Sagar0311
Joined 6 January 2012
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Joshua Jonathan in topic October 2024
October 2024
edit
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Indigenous Aryanism, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 11:07, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Joshua Jonathan What was not constructive? A sentence was just removed which was a very generalized statement without credible citation. A PDF file which is provided cannot define mainstream scholarship related to History. The paper clearly mentions at the beginning 'This paper presents the respondent's general comments'. The topic is about India and there are conflicting views in India about this. There are Historians in India with a lot of followers who are against Aryan migration theory who say that it fails to produce considerable historical evidence about the authenticity of these migrations and the article's topic is exactly about this contradictory view point. So the sentence which reflects the general comment which is in stark contrast to a historical view point was removed by not editing the rest of the paragraph which has proper citations. Sagar0311 (talk) 12:22, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- You're probably deliberately ignorant; the note cites six sources. That scholars in India - only India - deviate from mainstream scholarship on this topic tells a lot about the academic quality of those scholars. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 13:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Joshua Jonathan The first time when the sentence was removed it was only citing one James Mallory paper, these sources are tagged later to the note when the edit was reversed. Anyways, majority scholars in the sources are only presenting one side of this topic, as l mentioned earlier there are scholars from the other side with lot of followers in this country specially in recent times who produce contradictory views to Aryan migration theory which is not substantiated. This topic is related to the civilizational identity of the people of this country and is sensitive. Dismissing the other side and calling only one side of scholars as mainstream seems biased considering Wikipedia's neutral policy, that's why I edited and removed the sentence. Just for my clarity, you are an administrative editor, right Sagar0311 (talk) 15:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- You're probably deliberately ignorant; the note cites six sources. That scholars in India - only India - deviate from mainstream scholarship on this topic tells a lot about the academic quality of those scholars. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 13:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Nope. The note already had six references. But let's have a closer look: have you got some sources which argue for the indigenous theory? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:40, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Joshua Jonathan When I checked, it just had one, which I mentioned, that was the main reason to edit. Anyways following are the sources
- New DNA study challenges Aryan Invasion Theory
- https://www.deccanherald.com/amp/story/india/new-dna-study-challenges-aryan-invasion-theory-759635.html
- Michel Danino, member of the Indian Council of Historical Research, Government of India
- http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Michel_Danino
- This research papers of Michel Danino presents nine major studies and reports and also provides references & notes
- https://archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/genetics-aryan-debate
- The following article has plenty of evidence including links to various research papers, studies, articles, ancient texts, images and at the end list of references. It also includes the study of Jadunath Sarkar
- Aryan Invasion Myth: How 21st century Science debunks 19th century indology
- https://indiafacts.org/aryan-invasion-myth-21st-century-science-debunks-19th-century-indology/
- Jadunath Sarkar
- http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Jadunath_Sarkar
- B. B. Lal
- http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/B._B._Lal
- His following Interview
- Part 1. No evidence for warfare or invasion; Aryan migration too is a myth
- https://www.newsgram.com/general/2015/11/30/no-evidence-for-warfare-or-invasion-aryan-migration-too-is-a-myth-b-b-lal
- Part 2. Vedic and Harappan are respectively literary and material facets of the same civilization
- https://www.newsgram.com/general/2015/12/01/vedic-and-harappan-are-respectively-literary-and-material-facets-of-same-civilization-b-b-lal
- Nicholas Kazanas
- http://de.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Nicholas_Kazanas
- Padma Shree award winner, Government of India
- https://elinepa.org/kazanas-awarded-padma-shri/
- Link 1
- https://www.newsgram.com/general/2016/01/06/vedic-sanskrit-older-than-avesta-baudhayana-mentions-westward-migrations-from-india-dr-n-kazanas
- Link 2
- https://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.com/2011/02/collapse-of-aryan-invasion-theory.html?m=1
- Shrikant G. Talageri
- https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/868108.Shrikant_G_Talageri
- Interview
- https://www.newsgram.com/general/2016/02/10/purus-are-original-inhabitants-of-core-rigvedic-area-bharata-sub-tribe-the-original-vedic-aryans-talageri
- Swaraj Prakash Gupta, Archeologist
- http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Swaraj_Prakash_Gupta
- The Indian archaeologist S.P. Gupta proposed this cultural sequencing, accordingly there is no break in the cultural development from 8000 BCE onwards, no indication of a major change, as an invasion from outside would certainly be.
