User talk:Studentlife123

Here's my answer to your question of what's the issue in your version of the article: 1. RD Banerjee never mentions the chasa khandayat claim, contrary to your edit. 2. On a caste related article, local sayings (what you mistakenly mentioned as a proverb) can't be used as a reference. 3. The Sanskritisation of chasas is already mentioned in the following paragraphs.

I hope this clears all of your doubts and concerns. Refrain from making further disruptive edits. If you have any suggestions regarding the article, discuss it in the talk page of the article 1st. Solarson919 (talk) 18:01, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Are bro if you check maximum khandayats old caste certificate , chasa written their. And on faith. I think you are not a odia. Khandayat and chasa are just like synonyms. In 1891 there are only 8000 khandayat and around 3 lakh chasas in puri. But in 1831 there are aprox 1 lakh khandayat and chasa decreased. That not means caste change. Just name changed. This is the source. Page 11 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-journal-of-asian-studies/article/genealogies-of-the-paika-rebellion-heterogeneities-and-linkages/4F1D10668F4ED9EE67FA01845047B201/share/ac52e489f0fa78d01a79aae993316ba1a10bf295

Studentlife123 (talk) 19:24, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

goudas are shudras who got sanskritized in 1920. They use to bear palanquins of their khandayat lords(saantey). That's why many of them have inferiority complex and spread lies. ~2026-28994-53 (talk) 03:07, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

it is well recorded how many lower castes identified as khandayats cause khandayats were considered dwijas. Many lowers did change their castes it wasn't just name change. ~2026-28994-53 (talk) 03:08, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in South Asian social groups. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

--RegentsPark (comment) 17:07, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Studentlife123! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Orh several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Orh, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. The source clearly says both 'Orh' and 'Oda', please do not edit war. Discuss in the talk page for WP:CONSENSUS. Wikipedia is a collaborative project. We cannot remove longstanding sourced content based on your personal choices.. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:14, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Opened a discussion here, with proper explanation. You should use it. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:20, 17 August 2022 (UTC)