the princely states of Punjab, Kashmir, Rajasthan and Surashtra, where the largest number of princely states were found.............Was reverted within 48 hours because the editors there did not allow Sitush to add a truth.

As far as Meenas is concerned, he is considering himself as if he is the only editor and other People or editors are ZERO. User:Sitush has some serious issues particularly with Meenas wiki page. This article has been evolved, corrected and referenced over last 7 years and User:Sitush has not provided any evidence to counter any of the facts presented in this article. Simple deleting some text does not make article valid or correct.This attitude of sitush and his supporter is fully biased and disastrous for true history itself. It will be better if we restore the article as it was on 1January2012 without any considerable amount of citations. Regards to wiki.Omkara1188 (talk) 16:19, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

My block of Oldestkshatriyas was nothing to do with article content, but was because of the personal attacks made on another editor, above. And you, Omkara1188, are making personal attacks too in your accusations of bias by the same editor - if you repeat it, you will also find yourself unable to edit. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:45, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

The user Boing! said Zebedee is continuously distorting this Meena article with the help of some other user Sitush. By going through the previous versions of this article we found that last year version was most appropriate. These users must be bloked from editing this article.59.161.8.177 (talk) 06:05, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

A lot of this article is not sourced, and it needs to be - never mind you (whoever "we" is) telling us you have determined it is correct. You have been repeatedly removing the maintenance templates that identify that fact, without fixing the problem by providing sources. Reverting your removal of those tags (together with blocking you to counter your ongoing disruption) is all I have done - I have not made any content changes to the article. If you carry on the way you are going, you will simply keep being reverted and blocked. If you believe I am acting unjustly in my admin actions, the place to complain is at WP:ANI (once your current block expires) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:16, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Mr Sitush can u please tell us why you are not allowing the great historian James Tod for this article? He was unusually fond of rajputs ,not Meenas. hence we can add his books as ref..please reinsert this ref again,and be a part of truth/true historyOldestkshatriyas (talk) 14:59, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Because he is not reliable for anything relating to ethnographic matters, although just possibly he is ok for numismatic stuff. He was writing around 180 years ago, had no formal training, knew no Indian languages, accepted the (translated) word of whomever he listened to, had a clear agenda based on notions of Romantic Imperialism, and so on. The list is long but you might find a read of James Tod to be useful. - Sitush (talk) 17:24, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

TO ADMINISTRATORS PLEASE: It is now confirmed that sitush is intentionally behind Meenas article..he is continuously hiding the well known Truth and distorting the article since Beginning. In his eyes..Any reference is not valid which shows the Truth. Like Tod he is fond of rajputs and Now he had inserted Negative points for the most loyal community of India/Meenas... by indirectly calling them bandits or criminals. He messed the article. THE ARTICLE WAS BEST AND COMPLETELY TRUE AS ON 01/01/2012. IN WIKI as a contributor our mission is to present the real truth and real history of a community or race. Am asking the administrators..what is the need of this great n huge wikipedia...when it fails to show the TRUTH. sometimes reality has no references/having lack of references/as for this community. Still this original royal community has some authentic history in the form of James Tod Books like Annals and Antiquities of Rajast'han or the Central and Western Rajpoot States of India, 2 vols. London, Smith, Elder (1829, 1832); New Delhi, Munshiram Publishers, (2001), pp. 83-4. ISBN 8170691281. Same thing is written in Cultural heritage of Rajasthan, Manohara Prabhākara, Panchsheel Prakashan, 1972 - 138 pages. ; Chandarao, Ramnath. History of Chandavanshi Meenas. Then why he is continuously deleting reference of James books. Am asking the administrators..what is the need of this great n huge wikipedia...when it fails to show the TRUTH..and depicts a royal community as criminals..just because they lost wars by betrayal and became poor/fortuneless/underprivileged since centuries after kachwaha rajputs and akbar,hence came in criminal tribe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldestkshatriyas (talk • contribs) 14:59, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

To administartors..Mr Sitush is intentionally and deliberately behind Meenas article and there is no other sign of his any other article contribution except detiorating it since 1.5 years. how many books he wants..here is the list... Rizvi, S. H. M. (1987). Mina, The Ruling Tribe of Rajast.han (Socio-biological Appraisal). Delhi: B.R. Pub. Corp.

The Rigveda: A Historical Analysis, Aditya Prakashan, New Delhi 2000

Kanakasabhai, V. (1989). The Tamils Eighteen Hundred Years Ago. Asian Educational Services. ISBN 8120601505.

Rajasthan aajtak ISBN81-903622-6-7.

Somebody has to stop him and he should blocked him to edit Minas article anymore..this is the more than enough of his dominance unnecessarily. we will report to higher authorities if he continues to do so. All I can see from Sitush is biased and unfair text removal from this article. Someone need to stop user Sitush, and I also see his own page is full of complains. this user repeatedly removed James Tod books sources..and KEEPING READERS DEPRIVE OF REAL MEDIVAL HISTORY: The Meena King Raja Ralun Singh also known as Alan Singh Chanda of Khogong[44][72] kind-heartedly adopted a stranded Rajput mother and her child who sought refuge in his realm. Later, the Meena king sent the child, Dhola Rae, to Delhi to represent the Meena kingdom. The Rajput, in gratitude for these favours, returned with Rajput conspirers and massacred the weaponless Meenas on Diwali while performings rituals i.e. Pitra Trapan, it is customery in the Meenas to be weaponless at the time of PitraTrapan, "filling the reservoirs in which the Meenas bathed with their dead bodies" [Tod.II.281] and thus conquered Khogong.This act of Kachwaha Rajputs was termed as most coward and shameful in history of Rajasthan.

SOURCE:Annals and Atiquities of Rajasthan. Calcutta: Rupa. ISBN 81-7167-366-X.

99% contributors here are not happy with user sitush. Stop user sitush for this article and protect meenas article from him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omkara1188 (talk • contribs) 06:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Detailed discussion of Oldestkshatriya's contributions

Let's do this one paragraph at a time, based on the article as it was at the end of the contributions from Oldestkshatriyas - here.

Lead section

Opening para

This says

Meenas, Meena, Meenoāt or Mina are an ancient caste and community mainly found in Rajasthan (the land of kings), India. The name Mina is derived from Meen,meaning 'fish' in Sanskrit, and the Minas claim descent from the Matsya Avatar, or fish incarnation, of Vishnu.

