The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. While the hoax concerns appear to have been addressed, there is not a clear consensus that there's reliable source material at the moment. At the same time, there isn't a clear consensus to delete the article, and conversations about a rename, or redirect should continue editorially. Star Mississippi 16:38, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jangladesh[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The topic—if not a hoax—is not notable. Not a single reliable source has bothered to document the existence of any such region. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ - no reliable sources proferred in support of the region/term even after passing some older deletion nominations. Shyamal (talk) 16:21, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PS: the nearest thing that comes to it is a region known as "Janglu" - and also some titles for some local chiefs - see this Shyamal (talk) 15:23, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rename as Jangaldesh as there is no reliable source for the spelling that rhymes with Bangladesh... Shyamal (talk) 05:07, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Although there are some reliable sources which mentions the area Jangladesh or Janglapradesh as it was known then but I think its coverage or importance is not that much to have its own article, WP:GNG issue. Sajaypal007 (talk) 15:08, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Struck out 'Delete' vote, as per discussion below. Sajaypal007 (talk) 13:22, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No reliable sources that support the contention that such a region ever existed. --RegentsPark (comment) 19:05, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Obvious hoax. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 04:59, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Note that the Rajasthan's historic north-western region in question is known by multiple similar names, e.g. Jangal Desh, Jangal Pradesh, Jangaladesh, Janglu, Jangal, etc. A cursory search with these terms shows a large number of results at Google Books and I don't have time to check them now. But I can provide relevant quotes from an academic source which is already cited in this article:

Kothiyal, Tanuja (2016). Nomadic Narratives: A History of Mobility and Identity in the Great Indian Desert. Cambridge University Press. pp. 28, 77, 78. ISBN 978-1-107-08031-7.

quotation
p. 28 A part of this desert was also addressed as ‘Jangal’, ‘Jangal Des’ or ‘Jangalu’ referring to the arid wilderness of the region. Contrasted with the neighbouring fertile plains of the Punjab rivers and the Indus, rich loamy lands of Gujarat and the thickly forested plateau of Malwa, its aridity renders a singularity to its character, that of a desert. pp. 77–78 The kingdom of Bikaner was established in 1465, in the area that was traditionally known as Janglu.⁴⁸ The fort-city of Bikaner was founded in 1488, in a place that was strategically located on a route that connected Punjab, Multan, Marwar, Delhi and Sindh. The control of this area seemed to have passed from one group to another and at the time of establishment of Bikaner. Johyas, Chauhans, Sankhlas, Parmars, Bhatis, Bhattis, Khichis, Chayals, Kyamkhanis and Jats were dominant groups and controlled large portions of this arid region.⁴⁹ Several of these groups had accepted Islam but still seemed to maintain old associations, even continuing to enter into matrimonial alliances with their Hindu counterparts. In the 15th century, towards north and west of Janglu, Bhatis were still very strong and controlled all major forts including Pugal and Bhatner.⁵⁰ Jats in this region saw Bika as a possible buffer between them and the Bhatis. Bika is believed to have intervened in ongoing disputes between Saran, Godara and Punia Jats, and eventually subjugated all of them. Nainsi describes Bika’s role in a dispute between Godaras and Sarans as follows, The Saharans said, we will not be able to win, as Bikaji backs the Godaras. The Jats of Bhadang went to Narsinghdas Jatu, who brought his forces. When one hundred and forty Godaras were killed, they approached Bikaji, and told him that your Jats are being killed by Narsinghdas. At midnight half of the Jats of Bhadang approached Bikaji and told him that we will help you kill Narsinghdas. They took him to where Narsinghdas was asleep and Bikaji killed him. The Jat forces, fled, and Bikaji took all their cattle. Bikaji also killed Sonhar Jat at Harani Kheda.⁵¹

quotation

p. 28
A part of this desert was also addressed as ‘Jangal’, ‘Jangal Des’ or ‘Jangalu’ referring to the arid wilderness of the region. Contrasted with the neighbouring fertile plains of the Punjab rivers and the Indus, rich loamy lands of Gujarat and the thickly forested plateau of Malwa, its aridity renders a singularity to its character, that of a desert.
pp. 77–78
The kingdom of Bikaner was established in 1465, in the area that was traditionally known as Janglu.⁴⁸ The fort-city of Bikaner was founded in 1488, in a place that was strategically located on a route that connected Punjab, Multan, Marwar, Delhi and Sindh. The control of this area seemed to have passed from one group to another and at the time of establishment of Bikaner. Johyas, Chauhans, Sankhlas, Parmars, Bhatis, Bhattis, Khichis, Chayals, Kyamkhanis and Jats were dominant groups and controlled large portions of this arid region.⁴⁹ Several of these groups had accepted Islam but still seemed to maintain old associations, even continuing to enter into matrimonial alliances with their Hindu counterparts. In the 15th century, towards north and west of Janglu, Bhatis were still very strong and controlled all major forts including Pugal and Bhatner.⁵⁰ Jats in this region saw Bika as a possible buffer between them and the Bhatis. Bika is believed to have intervened in ongoing disputes between Saran, Godara and Punia Jats, and eventually subjugated all of them. Nainsi describes Bika’s role in a dispute between Godaras and Sarans as follows,
The Saharans said, we will not be able to win, as Bikaji backs the Godaras. The Jats of Bhadang went to Narsinghdas Jatu, who brought his forces. When one hundred and forty Godaras were killed, they approached Bikaji, and told him that your Jats are being killed by Narsinghdas. At midnight half of the Jats of Bhadang approached Bikaji and told him that we will help you kill Narsinghdas. They took him to where Narsinghdas was asleep and Bikaji killed him. The Jat forces, fled, and Bikaji took all their cattle. Bikaji also killed Sonhar Jat at Harani Kheda.⁵¹

