Talk:Kashmiris

Difference between intellectuals and witch doctors

I am an ethnic Kashmiri from the Kashmir valley, speaking Koshur and I think you are being prejudiced, there has always been a link with our fellow Kashmiris, who speak Pahari and are not Punjabi, they speak differently. I don't know much about anthropology, but you cannot say whatever may be the case I know they're not Punjabi, Its like saying the Scots are English, even though they both speak English, yet the Azad Kashmir people speak Pahari and the Punjabis speak Punjabi/Potohari. I sometimes wonder if these people with weird theories about the fellow Kashmiris in Azad Kashmir still think that the world is flat too. Some theories say Koshur is indo-Aryan anyway http://www.koshur.org/ , just like the Kasmiris in Azad Kashmir speak Pahari which is an Indo Aryan language too. Please research further with proper resources, I want us to be clear. The Yehudi (Jew) has now entered Kashmir (India) and has started the work the Jews are best known for; that is distort history and plant a fake Yedudi origin history. Aryan of Kashmir are not sleep in this Aryan Central Asian land.

You are a traitor who considers pahari speaking population of so called azad kashmir as "kashmiris". Just visit an area in azad kashmir and have a look at their language and culture, then go to the neighbouring areas of pakistani punjab and you will notice that these so called kashmiris of so called azad kashmir are plain punjabis. They have same ethnical surnames and roots like rajput, jatt or gujjar. Actually you jack pots who live in kashmir valley do not know about the ground realities of the area which is called azad kashmir for no reason´.

Comments by IP user

There is lot of ignorance and nonsense in this thread. There is no race by the name Aryan so there is no question of anyone being pure Aryan. The word Aryan was used to describe the nobility and other influential people among proto-Indo-European cultures, it is is not a race. And people migrate so even if there was ever any such race, they would have been diluted beyond recognition by now. As for Kashmiri being different from other Indians, this is a myth being cultivated by jihad gang. Kashmiris are as different from other Indians/South Asians as other Indians are from each other. The world Kashmiriyat is also a very misused word, these people who claim Kashmiriyat as basis for another country don't even know a single kashmiri word, they speak urdu at home. As for being fairer to other South asians, that is partly true because fairness mostly increases with distance from equator. Some of the fairness and lighter hair color can also be attributed to relative isolation of the people in mountain valleys. However to an outsider, am average kashmiri is not going to look much different from an average South Asian, you are still a brown person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.247.207.157 (talk • contribs) 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Recent edit, p 55

Fylindfotberserk you have interpreted this as a case of redundancy. My impression is that you have read page 55 where Central Asia is touched upon in the Aryan theory context. But my revert of the modification to longstanding content is because page 56 mentions Central Asia in a different breath, which is why I urge you to read on. There's another touch from the historians. So it is not the same context at all. JosephusOfJerusalem (talk) 09:31, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

References

JosephusOfJerusalem, I've seen that. I believe this line:

According to Dar, Kashmir was settled by several waves of migrants, such as Central Asians and Brahmins from India pursuing studies who either mixed with or removed the earlier Nagas. Dar also includes the arrival of Sufis from Iran and Iraq among these migratory waves

cover the Central Asian part well as described in p.55.

Secondly, I believe we should mention "Lord Jesus Christ and origin of Kashmiri from Hebrew" here as well as it is written in the source. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:43, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

EDIT: I want to see the Majeed book. Please provide links

That line covers Dar, it does not cover the ″several historians″. Which is why the removed sentence has its own place.

"Lord Jesus Christ and origin of Kashmiri from Hebrew" are not associated with Kashmiri origins. The linguistic theory might get a spot in Kashmiri language but I don't see any way it can go into a section on the origin of the people. No WP:RS or scholarly theory has ever claimed Jesus to be an ancestor, so I don't see it reasonable to put him in either.

Please see WP:OFFLINE. The title should be self-explanatory. JosephusOfJerusalem (talk) 09:51, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

---

That line covers Dar, it does not cover the ″several historians″. Which is why the removed sentence has its own place. - I understand but all these sentences were framed so similarly that it looks redundant.

• According to scholar Pandit Anand Koul, Kashmiris descend from Indo-Aryan people from Central Asia, and he sees their fair complexions as an indication of that.
• Some historians have argued that the Kashmiris migrated directly from central Asia, citing similar cultures and complexion as evidence for their stance.
• According to Dar, Kashmir was settled by several waves of migrants, such as Central Asians

Anyway, I will put it back. Another thing. Is this section really necessary. I mean a lot of these things were covered in origin section. I believe wiki article on any contemporary group doesn't have this type of a section. Even for Scandinavian groups who were romanticized heavily during 19th-early 20th century. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 20:05, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

To editor Fylindfotberserk: The physical characteristics section has many WP:RS behind it so it is WP:DUE, and much of the content under it is much more than just about the origins of the ethnicity. I do not think that ″I believe wiki article on any contemporary group doesn't have this type of a section″ is a suitable argument, according to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 05:05, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

A required administrative look

@GoldenRing:. I reverted a removal of verifiable content on scholarly discourse on the origins of the Kashmiri race. I then get another person, Razer2115, reverting me and saying this edit comes within the topic ban (in an extremely broadly construed extension of the actual topic ban area). As the administrator who imposed the sanctions you will know well the limits that you have set out. JosephusOfJerusalem (talk) 09:08, 5 June 2018 (UTC)