• There is an obvious problem, or at least it is obvious to anyone who has read WP:LEAD, WP:CITE and WP:CITEKILL. A good article needs no citations in its lead section, and when citations are used anywhere we should limit our usage as best we can.
• A further issue is the reinstatement of overlinking - please read WP:OVERLINK, which clearly states that the names of countries should not usually be linked.
• There is a minor phrasing issue, since a caste is a communal grouping, which makes "and community" redundant.
• The etymology of Rajasthan is irrelevant to this article, and sourcing it to a travel guide is simply wrong anywhere.
• More comments to come, just on this single short paragraph. - Sitush (talk) 15:05, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
• The isbn for Rizvi does not work & is probably wrong.
• There is no page number for Mann
• There is no page number for Singh, nor does it state the full title or which of the 41 volumes of People of India is being referred to
• There is no page number for Kanakasabhai (sic) ... and the author's name is wrong
• No page number for Mukerji, and simply looking at the title makes me really doubt that it is a reliable source - Sitush (talk) 15:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
• Journal of the Asiatic Society - a link would be handy (I'll look on archive.org later)
• Sharma - this is only available in snippet view. Can anyone see the full version?
• Kapur is an abstract of a seminar paper - simply not acceptable
• Supreme Rajasthan - citation is far from complete
• Rajasthan aajtak - ditto, but we probably will not need it anyway. This is en-Wikipedia and we should avoid non-English sources where it is feasible to do so
• The dharmashektra website is not a reliable source
• Krishna Leela theme in Rajasthani miniatures citation is incomplete but looks likely to be a book concerning art, so will not be a great source to support the statement
• The paragraph introduces an inconsistency in spelling. We should use the spelling as per the article title. If it is the case that the article title does not comply with WP:COMMONNAME then we should have a discussion about changing that title before we use one of the alternate spellings. - Sitush (talk) 15:22, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposal: remove all citations from this opening paragraph. The etymology of Rajasthan is tangential and the second sentence is already sourced in the opening of the Meenas#Meenas.2C_Scythians_and_pure_Bharmans section. The problem then is that the sources used there are repeats of some of the ones that I have queried above, so we still need to sort out that particular issue. Can anyone propose a maximum of two, fully cited, reliable and preferably modern sources - either from those used above or elsewhere? - Sitush (talk) 15:32, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

NB: doing as I propose is effectively the same as leaving the article as it stands right now. - Sitush (talk) 16:06, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

2nd para

The second paragraph has for a long time read

Meenas celebrate Meenesh Jayanti in the name of Vishnu on 3 Tithi of Chaitra Shukal paksha according to the Hindu calendar. The main reference of this belief is based on the scripture of the Matsya Purana.

• It is complete gobbledegook to people unfamiliar with Hindu worship and the Hindu calendar.
• It uses the unacceptable Kapur source, per notes in the Opening para section above
• How significant is this anyway? Assuming that someone can come up with better phrasing, does it still have a place in the lead section? Leads are intended to summarise an article (& ours at present does not), but that does not mean that we include minutiae there. Is this minutiae? - Sitush (talk) 16:13, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

3rd para

The third paragraph as written by Oldestkshatriyas says

Originally Meenas were a ruling caste, and were ruler of Matsya,i.e., Rajasthan or Matsya Union but their slow downfall began with the assimilation with Scythian and was completed when the British government declared them a "Criminal Tribe". This very action was taken to support their alliance with Rajput kingdom then in Rajasthan, and Meenas were still in war with Rajputs, carrying out guerrilla attacks to retain their lost kingdoms.

• Even in the present, post-Oldestkshatriya version, the paragraph is far from perfect. I could fix the basic grammatical stuff, link to Criminal Tribes etc right now but will wait until others have commented on the wisdom of reverting to O's version
• The above quote includes an unnecessary citation, as per WP:LEAD. The source is not available to me for inspection: if it is ok then perhaps it could be included in the Meenas#Meenas.2C_Scythians_and_pure_Bharmans section, which is where a rather poor depiction of the Matsya period appears. However, the title of the source makes me a little doubtful and I would prefer to see more of it.
• The Matsya Kingdom appears not to have covered Rajasthan but rather an area of Rajasthan, around what is now Jaipur.
• Mentioning the Matsya Union seems really weird. The thing did not exist until post-WWII and I am not sure that it corresponds exactly to the ancient kingdom. In any event, we have an article on the ancient kingdom and so that will suffice.
• "This very action" - "very" is redundant.
• Why are we redlinking "lost kingdoms"? - Sitush (talk) 16:27, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Reflist for discussion

meena community in rajasthan

meena origin in delhi cantt now IIt delhi area,,,,............... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.149.52.44 (talk) 07:39, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Protected

IP editors have been repeatedly removing sourced content from this article without discussion, with the latest one using the edit summary to make personal attacks. I have therefore temporarily protected the article to prevent anonymous editing. If you wish to make an edit to the article and do not have a confirmed account, please make a request here - but be sure to provide a policy-based justification, and do not make any personal attacks. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:38, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Repeated removals

This content has been repeatedly removed even though it is reliably sourced and is consistent with modern academic opinions regarding the oral history of caste etc in general. Per our policy regarding neutrality, we cannot do this. We show all reliable opinions (provided that they are ok per WP:FRINGE) and generally we prefer modern reliable opinions to those written during the Raj period etc.

I am reinstating the thing, which has been there since at least when this article was last protected in May, and if someone doesn't like it then they'll have to come up with a better reason than that other sources disagree. For example, you might wish to argue that this is indeed too fringe-y a source or is in fact unreliable - just bear in mind that I've almost never been wrong when I have made assessments on such issues in the past, so the odds are pretty high that I'm not wrong now: I'd suggest that those links are read before an argument for removal is made.

Please also note that this article is subject to sanctions as per the notice at the head of this page: we don't tolerate caste POV warriors here. - Sitush (talk) 22:35, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Re: Sitush:

Expermely hippocratic argument and you are right about your self "we don't tolerate caste POV warriors here". I have seen more of your edits are dehumanising, derogatory towards certain communities. Also, you are just self proclaimed ignorant. Good Luck.

I have just found the necessary citation for the Britannica quotation. I'm not a great fan of using the Britannica but it certainly does say what the quote says. The article is a mess and has been for a long time: one day, I'll summon up the effort for a complete overhaul. - Sitush (talk) 11:56, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

britannica is just like wiki..if you want to reinsert this false statement(CITE BOOKS OR PROPER SOURCES) and IF U want to misguide readers then its your fault............04:37, 10 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldestkshatriyas (talk • contribs)

Britannica articles that have "EBChecked" in the url are generally considered to be ok. Yes, it is a tertiary source and I am personally not fond of such things but the wider community thinks otherwise. I've done a bit of expanding here using "proper" academic sources from time to time but it is quite a difficult subject to research because of the prevalence of the name in varying contexts. I've not given up on it and if the Britannica says what it does then there should be academic sources out there which support it - the issue is one of time and, to a lesser extent, inclination.

If you'd like to dump a list of reliable sources for review here then please feel free. That might concentrate our minds & give this article the push that it needs. But please note that writers such as James Tod are not reliable. - Sitush (talk) 09:28, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

kindly remove this statement for an entire community.. as this is dispted among contributors and false too.

"the Minas are possibly of inner Asiatic origin, and tradition suggests that they migrated to India in the 7th century

please remove this for the timebeing,request to adminOmkara1188 (talk) 14:57, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Rig Veda: A Historical Analysis

Rig Veda: A Historical Analysis has been tagged for a page number for ages. I've just found a full copy online here and have searched for "meena", "mina", "matsya" and "meenanda". The first & last of these do not appear at all, the third appears three times but never in a context that is relevant (pp. 21, 165, 186). The second - "mina" - appears a lot because the author frequently uses words such as "examination" and "determination"; however, as a free-standing word it appears only on p. 186 when he is discussing linguistic shifts between Sanskrit and Dravidian styles.