Its page nos. 57 and 76 also contain some relevant details about it, but I am not quoting them due to copyright issues. Note that I have just glanced through some pages of the above source, rather than reading them. And I am only posting here to show that this is not a hoax. So this needs a second look. But I guess we do need some coverage in other scholarly sources for meeting WP:GNG. - NitinMlk (talk) 20:47, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Partially agree with NitinMlk. As I already mentioned Jangladesh was real name of the region and it is no hoax. Rathores of Bikaner did subdue Jats of the area and took control of this region. The Bikaner Kingdom even in later times was called Jangal desh. As pointed out by @NitinMlk, there is problem of different spellings, in my opinion more common spelling is Jangal desh or Jangaldesh and not Jangladesh. Quick google book search for Jangal desh and Jangaldesh not Jangladesh gives quite a number of books mentioning it in relation with historical region. If I remember correctly, the rulers of Bikaner till later times were called Jangal dhar Badshah i.e. Lord of Jangaldesh. Sajaypal007 (talk) 12:49, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, it is not a hoax: was too confident to bother rechecking Kothiyal. That being said, GNG is not met: there is nothing to write apart from that in bardic chronicles, Rajasthan (or rather, a part of it) is frequently mentioned as Jangaldesh. TrangaBellam (talk) 20:53, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, only a particular north-western region of Rajasthan (rather than the whole of it) is historically known by this name. A quick search at Google Books shows that this academic source also has some details about it. But I don't have access to it. Anyway, you are way better than me at searching sources. So please do have a look at them if you get some time. Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:07, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't get time to look at the Google books search results, but I have just looked at the other sources cited in the article. One of them contains a chapter authored by Dr. Jibraeil, who was an assistant professor of history at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU): [1]. His research was focused on Rajasthan and the revised version of his thesis was published by Routledge in 2018: [2]. So I guess his cited chapter seems fine with in-text attribution. I will check its content in a day or two. Note that he was one of the multiple AMU faculty members who died this year due to COVID-19: see [3], [4], [5], etc.

Sajaypal007, the article's title is not an issue, as the page can be moved to Jangal desh if that's its WP:COMMONNAME. This region is mentioned in many Rajasthan-related articles. So a short and well-sourced article would be helpful. But at the same time, we need inputs from someone who is well-versed in Rajasthan's history of that era. - NitinMlk (talk) 23:44, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NitinMlk, I consider myself as having good grasp on Rajasthan History, did my graduation and PG in it. As I looked at more and more sources, I kind of think that my vote for deletion was made in haste, although I did mention that the region is mentioned as such in history books. Can I change my vote from delete to merely a comment, with more inputs I can make better decision. Although I am little busy for next couple of weeks, I will atleast list as many sources I can find on this below. Sajaypal007 (talk) 05:42, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added 3-4 sources on Jangladesh page alongwith quotes, copy pasting those here, Jangal Desh^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4] Dr Dasharatha Sharma was a famous historian from Rajasthan. Rima Hooja is also archaeologist turned Historian. Karni Singh was former Maharaja of Bikaner i.e. the same region which was called Jangal desh and he also studied history from Delhi University. K.R. Qanungo was also a historian and wrote many books. Here 1 another famous historian of Rajasthan G.N.Sharma mentioned Jangaldesh in his map. Another historian Ram Vallabh Somani 2 in his book Prithvi raj and his times mention the region of Jangal desh. If time permits, I will add more sources that mention the region. Sajaypal007 (talk) 06:30, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just remembered, the famous Chirwa inscription of Guhilot prince Samarsimha, states that Jaitrasimha's (his grandfather) pride could not be curbed by rulers of Malwa, Gujarat, Maru and Jangala. Sajaypal007 (talk) 06:42, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sajaypal007, the WP:!VOTE can be changed whenever you want, and the AfD can be relisted if you need some more time. But I am not familiar with Rajasthan's history of that era. BTW, Jibraeil's chapter does have relevant details, which I will hopefully quote here tomorrow. - NitinMlk (talk) 19:42, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As the title indicates, Jibraeil's chapter is about the Churu region, rather than Jangaldesh, although Churu was part of Jangaldesh. Anyway, here's a relevant quote from the book:

