Talk:Meo (ethnic group)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Copyright violation[edit]

Sections of this article seem to be straight copy paste from another website. SahirShah 17:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

Why is this article placed under Indian categories, Sardar Tufail is a Pakistani politician (Bilalchd 02:17, 13 November 2007

Meo (Portugal)[edit]

Why when searching for "meo" Wikipedia does not return the possibility of disambiguation of "meo" (which would include de article "Meo (Portugal)") but returns disambiguation of "mayo" instead!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 512upload (talk • contribs) 21:58, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Meo killings during partition[edit]

According to book "The Partition of India and Mountbatten" Ahirs started attacking Muslims of Gurgaon and Alwar. Jekins wrote that on 30 April 1947 Hindu Jats and Gujjars had joined Ahirs against Meos, in one village alone Ahirs had killed 28 meos.36 bodies of Meos were found in a nullah near one of the Gurgaon villages and that these bodies had been brought from Alwar where the state forces had fired on a crowd from an Army vehicle.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumitkachroo (talk • contribs) 20:23, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conversion to Islam[edit]

present circumstances and conversion to islam says same thing so adding in one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.21.182.12 (talk) 10:08, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please can people provide sources here that relate to the recent edit warring concerning the alleged Muslim and Rajput (or, indeed, Muslim Rajput) status of the Meos. I've reverted the article to show the position just prior to the ping-pong - let's discuss. - Sitush (talk) 08:00, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the following text.
Against History, Against State: Counterperspectives from the Margins By Shail Mayaram. This is an anthropological study of the Meo community through their oral history. A reading of just the first two to three pages of the preface will show that Meos are historically Rajput but that they have a deep clan antipathy towards Rajputs and others whom they see as former oppressors - Mughals, British etc.
I am not disputing that some members of present day Meo community may have Rajput names - and probably Rajput ancestry, but this is the same as saying that all Meos are "Muslim Rajput". Such a claim should be supported by clear source references - which have been severely lacking to date. I suggest we wait a couple of weeks for source references to materialize before removing the term "Muslim Rajput". Parmark (talk) 16:18, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That is a good source. Does it explicitly deny the Rajput claim anywhere? The present sourcing is not great (oddball journals, lack of page numbering etc) & so I envisage that if nothing improves during your entirely reasonable timescale then there will need to be many more changes than merely the removal of "Muslim Rajput" from the lead - the Rajput connection is deeply embedded throughout the article. - Sitush (talk) 16:26, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Meos community had 10 thousand years history.they were uper class Rajputs from Jaduan clan.Mewat state had very old history.Mewat state ruled 450 years by Meo rulers.First Meo ruler is Raja Nehar Khan and last Meo ruler was Raja Hassan Khan Mewati who killed in battle of khawana 1527. Ahsan Ali Rajput (talk) 08:32, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Collateral reversion[edit]

I make no comment on the content of the article, but its structure is highly disorganised, with parts of some sub-topics repeated under several headings and some material seemingly plonked into any section without thought. My reorganising edits were reverted by user No2WesternImperialism, as, I am going to assume, collateral damage in some content dispute with someone else, or one that possibly doesn't exist, but is merely a misunderstanding, [perhaps?] ...

As a result, improvements to the article, like: expanding and completing existing references; phrasing changes to correct tense; non-random spacing and caps; DISAMBIGUATION of linked terms; were all undone, along with my text and section restructure.

My first edit did not change anything that No2WesternImperialism added, except I reinstated some sources they had removed. I then re-read their previous edit summary and realised they had deleted them as non-RS. So I moved them out of the text again and apologised for my misunderstanding:

  • (As a "Further reading" section
    • [Tauseef-ul-Hasan] توصیف الحسن میواتی الہندی (2020-08-23). تاریخِ میو اور داستانِ میوات [Rekh-e-Meo and Dastan-e-Mewat: Epic history of Meo (Mayo) and Tale of Mewati (Mayoat)] (in Urdu). Mewati-ul-Hindi.
    • Hakeem Abdush Shakoor. Tareekh-e-Miyo Chhatri. Retrieved 2022-06-07.

Which elicited the response from No2WesternImperialism: "Read the source again, Meos can be of multi-background communities, they are also believed to be descendants of the Minas (Meenas), as there was historical evidence and kinship shared between the two communities, to which I say: huh?

I made no dispute, nor changes, in my edit regarding ethnic-group relationships in any way, so what's going on here?

Am going to restore my earlier improvements, and completely restructure the article sections, while retaining the recent additions (although they might move position.) This being the case, if editors don't agree with my changes, I request that instead of just undoing them out-of-hand (i.e. reverting), concerns are discussed here first, please. I would really appreciate the favour.