For this reason, I am removing "The Rig Veda includes the Meenas among the pure Kshatriya tribes of ancient India" from the article. As is, alas, common when it comes to claims of kshatriya status, the statement relies on a fake reference. - Sitush (talk) 09:58, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Removal of the varna status from the main page.

Meenas belong to Kshatriya varna because of its categorization under ST category, many people may doubt the above claim. It’s very much evident that Meenas of Rajasthan were mistakenly put in ST category many news articles in Economic times, Times of India etc have been published on it, recently(2014) Rajasthan high court has also accepted this fact moreover its very much known to the people of Rajasthan. Therefore a correlation with the present categorization and the later varna system should not be made. It becomes imperative that the information seeker should be clearly made aware of the social status (which is very much likely that he/she may be looking for) of the caste by clearly depicting its varna ie Kshatriya in the box. The facts supporting the claim are numerous but ill not adhere myself without mentioning few.

1. In the time frame of ancient history meenas ruled the matsya kingdom at this time varna system was at its peak.

       Hence meenas hold there position rightfully in Kshatriya varna.

2. Rig veda has mentioned meenas among the purest ksathriya tribe 3. Amer which later acted as the base for the foundation of Jaipur was founded by a meena king. 4. Only Meenas and Rajputs have jaaga’s who hereditarily keeps the genealogical records — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.22.35.30 (talk) 20:42, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

It is true that Meena belongs to Kshatriyas Varna as it is mention in Vedic period the matsya tribe kingdom is divided into janapadhas which are named after their Kshatriyas Jana.To prove this fact I am providing this citation --.. I hope now it is clear to the editors that meenas belongs to Kshatriya Varna Jalodiya (talk) 03:48, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Vasudeva Sharana Agrawala — India; India in the Time of Patañjali, 1968, p 68, Dr B. N. Puri — India; Socio-economic and Political History of Eastern India, 1977, p 9, Y. K Mishra — Bihar (India); Tribes of Ancient India, 1977, p 18, Mamata Choudhury — Ethnology; Tribal Coins of Ancient India, 2007, p xxiv, Devendra Handa — Coins, Indic - 2007; The Journal of the Numismatic Society of India, 1972, p 221, Numismatic Society of India — Numismatics . Jalodiya (talk) 03:50, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 22 October 2014

"A Meena dynasty ruled Rajasthan in ancient times and their emblem was a fish, similar to that used by the Pandyan kingdom of the south.[8][page needed][9] It lay to south of the kingdom of Kurus and west of the Yamuna which separated it from the kingdom of Panchalas. It roughly corresponded to former state of Jaipur in Rajasthan, and included the whole of Alwar with portions of Bharatpur.[10]

The Meena Kingdom was known as “Matsya” as each of these Janapadas was named after the Kshatriya tribe (or the Kshatriya Jana) who had settled therein.[11] Around 300 BC, the Meena kingdom succumbed to the rising Mauryan empire.".Please remove the text as according to wikipedias own articles on janpadas amd mahajanpadas there was no Meena dynasty nor are there any historical refrences to it.Also matsya kingdom was ruled by king Virat as is mentioned in the Mahabharat Mfdown07 (talk) 08:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Wikipedia cannot be a source for itself. There are three sources for those sentences as it stands now. Stickee (talk) 01:44, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2015

The correct information about meenas is given in 'meenasamaj.com/modules.php?...5 and also in S.H.M Rizvi book about "Mina the ruling tribe of Rajasthan".Some of your user tried to manipulate the history of meena. Jalodiya (talk) 05:37, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

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. You may re-open this request by changing |answered=yes to |answered=no. NiciVampireHeart 16:34, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

there is lack of history content in this webpage

It did not mention about dhundhar region which was once ruled by meenas.It did not clearly distinguish between ,chaukidar,parihar and zamindar meenas. I think some of your user are trying to manipulate the information regarding meenas .Meenas are ST of Rajasthan but they actually belongs to Kshatriyas Varna like yaduvanshi/jaduvanshi's and Rajput are the admixtures of jat,gurjar,yadav and ahirs . Jalodiya (talk) 14:52, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

dhundhar is the subject matter covered in a separate article. Mythologically, I too heard that Meena as Matsyavansh were close allies to Old Yadavas or Abhira(Ahirs), but to project it on wikipedia we need the sources to support the fact. If you have knowledge of any such reliable source of information then you are most welcome here to let all know about it. Here, no one is against projecting the sourced information, but, if not then we are unnecessarily expanding the Talk page here-- Mahensingha _{(Talk) "Thanx n Regards"} 17:43, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

It should be fully protected page

As I have seen that many of Wikipedia user are trying to change the information regarding Meenas because they are jealous of meena,as we all know that meena belong to Kshatriyas Varna but they are also the scheduled tribe of Rajasthan and this is the reason behind suppressing the fact that they belongs to upper caste and they should be discriminate on the basis of that they are scheduled tribe of Rajasthan.I think all the information regarding to this page is sufficient.so I hope that you please put this page on full protection so that nobody can vandalises it. Jalodiya (talk) 19:12, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Parihar Meenas

The Article itself points to the main caste article Meena. Since it has no much contents and referential support of sources to stand as a separate article. Hence it may be merged with its main article Meena. MahenSingha (Talk) 19:37, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

• Agree. This is a one-line stub and it isn't going to get any better. - Sitush (talk) 19:34, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Meenas belongs to Kshatriyas varna

After through research I have come to know that Meena belongs to Kshatriya Varna.In Vedic period the matsya kingdom was divided into janapadas and these janapadas was named after there Kshatriya tribe (or Kshatriya Jana) which means that rulers of Meena community belongs to Kshatriya Varna. User:satyashodak was asking that if they belongs to Kshatriya Varna then why there is no intercaste marriage between rajputs tribe and meenas,For your kind information -The marriages between Mina(meena) and rajputs resulted into the formation of 'rawat mina(meena) who are generally found in ajmer(merwara).You can seek information about 'rawat meenas' in the book 'MINA :THE RULING TRIBE OF RAJASTHAN' which is written by MR. Syed Hasan Mujtaba Rizvi ( page no: 31) and there one more book which tells about rawat meenas, It is written by Lakshmi Narayan meena and the name of book is 'Meena janjaati ek parichay'. I also request admin to remove the text which state meenas belongs to scheduled tribe as many of the communities or caste in India comes into general category,St,obc,and sc depending upon their conition and location.For example-In some part of 'uttarakhand' the rajputs are classified as ST and gurjars(or gujjars )are also classified as scheduled tribe in some part of Jammu and Kashmir, and I Uttarakhand.but actually in rest of the parts of country the rajputs belong to 'general ' category whereas in most of the states of India gurjars belongs to 'other backward classes'(OBC).So I request admin to remove that text which state that Meenas belongs to 'Scheduled tribe' as this is a political matter and we have no right to categorized any community of India to any of the following categories like scheduled caste,scheduled tribes,other backward classes and general.It's totally upto the government of India to categorized the community or caste on the basis of their economical status or their family status . In Uttar Pradesh and in Gujarat the people of Meena or mina community belongs to 'general category '.I hope the facts provided by me are sufficient to prove that meenas belongs to Kshatriya Varna and there is no need to mention the category of meenas as it differ from state to state of India.Jalodiya (talk) 04:40, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Why at all you are interested in asserting that they are Kshatriya, this was never accepted by Hindu society and even at present Meena are classified as a tribe following Hinduism and It is not a Hindu caste. I suggest keep the page contents away from such controversial contents. Also the sources mentioned by you is a WP:Circular reference of another article of wikipedia. Please find a secondary better relaiable source even if you still think to add the contents but do not remove pre-existing sourced contents. Thanks--MahenSingha (Talk) 14:05, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

