Talk:Randhawa

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthroponymy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the study of people's names on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthroponymyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthroponymyTemplate:WikiProject AnthroponymyAnthroponymy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

India: Punjab Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Punjab portal This article is supported by WikiProject Punjab (India) (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article was last assessed in May 2012.

notable people[edit]

There have been some notable people added, some of whom (an engineering student) definitely do not meet the notability requirement as set out by WP:N. There are others that I am not sure of, but at this stage there has been so much traffic in this section that I am removing all that do not have a defence of notability. Please do not re-add unless they are notable. BananaFiend (talk) 09:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just done it again. Claims to fame need to be supported by refs meeting WP:RS standards. -- Timberframe (talk) 13:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Could somebody please provide ISBN numbers for the references? AnyPerson (talk) 04:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jatts[edit]

The article defines Randhawa as a Jat gotra, and then goes on to give 4 paragraphs about Jats in general without any indication how much, if any, of this info applies to Randhawa. I propose deleting these 4 paragraphs as they belong in the Jat article and don't tell us anything specific to Randhawa. Any thoughts, anyone? -- Timberframe (talk) 13:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

H. A. Rose[edit]

H. A. Rose and his British Raj colleagues - the supposed "ethnographers" - have been determined to be unreliable as sources for Wikipedia time after time after time. I've become so fed up of repeating myself that I am developing an essay at User:Sitush/CasteSources and this will eventually summarise the myriad of reasons why these so-called authorities are not used. FWIW, they are also not used by modern academics, other than the much-maligned The People of India survey of the 1980s/1990s. Please do not reinstate him as a source in this article. - Sitush (talk) 19:14, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]