Talk:Dulla Bhatti

Bravery of Dulla Bhatti Rajput

one day mughal ruler Akbar went in the forest of Dulla Bhatti nearly by Pindi Bhattian for hunting with his Realitives.Akbar didn't know about this place is very dangerous for him. when Dulla Bhatti Rajput's soldier saw them,they caught and bring them to Dulla Rajput Bhatti. Dulla Rajput does not recognize the Akbar Because he was not see Akbar before this matter. when Dulla Rajput ask Akbar that who is he, then Akbar said in terribly that he is marasi(drumer) of ruler akbar, on this answer Dulla rajput said;I am sorry for this mistake if you are not Akbar then i realize you and if you are Akbar so, this is very shameful to you. Dulla Bhatti is known as the Hero of RAJPUTS and mostly indians RAJPUTS of punjab RAJPUTANA proud of him. Dulla Bhatti is the glory of RAJPUTS and every 13jan Dulla Bhatti day is celebrate in india — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaban Rajput (talk • contribs) 19:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

This talk page is intended for discussion regarding how to improve the article. I'm not sure what your intent is but if you are hoping to see something added based on the information that you provide above then you'll need to provide a reliable source. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 07:53, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

If you add the word Rajput 20 more times with his name he still remains a local Gujjar hero. And btw when did Rajput locals rose against Moghuls? Funny isn’t it? The Real Rana (talk) 16:00, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

India

I've noticed before that some Pakistan-centric contributors really, really don't like to see the word "India" in articles. Obviously, I'm aware of the friction between the two countries but sometimes it seems a bit daft. "India", for example, is the common terminology for the area now known as Pakistan in the medieval period, despite Sajjad's centricity.

Similarly, "Mughal Empire" was until recently given as the birth/death place in the infobox. I know the the Empire was there but it is rarely referred to as a region of birth, just as we do not say someone was born in the British Empire, Holy Roman Empire or Austro-Hungarian Empire. On the other hand, distinguishing a birthplace as British India from India, Pakistan etc does serve a useful purpose for people who were born before 1947 and died after it.

I can't help but think that these devices are designed mainly with the intent of removing as many uses of the "India" word as can be done. Should we call it Bharat instead (joke)? - Sitush (talk) 12:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

• First of all, look at what you are insisting there, you are insisting on a text which totally does not make sense, "Dulla Bhatti lived at Pindi Bhattian and then in India". Think about the text you are insisting on. First of all, lets decide what was the name of the region, was that India or Indian Subcontinent, i believe name of the location was Indian Subcontinent and not India at that time because when you put India in there, you are referring to present day India. Secondly, lets assume the name was (Indian Subcontinent or India) now lets define where was Pindi Bhattian. Was it part of (India or Indian Subcontinent) or was it out of India. According to my knowledge Pindi Bhattian was part of that geographical location. So if Pindi Bhattian was already part of India and Dulla Bhatti already lived in India while living in Pindi Bhattian then what does it mean here to say that he lived at Pindi Bhattian and then in India. So "then in India" needs to go from here, it does not make sense. To me you look like Indian-centric when you insist that India must be mentioned there while there is no point to mention that.

Now let's move on to the table, i agree with Smsarmad's edit partially that Mughal Empire does not need to be mentioned as a location but i don't think India would be right as a location there, i think it was Indian Subcontinent and it should be mention as that, when you say India, you are referring to modern day India. Even if we decide to use India as a location there which i don't think i will, still we should not be linking to an article which is about modern day India, we should be linking it to Indian Subcontinent or leave it un-linked. Sajjad Altaf (talk) 15:04, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Probably if you take out "and" from "Dulla Bhatti lived at Pindi Bhattian and then in India", that I only find in your reply (none of Sitush's reverted version has that), it will make sense to you. -- SMS ^Talk 19:24, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I've reverted Sajjat yet again. This is getting silly: not only are there real problems with understanding how Wikipedia works but they're also seemingly not too good at reading English. My latest revert is also to prevent the common puffery that goes on in Indic articles, whereby people from ~India and Pakistan try to manipulate things to gain reflected glory from the heroes of centuries ago (& to deflect the nasty stuff by suggesting their enemy). Take your nationalist editing elsewhere, please. Pindi Bhattian is linked, the article already mentions the timescale and there is no need to push these ridiculous POVs that, ultimately, are just posturing. - Sitush (talk) 22:18, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