For your kind information they descendant from the matsya tribe which belongs to Kshatriyas as mentioned in rig Vedas .whereas in India a community or caste which is not under any of the following category like other backwards classes and scheduled tribe etc,comes under general category , and there is no special list for general category so If a meena person belongs to Uttar Pradesh or Tamil Nadu he is not under scheduled tribe category.i hope now you have got your answers ,so please do not distract our reader from reading true facts about Meenas.At Last I would like to say that admin should take serious action against "Mahensingha" who is always reverting the text of Meenas page to prove that they do not belongs to Kshatriya Varna and they only belongs to scheduled tribe which not a true fact Jalodiya (talk) 12:21, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I am very disappointed with the user mahensingha who is saying that Meena is not a Hindu caste.i would request mahensingha to provide facts that state that "Meenas" does not belongs to Hindu. Many of historian hqve state that they were the original builder of "amer" town and "jaigarh fort".Meena and rajputs are the only caste whose records are written by 'Jagas' in rajasthan. Jalodiya (talk) 12:44, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

http:http://www.viratnagar.in/about.html The link which is send by me ,is provided to prove that they were the original ruler of amer town and jaigarh fort. I would also request the admin to stop user:mahensingha to stop vandalizing the meena page by removing true content of the page Jalodiya (talk) 12:50, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

To prove that Meena original belongs to Hindu religion,I would like to tell you that they descendants from matsya tribe which belongs to Hindu religion and the great virata king is also a kinsmen and brother of meenas.The king virata also ruled viratnagar which is the capital of matsya kingdom Jalodiya (talk) 12:54, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I think you have some enmity with the Meena community or caste that's why u always interfere in any change made to this page Jalodiya (talk) 12:57, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

To prove that you have some enmity from meenas , I would like to tell the admin that he always tries to enlight the bad facts about meenas which are bogus and wrong. For example-mahensingha told us that meenas does not belongs to any Hindu caste.

Jalodiya (talk) 13:01, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Let me first clarify that I said Meena is not a Hindu caste but a Hindu tribal community. Please read with good sense again. I think now you can understand that no one denies that they are Hindu but they are classified as a tribe not as a caste. This is what I said. I undid the unsourced additions and removal of sourced contents which you specifically did for no reason. further please note that http://www.viratnagar.in/about.html is not a valid reliable source and can not be accepted. You can make yourself familier in this regard by referring WP:RS, as I suggested you earlier also. I am active almost on all the caste related article and hence it is unfair to say that I hold any ill feeling or something like that for any community. In future please avoid Personal attack. Meenas are no where listed in General caste category ( In U.P., they are ST) and If you know then provide the valid source of Information and edit. I have no objection if you give reliable sources for any of the information added. Thanks.--MahenSingha (Talk) 14:05, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Meenas were earlier considers as St in Uttar Pradesh but since 2010 they comes in general category and they have been expelled for scheduled tribe category.please check the list of ST CATEGORY OF UTTAR PRADESH Jalodiya (talk) 15:20, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

And let me remind you that Varna are divide on the basis of the work done by the people of that community ,caste and race.it is also mentioned in the Vedas that Varna are associated with work not on the basis of caste.According to the rig Veda matsya tribe were the ruler of matsya kingdom,which means that they belongs to Kshatriya .As the main purpose of Kshatriya is to rule and fight for his kingdom. The link which has been provide by me can withstand to the Wikipedia standards.This site is not created by some individuals rather it is created by historian of Rajasthan who have verified these content on the basis of textbook ,historical documents,and by visting that place. I hope now you must have got your answers

I have also review your earlier discussion on this topic and I have come to know that mahensingha ,sitush and satyashodak are prevailing there hatred against this community.It is not a good practice and I would also like to mention that in reservation certificate of scheduled tribe of India there is a column of caste in which the regional officers fill meena as a caste.so stop these nonsense that Meena is no caste. Jalodiya (talk) 15:37, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

http://www.viratnagar.in/pages/directory.html this link can be find from the same site which gives the phone number of officers of Viratanagar. And they can tell you the truth about the page and of viratnagar history Jalodiya (talk) 15:42, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

To prove that meenas were the ruler and rulers were considered as Kshatriya as mentioned in rig Veda .I am providing you a link which tells you that meenas were the ruler of "amer town" and "jaigarh fort". http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsFarEast/IndiaRajputanaAmer.htm. Jalodiya (talk) 15:58, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

If still you do not agree with my argument then please provide us some facts or documents of rig Veda which state that Varna are associated on the basis of caste not on the work of a person Jalodiya (talk) 16:05, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I request admin to review this link which given below that tells us that meenas does not belongs to "SCHEDULED TRIBE" of Uttar Pradesh:-http://tribal.nic.in/WriteReadData/CMS/Documents/201212010356439267578File1068.pdf Jalodiya (talk) 16:20, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Here is one more link which state that mina or Meena is a caste and tribal group Url=http://www.britannica.com/topic/Mina-South-Asian-people Jalodiya (talk) 16:38, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I hope now mahensingha you can admit that Meena (Mina) is a caste also. Jalodiya (talk) 16:40, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I will certainly appreciate if you give all the links togather where they are classified as General caste. And give reference that which branch of Vedic Kshatriya they are- Solar, Lunar or Fire race. I have no objection if you add the valid information with sources and please do not remove pre existing sourced information. Also it is better if you mention the reason that why have you removed the sourced contents. On what basis that was inappropriate or unwanted. Thanks--MahenSingha (Talk) 16:56, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Mahensingha as you written that meenas are not in the list of general category of Uttar Pradesh,I would request you to send the link of general category list of Uttar Pradesh.As far as I know there is no such kind of list as those caste which do not comes under any other category ,then that caste or community ultimately falls under gaeneral category . I request mahensingha to stop vandalizing that meenas are no caste and they do not belongs to Kshatriya Varna.And please provide us document or link which tells us that there is no caste named after meenas Jalodiya (talk) 16:53, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

If there is no list or other secondary sources to prove them to be General caste then its better that we must no include this in the article as I already said that the controversial contents be avoided. As per wikipedia policy we can not add anything which is not supported by the valid sources. Please refer WP:OR. See Its not me who wanted to add something new, here it is you who has to provide the sources for what you need to add. I just objected the way you removed the sourced information and added unsourced one. So it is better you state the reason that why did you remove the sourced contents and secondly, what so ever you wanted to add, you are most welcome to please come up with the valid sources, oh yes, definitely not the promotional or tourism promotional sites. Thanks. Happy editing in Wikipedia way.--MahenSingha (Talk) 17:43, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

But you were the only who is telling that meenas come in St category in up and you also stated that Meena is not a caste. It is well known that Meena is a caste and a tribe.and for that I have already given numerous of web link. Jalodiya (talk) 17:55, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Certainly they are locally considered a tribe both in UP and MP, then only Govts. of the states have requested their inclusion in central list of Central Govt. Please update yourself with the issue.

