Talk:Chamar/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Chamar being pejorative term

TimesGerman, Chamar is used as a pejorative term in India, and that has been covered in a large number of academic sources. They even compared it with N word. In fact, its use is "a punishable offense under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989". But you removed this detail by calling it irrelevant and not being standard in other caste articles. It is surely not irrelevant, and it's not standard in caste articles simply because neither the names of other castes are considered abusive in general nor their use is a punishable offence. Here are some quality sources regarding the use of the term Chamar:

• "The negative connotations associated with the name “chamar” long ago turned it into a term of profanity used by many caste Hindus, much like the term “nigger” has been used by many non-black Americans. By officially separating his followers from a degraded livelihood, and by further attempting to disengage them from the pejorative connotations of “chamar,” Ghasidas again hoped to address and remove a major vehicle used by the caste-Hindu society for his caste community's social and religious ostracism and their status of untouchability."

• "The term 'Chamar' in India is a highly stigmatized one, equivalent to the highly derogatory term used to humiliate African Americans. Under the SC/ST (Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe) Prevention of Atrocities Act of 1989, it is a legal offence to call someone a Chamar."

• "In contemporary India, the word 'Chamar' is used with caution as it still carries offensive connotations and is considered a term of abuse."

• "The debased caste status of the Chamars is reflected in the fact that, even now, the word ‘Chamar’ is used as a general derogatory term: IndoTrinidadians who wish to insult and abuse each other will often use the term as an epithet. Interestingly, this term has entered the vocabulary of Afro-Trinidadians, too. While the term ‘Chamar’, used as a term of abuse, has no reference to the caste of the person abused, the essence of the insult consists in invoking an ambivalent element of the Indian cultural heritage, namely, the backward ‘tradition’ of ascribed status: the term ‘Chamar’ not only means ‘lowly individual’, but it also implies a ‘remnant of an undesirable practice’."

In fact, you can easily find even more sources for it, e.g. [1], [2],[3], [4], etc. And it is regularly reported in the Indian media.

I will temporarily remove the mention from the article, mainly to bring you to the discussion. So please go through the above sources, and stop edit warring. Also, don't add WP:CIRCULAR to the article, as you did with this, and again with this edit. Also pinging Sitush as they were the one who added/fixed this detail. Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:55, 3 April 2019 (UTC) fixed a citation NitinMlk (talk) 22:37, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

References

NitinMlk, This wikipedia article is about the Chamar caste and not about use of the caste name as a slur. This is not relevant to the article or should be another wikipedia article. It is in fact very casteist and elitist thinking. None of the other caste articles in wikipedia have this mentioned in the introduction section. For example: It is very common to use "Bahman" as a curse word in punjab to mean someone who is not trustworthy and cunning. "Bania" is used a curse word to mean cowardly, greedy person. "Jat" is used a curse word to mean someone who dumb and uneducated. Every caste in India, has derogatory curse words used against it, by members of other castes. This is something that should not be included in Wikipedia since it is subjective/casteist. TimesGerman (talk) 15:47, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

NitinMlk, The way this sentence is written is not correct: "Chamar is one of the untouchable communities, or dalits," since it implies that this is the defining features of this caste, and comes across as castiest, elitist and condescending. The Chamar caste may have been "untouchables" in some parts of India but in other parts of India they were not Untouchables (especially in Punjab and Sikhism). The sentence implies that this caste "low" and "weak", while it is one of the biggest castes in India, is politically very powerful (for example BSP and political influence that comes from its large numbers, the huge numbers of this caste in the Indian army etc. It would be better to write the sentence as "Chamar is one of the traditionally dalit communities, or dalits, native to India, Nepal and Pakistan".

See how the other "general" caste wiki articles are introduced: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jat_people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bania_(caste) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahir TimesGerman (talk) 14:09, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Firstly, the article is about Chamar caste, the name of which is used as an abuse in India, which is a punishable offence per the supreme court's judgement. So it is related to Chamar caste, and we cannot and should not cover it anywhere else.

Secondly, it is not "very casteist and elitist thinking"; rather it is the scholarly work on which all of our caste-related articles are based.

Thirdly, "none of the other caste articles in wikipedia have this mentioned" because, as I've already explained in the previous comment, neither the names of other castes are considered abusive in general nor their use is a punishable offence. If you can provide multiple academic sources which say that the terms like Brahman, Bania, Jat, etc. are considered pejorative in India, and that their use is a punishable offence, then we should surely mention that in the body as well as lead of their respective articles. But you know it yourself that that is not the case. And Wikipedia is not censored, so please stop the using the term casteist again and again.

Fourthly, we summarize the work of scholars in caste-related articles on this project. If a controversial claim is made by only one academic, then we cover that detail with attribution only in the article's body. But if the same details are covered by multiple scholars then we cover them without attribution and sum them up in the lead as well. And that's the case with the use of the term Chamar.