And again. Why Sajjat keeps changing things without discussion is beyond me - it's not as if they're unaware. The India article covers the medieval period perfectly well, while the Indian subcontinent covers a much larger land mass. - Sitush (talk) 00:46, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

• Sitush I tried to discuss, here at Talk: Dulla Bhatti and User Talk: Sajjad Altaf and User Talk: Smsarmad, it seemed you didn't want to reply. I tried my best to reason with you but it's not working.

I am willing to take the word "medieval" as well but it should then read "then part of India" and not "then in India". Location specific can contain "India" as well but it should not link to article representing modern day India and you will have to add references for all this with quotations like you happen to ask everyone else and I will be okay with that. Won't bother you again on this? Thank you Sajjad Altaf (talk) 01:08, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Medieval India (which is the linked article) was indeed medieval India. Look, I overhauled this article recently and you only came to it after you disagreed with me elsewhere. While I do not own the article, you've been nothing but a pain in the arse here. I wouldn't mind if you were learning from it but you are not. Next time, discuss and get consensus before changing things - that's the best way to learn. - Sitush (talk) 01:19, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

I have the same feeling for you, "the pain in the arse" one, if you agree that it was medieval India then why don't change that and get done with it. Why are you being so stubborn and creating unnecessary tussle with me. You say, you do not own the article but you have been acting towards with me like you own Wikipedia. Look man, give some rights to others too. Sajjad Altaf (talk) 01:27, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Have you read the bloody article or not? It says "medieval India" right there in the lead section. There is no need for us to repeat in the body because the link is already there (WP:OVERLINK) and the dates are given. Writing articles is not merely about assembling information but also about presenting it with at least some semblance of style - I have a fair amount of experience in doing this, hence the almost single-handed WP:GAs and WP:FA noted on my user page. It doesn't mean that I'm always correct but common sense would suggest that when someone with nearly 120,000 contributions tries to explain to someone with < 1,000 that things are best left alone (or whatever) then the chances are fairly high that the experienced contributor is in fact right. That is why you'll learn better from discussing what you want to do first, rather than running around like a bull in a china shop. Sure, be bold but when you are reverted take it to the talk page and leave it there until you get consensus for your proposals - see WP:BRD. - Sitush (talk) 01:45, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

You should better watch your language except that I don't want to answer your crap. Sajjad Altaf (talk) 01:59, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Recent edits

Not sure if pinging works for IPs but 117.224.41.31 can you please explain what your point is regarding your recent edits? I am not seeing much, if any, gain and the phrasing is awful in places, eg : "as per". I can fix the phrasing but only if I understand why you are doing what you do. - Sitush (talk) 00:36, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Redirecting

Please do not redirect Punjabi-Mughal War to Dulla Bhatti. Both are similar but not the same. I understand the sources is weak but with other people help, It can certainly get better. Dulla Bhatti Article discusses Dulla Bhatti but the Punjabi-Mughal War discusses the detail of the conflict that Dulla Bhatti fought. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AhdBhat (talk • contribs) 01:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC) AhdBhat (talk) 01:36, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I redirected it for the reasons given at Talk:Punjabi-Mughal War. I can't even see where the sources refer to it under that name. Yes, it was a revolt but I can't see anything more than that - no need to sensationalise a local dispute. This person tends to attract hero worship and regional/religious sympathisers, so perhaps let's see what the consensus may be. - Sitush (talk) 01:37, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I will try to research more evidence and sources for my article. Thank you for the feedback. AhdBhat (talk) 17:08, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Shaikhu/Salim