I have add this discussion to talk about that meenas belongs to Kshatriya Varna and I want to know that how can you say that they do not belong to Kshatriya.It is already mention in rig Veda that Varna are associated on the basis of work of a person not on the basis of caste.we all know that Meena were the ruler of matsya kingdom and they are also kinsmen of king virata (king of viratnagar the capital of matsya kindom).In the epic Mahabharata there is lot of information about king Virat and and matsya kingdom. As king Virat belongs to Kshatriya Varna and meenas are the kinsmen and brothers of king Virat,so it prove that Meena belongs to Kshatriya Varna as well as they were the ruler of matsya kingdom. Jalodiya (talk) 18:06, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Here is an another link of a book which state that minas(meenas) are a high caste Hindu and they also belongs to Kshatriya Varna.it is also mention that the meenas kingdom is also known as matsya kingdom Url=https://books.google.co.in/books?id=fOQkpcVcd9AC&pg=PT253&dq=matsya+kingdom+history+and+meenas&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBgQ6AEwAmoVChMIu-GQ24KJyQIVwi6mCh3QqwF0#v=onepage&q=matsya%20kingdom%20history%20and%20meenas&f=false

I hope now admin and Elonka can review this page and add the content of this page to meenas history.I also request mahensingha not to spam this page by stating that this is some kind of advertising site. Jalodiya (talk) 18:57, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, certainly but at the same time also consider the line in the source that they claim their origin to Matsya Kingdom but scholars disagree to their claim. The source is also confused with Meena and Minhas. Minhas is a separate article and here we must concentrate on Meena article. So it is better, if you give few more sources and that will certainly strengthen your claim. There are a lot of books depicting Indian communities. So please find the better sources which are clear and not confusing.--MahenSingha (Talk) 08:02, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Do not try to distracted our editor by saying that the link provided by me create confusion regarding meenas and minhas.In the given link it is clearly mention that both are different communities and there are two different article written on the book about meena and minhas. Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Jalodiya (talk) 03:45, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

11:49, 13 November 2015 (UTC)now after such a long discussion we can say that meenas are high caste Hindu and as they belongs to matsya tribe who are Kshatriya tribe , ao we can also say that Meena belongs to Kshatriya Varna. Thanks Jalodiya (talk) 11:49, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

12:00, 13 November 2015 (UTC)Partihar meenas or parihar meenas descended from agnivanshi lineage of Kshatriya Varna, hence it proves that Meena belongs to agnivanshi lineages of Kshatriya Varna. Thanks Mahensingha to discuss such topic with me. Jalodiya (talk) 12:00, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

13:31, 13 November 2015 (UTC)a third opinion is required to solve this dispute. Jalodiya (talk) 13:31, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Edit by ajayjo

Jalodiya has mentioned that a Mahajanapada by name Matsya is mentioned in the Mahabharata. This is indeed correct. He has also mentioned that certain parts of Rajasthan were ruled by Meenas before they were overthrown by Rajputs. This may also be correct. But how does he connect the Matsya kingdom with the Meenas of the 10th century? What is the evidence historical or even scriptural behind this connection ? The only thing I can infer ( Jalodiya has not specifically mentioned it) is the word Meen which means fish in Sanskrit. So Jalodiya's logic is Matsya (fish in Sanskrit) = Meen and hence connected with Meena. The problem here is that Meen is originally a Tamil word. It was not a part of Sanskrit when the Mahabharat was composed. Jalodiya has not cited any other reference to connect the Matsya with the Meena. In my opinion to connect the Matsya with the Meena by the use of just one word, and that too when the word is of Tamil origin, seems to be rather weak logic. Therefore while the Meena may indeed have been rulers, to claim a Kshatriya status on the basis of just this one word (Meen) used out of context, seems incorrect. (Note : I have met a few people from the Meena community. They have no need to claim a Kshatriya connection, as they are smart and brave people on their own.)

Another minor point. Jalodiya had a discussion about one Nadnini Kapur. He said she is NOT a historian. Now Historian is not a Degree awarded by a university, nor a position in an organisation. So how exactly does one get to be called a Historian ? On the same issue someone pointed out that she was a Lecturer of History, Reader of History in IGNOU. To this Jalodiya's response was, that she is reading history (like a student would read a history book) , therefore she cannot be a Historian. I would like to point out that the word Reader of History, in this case refers to a position in the university.. (eg Asst Prof, Reader, Professor). So she is definitely not reading a history book like a student.

Finally, in India tribals are tribals. There are no Hindu tribals and there are no Muslim tribals. This point is not understood by most people in India. They automatically assume that tribals are Hindu. If indeed they were Hindu, the Indian constitution would not have created a separate schedule for them.

The main differences between Hindus and tribals are

1. Tribals do not believe in rebirth 2. For tribals fire is not a sacred element as it is in Hinduism 3. Tribals do not worship mainstream Hindu gods such as Vishnu, Hanuman, Lakshmi, Krishna.

The irony of the situation is that some tribes wish to enjoy the benefits of reservation policy but they simultaneously claim a higher caste status. I don't know if Jalodiya is aware that remarks such as claiming Kshatriya status (even on Wikipedia) can lead to the community being removed from the Scheduled Tribes list and put in the general category.

Ajayjo (talk) 19:54, 3 February 2018 (UTC)--Ajayjo (talk) 19:54, 3 February 2018 (UTC) ajayjo

Inclusion of rig veda:a historical analysis

Resurrection of "rig Veda :a historical analysis " is indeed very necessary to know about the past of Meenas.Meenas of Rajasthan are considered the brothers and kinsmen of Virata, the ruler of Virat Nagar. They ruled this area (near to Virat Nagar) until the 11th century..Matsya or Machcha (Sanskrit for fish), classically called the Mese, was the name of a tribe and the state of the Vedic civilization of India. It lay to south of the kingdom of Kurus and west of the Yamuna which separated it from the kingdom of Panchalas. It roughly corresponded to former state of Jaipur in Rajasthan, and included the whole of Alwar with portions of Bharatpur. Fishing was the main occupation of the people who lived near river Saraswati. After the river dried up, they migrated to river Charmanwati now known as "Chambal" meaning "fish" in Dravidian languages. And from there, they further moved down to South India.