To reiterate: Absolutely no changes in claims in the article were or will be made; structural improvements only. Thanks. AukusRuckus (talk) 04:55, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Second try[edit]

@No2WesternImperialism: Please do not add back the named references with another separate, full citation, as you did here: it creates an error message. I can't understand why you did so, I have cited them again using the WP:NAMEDREFS method.

As for your belief that I wished to classify "Meos" as "Rajput" I have no idea what you're talking about. I FULLY explained what my edits referred to. You left "Rajput" in several places in the article; I just followed what was already there, as far as content goes, and tried to fix the poor grammar, DABs, restructure the paragraphs/sections for a better flow.

When you said "Check the sources again", and bloody-well reverted me after all my work, I had no idea what you were referring to.

If you ACTUALLY CHECK: Before you first rudely reverted me, as the article appeared in your version, the word "Rajput" occurs 28 times, including in the infobox. After my first set of changes (that you reverted), "Rajput" occurred 15 times. How is this me "classifying" the Meos as "Rajput"?

Because you did not explain, but said "Read the source again, Meos can be of multi-background communities, they are also believed to be descendants of the Minas (Meenas), as there was historical evidence and kinship shared between the two communities", how could I begin to know what you were thinking? I didn't put anything (extra) about Rajputs, had no interest in background of Meos; but was really upset that you had made the article worse by reverting me. You reintroduced many, many errors, like WP:DAB links, e.g. Rana and pal, and crazy phrasing like:

According to one theory, they were Hindu Kashtriya and Rajput clans converted to Islam between the 12th and 17th centuries so A Meo with Islam until as late as Aurangzeb's rule

(read that sentence carefully, and see if you think it makes sense: I've bolded the problem bit), bare url cites, etc., etc. Because YOU misunderstood, I had to carefully re-do my work, manually. Because YOU did not explain, I had no idea what you were objecting to, and didn't know "Rajput" was the problem, so was unable to accommodate that. And still, after all that, you go back again, and reintroduce citation errors?

Please carefully look at this diff, which compares two of your edits directly: After you reverted me the first time on 4 June, and your last edit on 6 June. If you look properly, you'll see where all the "rajput" mentions are in both of YOUR versions. Nothing at all to do with me. Can you see why I couldn't see what you were getting at? I'm NOT a mind reader!

I do not appreciate being run-around by someone who will not, or cannot, bother to check the edit summaries or diffs properly. It is not fair to involve another editor in lots of unnecessary extra work. It was entirely a mare's nest. AukusRuckus (talk) 05:46, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

YOUR EDIT:

Meo (pronounced: may-o or mev), is an ethnic group of the Muslim Rajput community from north-western India, particularly from the Nuh district (previously Mewat) in Haryana and parts of adjacent Alwar and Bharatpur districts in Rajasthan. They speak Mewati, a language of the Indo-Aryan language family, although in some areas the language dominance of Urdu and Hindi has seen Meos adopt these languages instead.

No2WesternImperialism (talk) 16:51, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's all good, now (now that you've said, and I can understand, what you were even objecting to): I'll just point out, though you never said anything specific about what I was doing, but just kept alluding to "check the sources". As far as I knew, I was making only copy edits. (I think I get now what kind of "discussion" I can expect from someone that makes the kind of offhand reply above, but I'll still keep trying to explain myself, regardless, and hopefully without getting too testy):
  1. You don't respond to the fact that you, yourself, left Meo Rajput in the infobox (and I was just following that)—seriously, how was I supposed to know you reverted me because I unknowingly re-added ONE SPECIFIC label in the lead? Please re-read all of your edit summaries, and you'll see what I mean. You did not mention it at all.
  2. You reverted all my work just because I let "Muslim Rajput" creep back in one place in the lead? You do not reply with why this was necessary, rather than just removing the offending phrase, alone.[a]
Please be more careful in future when you decide to revert someone. Please be clear and explicit in your edit summaries. I repeat: I am NOT a mind-reader. AukusRuckus (talk) 14:13, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

  1. ^ Per WP:RV and WP:REVEXP:
    • "... revert an edit made in good faith only with an explanation and after careful consideration."
    • "Provide a valid and informative explanation ... Try to remain available for dialogue ..."

Can someone stop editors who link Meos as a caste when they are an ethnic group of people who are from Mewat?[edit]

Apparently there is confusion in terms of linking the Meos as a caste, when they can be any community from the Mewat region who are classified as Mewati. The related groups show categories they are classified from. GujaratiHistoryinDNA (talk) 23:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Meo_(ethnic_group)&oldid=1219468991"