Jibraeil (2006). "Position of Jats in Churu Region". In Singh, Vir (ed.). Jats: Their Role and Contribution to the Socio-Economic Life and Polity of North and North-Western India. Vol. 2 (1st ed.). Originals. pp. 222–223. ISBN 978-81-88629-51-0.

quotation
After Chauhans, Jats completely established their supremacy and hold over administration in their own traditional fashion, which continued till the conquest of the region by the Rathors.²³ The Jats claimed their right over the land which was under their possession before the Rathors occupied it and this claim was inherited by their descedants, who used to divide the land among themselves for cultivation. It appears probable that in the early period of their conquest the Rathors could not exercise any definite claim on the land as landlords. However, it was possible only in the 17th century,²⁴ due to internal rivalries among the Jats, primarily Godaras surrendered, later on all the Jat clans accepted Rathor's suzerainty.²⁵ After this, the rulers had strengthened their position and tightened their grip over the area.²⁶ When Rathors led an expedition into the region of dry land also known as Jangal Pradesh, which was occupied by the Jats and various tribes, the Bhatis and Jats of the region wanted to secure their position, they measured sworded with him and fought bravely against them, but finally defeated and accepted Rathor suzerainty.²⁷

quotation

After Chauhans, Jats completely established their supremacy and hold over administration in their own traditional fashion, which continued till the conquest of the region by the Rathors.²³ The Jats claimed their right over the land which was under their possession before the Rathors occupied it and this claim was inherited by their descedants, who used to divide the land among themselves for cultivation. It appears probable that in the early period of their conquest the Rathors could not exercise any definite claim on the land as landlords. However, it was possible only in the 17th century,²⁴ due to internal rivalries among the Jats, primarily Godaras surrendered, later on all the Jat clans accepted Rathor's suzerainty.²⁵ After this, the rulers had strengthened their position and tightened their grip over the area.²⁶
When Rathors led an expedition into the region of dry land also known as Jangal Pradesh, which was occupied by the Jats and various tribes, the Bhatis and Jats of the region wanted to secure their position, they measured sworded with him and fought bravely against them, but finally defeated and accepted Rathor suzerainty.²⁷

- NitinMlk (talk) 20:28, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Churu and Bikaner were both part of Kingdom of Bikaner, Rathores since Rao Bika ruled over this part. So historically Churu is also considered as part of Jangal Pradesh. Sajaypal007 (talk) 13:27, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Long story short, Jangaldesh used to be the old name of a particular region in Rajasthan which was ruled by Jats, before felling to Bika. We know nothing except this. So, why not merge to History of Rajasthan? TrangaBellam (talk) 06:44, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with TrangaBellam. The term is very sparsely cited and, at best, deserves a mention somewhere. Not an article of its own. --RegentsPark (comment) 15:21, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Qanungo, Kalika Ranjan; Kānūnago, Kālikā Rañjana (1960). Studies in Rajput History. S. Chand. p. 60. whereas the Jats lived in the Jangal-desh (a portion of ancient Kuru-Jangal region), which covers Bikanir and some portion of the Jodhpur State.
^ Singh, Karni (1974). The Relations of the House of Bikaner with the Central Powers, 1465-1949. Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers. p. 12. ISBN 978-0-8364-0457-9. "The old name of the territories which went to constitute the Rathore principality of Bikaner, had been 'Jangal Desh'.((cite book)): CS1 maint: date and year (link)
^ Hooja, Rima (2006). A History of Rajasthan. Rupa & Company. p. 6. ISBN 978-81-291-0890-6. In a different context, a part of the desert land now part of the administrative division of Bikaner was apparently known as 'Jangal' (also 'Jangal-desh).((cite book)): CS1 maint: date and year (link)
^ Sharma, Dasharatha (1966). Rajasthan Through the Ages: From the earliest times to 1316 A.D. Bikaner. pp. 287–288. There is good reason to believe that parts of the present north-eastern and north-western Rajasthan were inhabited by Jat clans ruled by their own chiefs and largely governed by their own customary law.((cite book)): CS1 maint: date and year (link) CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)

Comment -- I believe that "desh" means something like province. I do not know the distinction between it and pradesh (also province). However differences of name according to whether these words are added to the name Jangla and variations in the vowels (due to differences in transliteration and not significant. The footnotes seem to have quotations using the name, so that it seems to be real. On the otehtr hand I would caution against the expansion of this article beyond its current length. Peterkingiron (talk) 00:24, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 21:02, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:27, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I came upon this debate when patrolling Special:PendingChanges and, frankly, I don't know. But if one looks at the Bikaner article's cited sources, this [[6]] seems to make it clear that Jangladesh, at a minimum, is not a hoax and has some support from quasi-official Indian sources. Fiachra10003 (talk) 11:48, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the source from the article. Rajasthan tourism is not WP:RS. --RegentsPark (comment) 17:03, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.