The capital of Matsya was at Viratanagara (modern Bairat) which is said to have been named after its founder king Virata. In Pa-li literature, the Matsya tribe is usually associated with the Surasena. The western Matsya was the hill tract on the north bank of Chambal.

In present days Meenas of Rajasthan are considered the brothers and kinsmen of Virata, the ruler of Virat Nagar. They ruled this area (near to Virat Nagar) until the 11th century. Much historical evidence is recovered from this area all belonging to time of Lord Buddha. Among their last Kingdoms Dhundhar was the biggest and later on the region was governed by the Kachwaha dynasty from the 11th century until after India's independence in 1947. These facts can be found from the link given below:http:http://www.viratnagar.in/about.html

Jalodiya (talk) 05:35, 11 No

Your source is an advertising site and hence can not be reliable. Please find a better source before editing the page, refer WP:RS. Also please do not initiate edit warring. If you project the acceptable reliable sources you can add the contents you want to add but for no reason you should remove the existing sourced contents of the article. Thanks.--MahenSingha (Talk) 11:38, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

The site provided by me is not some kind of advertising site it is a site which has written its facts from government documents and I think these documents are reliable source to edit or to add content on this page Jalodiya (talk) 11:59, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

You can also check about viratanagar in Wikipedia itself and it is also mention that meenas were considered to be kinsmen of king virata of viratanagara Jalodiya (talk) 13:13, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Please provide us some genuine reason that people of Meena community or caste does not belongs to matsya kingdom,king virata,amer,jaigarh fort and Kshatriya varna Jalodiya (talk) 13:15, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Let me tell You that the issues you are reigniting have been discussed earlier also and you can go through the previous discussions. Hope this will answer all your doubts. further which source is valid for referencing on wikipedia, for this you can refer this link WP:RS.--MahenSingha (Talk) 14:21, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I want to tell you that Meenas do not belongs to scheduled tribe (ST) category of Uttar Pradesh ,I am providing you a link which is created by government of India. Url=http://tribal.nic.in/WriteReadData/CMS/Documents/201212010356439267578File1068.pdf Jalodiya (talk) 16:25, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

This link is provided to mention that all meenas people do not belongs to scheduled tribe(St) category .And I request admin to remove such a controversial content from the page which state that meenas belongs to scheduled tribe or obc category as you,me and any others user have no rights to categorized a caste or community. Jalodiya (talk) 16:29, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Please consider reviewing This and This_Link also, if Meena are high caste Hindus or a Kshatriya caste then why these official proposals of including them among the STs are under process by central govt. of India. And yes, these proposals are officially forwarded by the Govt. of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh where they are locally considered as an approved tribal community. You must be knowing that such proposals are initiated by the members of the community before state govt. and then Govt. officials review the actual status of the community in society and then only they consider to frward the lists.--MahenSingha (Talk) 07:52, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

According to the history the downfall of meenas started from invation of Britishers in India.due to invastion of British they get economically weaker.But Still they are considered to be high class Hindu which is also mention in the given link. I hope you do not create such kind of chaos regarding meena's high caste hindu and there scheduled tribe status (in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh only).i would request you to let other editor speaks about this topic. Jalodiya (talk) 03:53, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Disruptive Edits by Mahensingha, please discuss before making the changes in pre-existing contents

I have not deleted the whole content but I have added some new content provided with citation.I HAVE only deleted the article written just below "history" of Meena page as it does not seems to appear a history of Meenas ,rather its look like a personal review given by nandini kapur and she is not a historian.The facts which are provided by are true and they are taken by a reliable sources. I would request the admin to ban Mr. Mahensingha from editing the pages as he is trying to put unnecessary facts and untrue facts about meena community.It seems that Mr. Mahensingha have some personal enmity from meena community or caste. jalodiya

Inclusion of history of amer(amber) and jaigarh fort

I want admin to include the history of amer and jaigarh fort in the medieval period history of meenas.It would clarify that meenas were the ruling caste or tribe and it will also enlight our reader about there kingdom .

I am also providing a link which tells us that they were the original ruler of dhundhar region and of jaigarh fort. Url=http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsFarEast/IndiaRajputanaAmer.htm.

Here is another link which state that Meena is a high caste Hindu and they belongs to Kshatriya Varna.This link also provide information about meenas kingdom or matsya kingdom

Url=https://books.google.co.in/books?id=fOQkpcVcd9AC&pg=PT253&dq=matsya+kingdom+history+and+meenas&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBgQ6AEwAmoVChMIu-GQ24KJyQIVwi6mCh3QqwF0#v=onepage&q=matsya%20kingdom%20history%20and%20meenas&f=false I request Elonka and admin to review the last link provided by me and add its content to meenas pageJalodiya (talk) 18:25, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

In my view your first source does not fall into the category of reliable sources. Please refer WP:RS. The contents which you removed were part of the second source mentioned by you. which at large emphasize the Punjabi/ Haryanvi Minhas as well, contains the material which you intend to remove from the article. If you wish to include some good part from the source then how can you remove contents from the same source. A lot many other sources say opposite to what you insisted. So maintain neutrality as per WP:NPOV.--MahenSingha (Talk) 20:09, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Jalodiya (talk) 05:13, 12 November 2015 (UTC)please do not try to spam my post,and the source does not emphasize on punjabi/haryanvi minas(meenas) but there is only one line written about them that minas outside rajasthan region reside in punjab and haryana.i would also request you to stay on the topic.do not try to mislead our admin or Elonka. In the earlier discussion some of the editor were asking for prove that minas belongs to kshatriya varna and they are high caste hindu.

i am again posting the same link which prove the things which i have discussed above are true url=Url=https://books.google.co.in/books?id=fOQkpcVcd9AC&pg=PT253&dq=matsya+kingdom+history+and+meenas&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBgQ6AEwAmoVChMIu-GQ24KJyQIVwi6mCh3QqwF0#v=onepage&q=matsya%20kingdom%20history%20and%20meenas&f=false thanks

Almost all the communities in India are claiming Kshatriya status giving some mythological grounds which are certainly not historically proved. Any one can claim and claim does not prove anything. However, I asked that please give sources for which branch of Kshatriya the Meena belong- Lunar, Solar or Fire. Please read once again. Please also answer that why are you intended to remove contents which are also from the same source book which for no reason you titled inappropriate. Be neutral, if you add something from this book then consider not removing other contents of the same source. The line of Kshatriya claim was already existing in the article and all the issues have been discussed and settled earlier. Now why have you started writing the article your own way. Please once again go through the previous discussions of this talk page and then decide. It is very simple to understand that contents on wikipedia are subject to editor's consensus over them.--MahenSingha (Talk) 07:41, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Jalodiya (talk) 11:45, 12 November 2015 (UTC)I am requesting you once again that we can discuss this kshatriya matter in the previous topic i.e,"meena belongs to kshatriyas varan". please stay on the topic to dicuss about inclusion of history of amer and jaigarh fort in meenas page. please do not try to spam the dicussion. thans11:45, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

It is you who brought this thing here. See your aforementioned statements. Anyway, amer and jaigarh fort are sparate articles and mention it there in the right article. Present article is about the community and definitely not about the forts or places. So it is better if you add up the things there only and yes you can link the articles if it is technically valid and acceptable.--MahenSingha (Talk) 18:35, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Jalodiya (talk) 03:59, 13 November 2015 (UTC) I have add this discussion to include history of amer and jaigarh fort in the medieval period history of meenas. So that readers of Wikipedia comes to know about meenas kingdom. Hello, I'm Jalodiya. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the 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.