I've just reverted a change from the name Shaikhu to Salim (later known as Jahanghir). I did so because the source used in this article calls him Shaikhu. I then looked at Jahangir#Early_life and realise that there is some potential confusion here because - although I have not checked the sources in that article - it seems possible that he was indeed called Salim but his father preferred Shaikhu/Sheikhu. I'm now not sure what to do but my gut feeling is that we should stick to what the source says here. Perhaps add a footnote regarding the alternate name? - Sitush (talk) 23:48, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Dullah bhatti rajput

Abdullah bhatti was from muslim rajput family why you mentioned gurjar there? Pratap.rathod67 (talk) 22:54, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2020

110.172.142.156 (talk) 10:47, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

DULLA BHATI WAS A GURJAR

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:25, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Part of folklore only

@Noq: The source says "though entirely absent in the officially-sponsored histories, the record of his heroic deeds has been preserved in the collective memory of the Punjabis..."YaRaabAlHind (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Dulla bhati

Dulla bhati was gurjar not rajput 2409:4053:2E9C:CCD1:0:0:8BC8:8104 (talk) 05:04, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2022

Ashok Singh Bhadu (talk) 11:44, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

quote=a Muslim Jatt, Dulla Bhatti, the son of local zamindar

Yes Dulla bhatti was a jatt firm pind bhattian Ashok Singh Bhadu (talk) 11:45, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:50, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Why remove

Hi MT111222. Why did you remove this sentence, and the reference (see here)? It seemed fine. You didn't mention this removal in the summary. tw^sabin 21:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Sorry. It was an accident. MT111222 (talk) 21:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

No problem :) You can simply restore it manually, while keeping your other changes intact. tw^sabin 21:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Dulla Bhatti statue.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:22, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Dullah bhatti artby arsalankhan.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:08, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Recent edits

@Rasteem: I disagree with this removal of caste mention from the article, the information is well sourced and his caste is discussed in academic sources.:

Singh, Surinder (2023-12-12). "Revolt of Dulla Bhatti against the Mughal state". Situating Medieval India. Boydell & Brewer. p. 140-146. ISBN 978-1-83765-125-2.

Dulla Bhatti as a brave Rajput warrior, who shook the foundations of the Mughal state.... [page 140]

Ladhi cried that the Mughals had stained the glorious name of the Rajputs. If Dulla was a seed of the Rajputs, he must free the hostages. Otherwise, his reputation would be destroyed for all times.[Page 145]

It was difficult for him to garner the support of neighbouring zamindars, though they belonged to the same caste and clan.... He made Nizamuddin his foster brother by exchanging turbans with him and, in doing so, had overlooked the long standing Rajput-Mughal enmity...[page 146]

This also references the above work. And his existence is not in dispute, see: Gaur, I. D. (2008). Martyr as Bridegroom. Anthem Press. p. 33. ISBN 1-84331-348-0. Dulla Bhatti is not a folk construct. He is a historical figure who played an important role in the history of Punjab's culture. Ratnahastin (talk) 17:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Ratnahastin for discussing this here. I'm not the first to remove this WP:CASTE cruft; but other users have also previously removed this.[1]. Per per WP:CASTEID I believe that even if folk heroes or legends belong to a particular community the name of such community should not be included unless cited sources explain how caste influenced their life in general.®asteem Talk 17:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

@Rasteem: WP:CASTEID only applies to BLPs. There is no requirement of a caste to have played a significant role in a person's biography to warrant a mention in a Wikipedia article. The source I have quoted above does in fact discuss his caste and its influence on his life. Ratnahastin (talk) 03:44, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Okay by citing these sources you can add again if you're disagree with my changes. Name of the Bhatti tribe is still there but if you want to add caste "Rajput" you can add.®asteem Talk 21:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)