- https://www.iskconcommunications.org/iskcon-journal/vol-6/questioning-the-aryan-invasion
- Sita Ram Goel
- http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Sita_Ram_Goel
- Refusal of Aryan Migration Theory
- https://voiceofindia.me/2022/02/21/nightmare-of-nehruism-sita-ram-goel/
- R.C. Majumdar
- https://www.jstor.org/stable/41688885
- Dr. Vasant Shinde
- http://chapter.intach.org/pdf/press-note-prof-vasant-shinde.pdf
- Link
- https://scroll.in/article/882497/do-rakhigarhi-dna-findings-debunk-the-aryan-invasion-theory-or-give-it-more-credence
- N. S. Rajaram, critical of Aryan Migration Theory
- http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/N._S._Rajaram
- Link
- https://www.stephen-knapp.com/aryan_invasion_theory_the_final_nail_in_its_coffin.htm
- Archeologist Disha Ahluwalia refutes Aryan Migration Theory
- https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/the-ranveer-show/indian-archaeologist-shares-Weglxd8CYHL/
- Indian Council of Historical Research, Government of India
- http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Indian_Council_of_Historical_Research
- ICHR has organised a conference questioning Aryan Migration Theory
- http://ichr.ac.in/content/event/national-conference-on-indian-history-emerging-perspectives.php
- News
- https://indianexpress.com/article/india/ichr-hosts-conference-aimed-at-correcting-distortions-in-history-5087465/
- Dr. B. R. Ambedkar who headed the committee drafting the Constitution in his campaign in support of the nation's dalit community noticed the racial overtones underlying the theory and described the British espousal of the Aryan Invasion theory in the following words:
- "The theory of invasion is an invention. This invention is necessary because of a gratuitous assumption that the Indo-Germanic people are the purest of the modern representation of the original Aryan race. The theory is a perversion of scientific investigation. It is not allowed to evolve out of facts. On the contrary, the theory is preconceived and facts are selected to prove it. It falls to the ground at every point."
- https://archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/aryan-invasion-theories
- A lot of old scholars including Swami Vivekanand dismissed Aryan Migration
- https://www.newsgram.com/education/2024/04/22/beyond-the-textbooks-the-truth-of-indias-ancient-roots
- University of West Florida, Myth of Aryan Invasion, PDF
- https://uwf.edu/media/university-of-west-florida/colleges/cassh/departments/government/goel-bio-/Myth-of-Aryan-Invasions-of-India--in-Brief.doc.pdf
- Archaeological Science Centre, Aryan Invasion, PDF
- https://asc.iitgn.ac.in/assets/publications/popular_articles/The_Aryan_Invasion_Myth_or_Fact-Michel-Danino.pdf
- There are plenty of more sources, but the point is that historians are from both the sides. Aryan Migration or Invasion is a theory and it's not accepted completely and also rejected by many. In that article only calling one side as mainstream is not neutral. If you still want to keep the sentence and not remove it completely it can go like following
- " It has no relevance and is not supported by some scholars and historians"
- Similarly the title "Rejection by mainstream scholarship" in the article can be changed to
- "Rejection by scholars and historians"
- I just wanted to know as I asked you last time you are from the Wikipedia admin team or editors, right Sagar0311 (talk) 11:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your efforts; I'll respond at Talk:Indigenous Aryanism#'No Support in mainstream scholarship'. Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 14:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Nope. The note already had six references. But let's have a closer look: have you got some sources which argue for the indigenous theory? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:40, 11 October 2024 (UTC)