13:34, 13 November 2015 (UTC) I would request a third opinion from the admin of Meena page. Jalodiya (talk) 13:34, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Technical note on removed content

A broken {{3OR}} transclusion was removed from here in preparation for a change to that template. The transclusion provided no 3O response, was malformed, and appeared to be an attempt from Jalodiya to request a 3O, rather than respond to one. Jalodiya's signature below appeared below the original template transclusion. Preserving this record so as to avoid any confusion later. PlanetJuice 03:11, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Jalodiya (talk) 18:30, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2016

Pintu Meena (talk) 18:19, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 18:27, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2017

There are found in Maharastra state also where they are known as [Community in Maharastra].They speak Marathi language. MEENAKACHORA (talk) 08:59, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article.
The article you have tried to link to is a Wikipedia article, so is not a reliable source The article is also totally unreferenced, snd has been since it was created nearly 3 years ago, so should probably be considered for deletion - Arjayay (talk) 13:11, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Meena, Not Kshatriya, Not even a caste but a tribe

Meena are not a caste but a tribe, the status which they enjoyed scince long and all the literary sources mention them as a tribe, definitely not a caste. Claims are claims and their claim of Kshatriyahood is never proved due to the fact that no historical source could prove it. Meena like many others claimed to be kshatriya under the sociological process of "Sanskritisation", but the sources do not support this view. They are aborginals who were defeated by Rajput power. This is what the history could prove. --MahenSingha (Talk) 19:52, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Re: MahenSingha, considering the timeline, how a tribe change status as a cast? After reading this reply and language used. It appears a long way from nirvana. The little I know about Indian caste system, it seems it is better to be out of Indian caste system. Over the period, caste structures were formed from interaction with specific tribes. There are many who contest this and claim high castes were always high castes, and there was no interaction with tribes. Perhaps it is demeaning to them to be associated with Tribes. Ref this link: http://www.bbc.com/hindi/india-42793512 , will help to understand Rajputs in Rajasthan.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.103.196.75 (talk) 14:24, 20 January 2018 (UTC) 

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 May 2017

There is a section in Article that give a brief of analysis done by historian "Nandini Sinha Kapur" I think this in not good to put analysis of anyone because it is a matter of respect of a tribe/ Caste. So kindly Remove that Section. Warlord07 (talk) 16:21, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

See her CV and WP:CENSORED. I'm not closing this request because I think it was me who added that information. - Sitush (talk) 16:24, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

 Not done ProgrammingGeek ^talktome 17:56, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 May 2017

Please Delete this "Nandini Sinha Kapur, a historian who has studied early India, notes that the oral traditions of the Meenas were developed from the early 19th century AD in an attempt to reconstruct their identity. She says of this process, which continued throughout the 20th century, that "The Minas try to furnish themselves a respectable present by giving themselves a glorious past". In common with the people of countries such as Finland and Scotland, the Meenas found it necessary to invent tradition through oral accounts, one of the primary uses of which is recognised by both historians and sociologists as being "social protest against injustices, exploitation and oppression, a raison d'être that helps to retrieve the image of a community." Kapur notes that the Meenas not merely lack a recorded history of their own but also have been depicted in a negative manner both by medieval Persian accounts and records of the colonial period. From medieval times through to the British Raj, references to the Meenas describe them as violent, plundering criminals and an anti-social ethnic tribal group.[7]" Warlord07 (talk) 16:25, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Question:What's your reasoning for removing this section? — IVORK _Discuss 02:59, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

@IVORK: see the section immediately preceding this one. - Sitush (talk) 07:38, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

The lines from the book of Nandita Sinha Kapur does not support a historical base for what she has claimed about Meena community. She did not even mentioned about the references which she is boasting about. And how come a so called historian trying to maligned a caste's image. Did she forgot the ethical limits of a writer. This is a thoughtful that the wikipedia contributers are not even considering the messages posted by readers on talk pages. Please do remove the lines referencing the claims of Nandita Sinha Kapur. "From medieval times through to the British Raj, references to the Meenas describe them as violent, plundering criminals and an anti-social ethnic tribal group." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:4900:5B82:1D3:DC42:607F:182:1DB5 (talk) 08:18, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 July 2017

Specialxyzabcd12345 (talk) 10:08, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

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. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 12:16, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Meena. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160127142336/http://badaun.nic.in/MEENAs/REPORT.pdf to http://badaun.nic.in/MEENAs/REPORT.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160127142913/http://badaun.nic.in/MEENAs/MEENA.PDF to http://badaun.nic.in/MEENAs/MEENA.PDF
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160112012730/http://badaun.nic.in/MEENAs/meenas%20in%20budaun.html to http://badaun.nic.in/MEENAs/meenas%20in%20budaun.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:50, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Meena. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715174704/http://www.reseau-asie.com/cgi-bin/prog/pform.cgi?langue=en&ID_document=2854&TypeListe=showdoc&Mcenter=agenda&my_id_societe=1&PRINTMcenter= to http://www.reseau-asie.com/cgi-bin/prog/pform.cgi?langue=en&ID_document=2854&TypeListe=showdoc&Mcenter=agenda&my_id_societe=1&PRINTMcenter=

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:37, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Removal of content wriiten by Nandini Sinha kapur about Meenas.

◾Nandini Sinha kapur- is an abstract of a seminar paper - which is simply not acceptable . ◾Nadini Sinha kapur was a lecturer in DU,when she wrote about Meenas,This means she is not a historian . ◾Nadini Sinha kapur around 2012 has joined IGNOU , which again tell us that she is still a lecturer not a historian. The article written by nandini Sinha kapur should be replace by S.H.M RIZVI text which was edit by me and I have also provided citations for "Rizvi's" text to assure editors that it is reliable sources.

If anybody have some problem regarding this discussion ,please provide us source(not an advertising site) which affirm that Nandini Sinha kapur was a historian not a lecturer.

Thanks Jalodiya (talk) 04:46, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

05:43, 13 November 2015 (UTC) The given citation no. 7 on the page of Meena ,tell us that nandini Sinha kapur is a history reader in PGDAV ,which again proves that she is a reader not a historian. At last I would request admin to remove such unreliable content from the page of Meena the community or caste. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jalodiya (talk • contribs) 05:43, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Nandini Sinha Kapoor is a historian, according to the official website of the IGNOU,see_here, here and an author of Oxford University Press here@http://www.oup.co.in. A Lecturer of history or a reader of history is not the disqualification to become a historian. Thanks.--MahenSingha (Talk) 21:01, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Jalodiya (talk) 05:05, 14 November 2015 (UTC) okay I agreed now nandini Sinha kapur became a historian,but when she had written this article she is only a history reader which does not means that she is a historian.For Ex-If somebody is reading historical books that doesn't means that he became a historians. If you still disagree with my point of view then please provide us a reliable source which state that when Nandini Sinha kapur wrote this article ,she was a historian not a history reader. Thanks.

Her contributions are with biasness ...please remove asap Cjpatanbaaz (talk) 12:19, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Kshatriya origin of Meenas is questionable.

There are several writers who have sought to claim a Kshatriya origin for Meenas, specifically the Meenas of the Jaipur / Dhundhar region. Without meaning any disrespect to anyone, I believe this claim is incorrect. I propose 2 points in support of my position.

1 >> The prime argument that the Meenas ruled the Dhundhar region (and since they rued they were Kshatriya origin) before they were replaced by Rajputs is the mention of a Matsya Mahajanapada in the Mahabharat. Here Matsya is equated with the Sanskrit word Meen and an argument is made that the Meenas have descended from the Matsya kingdom rulers. Now there are two problems here. First Meen (for fish) is not originally a Sanskrit word. It has come to Sanskrit from Tamil. It does not look logical that the people of the Matsya kingdom of the Mahabharat would adopt a in later times a Tamil name for themselves. After all they could have continued to call themselves Matsya. So linking the Meenas to the Matsya by the use of the word Meen looks more like convenient manipulation.

2>> The Mahabharat was written around 300 BC and it recounts the history of an even earlier time. Let us say the events actually took place in 1000 BC. So a Matsya Mahajanapada existed in 1000 BC. The current claim of a Kshatriya origin of the Meenas links them to the Matsya kingdom and says that they ruled the Dhundhar region till the Rajputs replaced them in the 10th century. This gives the Matsya kindom a lifespan of 2000 years (from 1000 BC to 1000 AD). Is it not surprising that there is no mention at all in history of any Meena king in this 2000 year period? As a contrast detailed historical mention is available for many kings and kingdoms in the same period. The Maurya dynasty, the Gupta dynasty, etc all existed in the same period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajayjo (talk • contribs) 15:26, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't understand your point. The article does not appear to claim that they are kshatriya. - Sitush (talk) 15:32, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Please see the comments by Jalodiya. He repeatedly claims that the Meena are of Kshatriya origin. (sorry, I am not fully familiar with the edit protocols, so my comment might appear unsigned) Ajayjo (talk) 16:14, 2 February 2018 (UTC) ajayjo

I see. Well, people can claim what they want - including that the earth is flat etc - but unless they provide reliable sources to support their claim it isn't going to appear in this article. (Your signature for the message immediately above this one is fine - I know it is tricky getting to grips with a lot of Wikipedia's mark-up etc, so good work). - Sitush (talk) 22:53, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 September 2020

I have edited some grammatical error and making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered and have a proper cite Matsyameena (talk) 16:10, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

You can suggest edits here on this talk page on the form "Please change X to Y". – Thjarkur (talk) 16:12, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

About the photo you added on the Meenas wiki page

user:Heba_Aisha Why you have added a photo with the caption "Meenas, Hindoos of low caste, vagrants, Delhi."?

1. if the source is old does not mean it is correct or reviewed work. How a photo dated -1868 - 1875 is relevant? We are in 2020, do Meenas still live and are vagrants? Do you know how many divisions are there within Meena tribe?

2. Meenas are not natives of Delhi, as photo caption is stating.

3. Meenas in Rajasthan come under tribe, NOT a CASTE and do not fall under Hindu cast systems, hence, no point in stating low or hight cast.

So, the photo and caption are misleading and do not represent the correct status of Meenas. Please remove it or find a photo represents Meenas in factual terms. Thanks!

A few photos of Meena/Mina tribe: 1822 to 1890s..to replace the current photo from Meenas wiki page.

• http://www.smb-digital.de/eMuseumPlus?service=ExternalInterface&module=collection&objectId=1633129&viewType=detailView
• http://www.smb-digital.de/eMuseumPlus?service=ExternalInterface&module=collection&objectId=1633081
• http://www.smb-digital.de/eMuseumPlus?service=ExternalInterface&module=collection&objectId=1633126
• http://www.smb-digital.de/eMuseumPlus?service=ExternalInterface&module=collection&objectId=1633069 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.12.100.209 (talk) 22:33, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Desi tau

Prince Marmat (talk) 13:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Genetically Minas and Rajputs are akin

With reference to the research article 'Genetic sketch of the six population groups of Rajasthan: a study based on 12 autosomal loci' https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/ase/advpub/0/advpub_100826/_pdf

'Comparison of the six population groups of Rajasthan using a neighbour-joining tree shows that the Rajputs and Minas form a group (Figure 2). Ethnically, it has also been reported that the Minas share several clan names with the Rajputs, whereas the Damaria, Saharias, Bhils, and Garasias all form separate branches which may be attributed to their diverse origins.'

To my surprise, the Mina population sample taken in the research article is from Banswara district (core tribal region). Still, Minas are found to be genetically close with Rajputs than other tribal groups of the area. Wondering if Mina tribe samples were taken from North-East (Jaipur, Tonk, Alwar, Dausa ) Rajasthan, it may not be a surprise that, Mina and Rajputs in Rajasthan are akin.

• We avoid genetics studies in caste-related articles. - Sitush (talk) 14:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

--re Sitush I see, so what do you mean by "We avoid", who are WE? Also, Meenas are a tribe, not a caste - as you mentioned above. What is the purpose of your reply here? --Why do you think Meenas Wikipedia article is about caste?

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 February 2021

Please add the orphaned page on the religion of the Meena people here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meena_ethnic_religion Sideriver84 (talk) 07:00, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 April 2021

There are lines written under History header in reference to Nandita Kapur made by user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mahensingha . From medieval times through to the British Raj, references to the Meenas describe them as violent, plundering criminals and an anti-social ethnic tribal group.

These remarks made by Nandita Kapur in her book are historically unproven and intentionally malicious towards the Meena community. Kindly remove these lines from wikipedia page of Meena. 2401:4900:5B82:1D3:DC42:607F:182:1DB5 (talk) 07:57, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: the book appears to be a reliable source due to its editorial and publishing process, and the academic credentials of the author. The negative description about Meenas is attributed to medieval Persian accounts and records of the colonial period and in turn this whole analysis is attributed to Kapur, as is appropriate. Removals of this and other content has been disputed in the page in the past, so this is clearly a controversial change, and discussion needs to be had so that consensus can be reached as to whether this content is acceptable or not. Leave me a message on my talk page if you do not know how to go about starting such a discussion, or want additional explanation about any aspect of this comment. Thanks! — Bilorv (talk) 00:25, 10 April 2021 (UTC)