Finally, this section is regarding the use of the term Chamar, so you should open a new section regarding your other objection(s). BTW, before you open new section regarding the mention of dalit/untouchable in the article, you should back your every claim with academic sources, like I did above. Your personal claims count for nothing. Having said that, I will check whether the modern academic sources call them untouchables or ex-untouchables. - NitinMlk (talk) 23:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

You seem to have problem regarding the mention of the abusive use of the term in the lead. I have no problem with its removal from the lead, and mentioning it just in the article's body, provided other experienced editors agree with that. Until then, you should focus on providing sources for your other claims, e.g. your claim regarding the Sikh Light Infantry. BTW, I might not edit WP for a day or two, so be patient. Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 14:16, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

I agree with NitinMlk and I think that TimesGerman, after all these years of trying, needs to drop the stick. - Sitush (talk) 13:08, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Why you use untuchable and maje them down in front to every readers.Please understand and make new india with equlity. Thanks SirjiIndia (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Remove the photo of cobbler man

In 21 century The Great Chamar Community is not doing any kind of shoe making jobs . They are getting high posts in governmental and private sectors. One research says that today chamars have the highest number of IAS IPS officers after Brahmins. They are also very much active in politics like in Uttar Pradesh one of the Chamar had become CM for 4 Times. So it's humble request to you to remove photo of the cobbler man. Kattadchamarsofworld (talk) 06:14, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, in modern era every community has glorifying future and reputation, but we have don't have to hide the fact ,the traditional occupation of the community was of leather work and therefore it is not wrong to show the traditional work. Saichana (talk) 12:18, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Add some more photo in notable people section.

Add some more photo in notable people section. Saichana (talk) 12:22, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Add more information

Add some more information in the article. Saichana (talk) 12:24, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Remove the term "untouchables" from the article wherever it is used..

The term "untouchables" used in the article right in the starting reflects the cheap mentality of the people that is still in existence despite being it an offensive word.. Remove that term right away... Being categorised under "SC" that is enough to write.. what are you trying to promote to the upcoming generation by providing such article with offensive words.. Urs.Rajat (talk) 15:04, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I've removed it from the first sentence. Perhaps someone with more knowledge can figure out what to do with other references to the term. --regentspark (comment) 15:16, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Made a few more tweaks. Hopefully, this works. --regentspark (comment) 15:19, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Untouchable is a widely recognised term, which cannot be said of Scheduled Caste. Wikipedia isn't bound by India's laws and, IIRC, not all SC groups are/were called untouchable. To whitewash one of the most iconic words associated with India would be a dis-service, as also is obfuscation in the lead section. It is a point raised by members of various untouchable groups at their "own" articles and to the best of my knowledge has never gained traction. - Sitush (talk) 19:15, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Same rationale applies for dalit really. It isn't great that most readers outside India would have to click on a word in the opening sentence to work out what is meant. It isn't great practice even in scientific articles, where non-layperson terminology is inevitably much more prevalent. - Sitush (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 May 2020

You better not use chamar word straight away and should be a little subtle while telling about it. Better remove the word chamar and use schedule caste 223.225.14.96 (talk) 17:25, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 18:06, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 June 2020

remove some hatful information Yogeshpahade9 (talk) 08:57, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. TheImaCow (talk) 16:06, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Remove chamar page

I request You Administrator , Please Remove chamar page from wikipedia because now caste system abolished almost but wikipedia now again have starting casteism. Adsmohali (talk) 15:11, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

My caste is not chamar but i have read alot on wikipedia this create depression in the mind of person who have low caste. Adsmohali (talk) 15:13, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

No. See WP:CASTE. Praxidicae (talk) 15:50, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Replace the word positive discrimination with the term affirmative action

The article starts with "Chamar is a dalit community classified as a Scheduled Caste under modern India's system of positive discrimination." I do not think positive discrimination is the correct term because it means that they are being discriminated for/against. I suggest using Affirmative action as it means that they are increasing their representation in the field in which they are underrepresented. arpitarunmishra (talk) 12:18, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 June 2021

"Historically subject to untouchability, they were traditionally outside the Hindu ritual ranking system of castes known as varna."

Kindly remove this as this harms the self esteem of millions of Hindus. Even though this is factually correct, it is not right. 106.210.34.136 (talk) 19:41, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: per WP:NOTCENSORED ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Remove chamar image

Remove chamar image 2409:4043:29C:B0D6:0:0:F5B:70B0 (talk) 16:34, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Some other notable people of Chamar

Some other notable people of Chamar

Uddham Singh Sameerdi61 (talk) 14:56, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 May 2022

2409:4052:4D0A:2FBE:0:0:DC0A:AE0D (talk) 20:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Remove balai name

 Not done: There is a cited source at that part of the article. Please provide a WP:RS if you would like us to change it. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 02:20, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 June 2022

I want to edit history of chamars, so please allow me to edit. Yash1110 (talk) 12:45, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:01, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

I want to add about kingdom and places which was ruled by the chamars. Yash1110 (talk) 12:28, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Read the message above. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:39, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 September 2022

Chamar are not dalit community they are mol niwasi of India...and basically they are real Rajput read the books frist and then edit the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.180.183.134 (talk) 10:55, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Chamar or Chambhar

There is already a bigger article called Chambhar that deals with Indian leather working castes, should the two articles be merged? Comments please.Thanks. Jonathansammy (talk) 15:29, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

I think Chambhar should be merged in Chamar. Mahant Sonty (talk) 03:24, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 November 2022

In the districts of Bharatpur, Dhaulpur and parts of Alwar (adjoining to Bharatpur) they are known as Meghwal Please remove meghwal they are separate community they are not chamar Rajput joga (talk) 04:46, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The statement appears sourced, so you'll need to have a consensus amongst editors to ascertain if an issue with the source exists and - if so - what to do. —Sirdog (talk) 05:48, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Chamar king of Utpala Dynasty

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utpala_dynasty Add this dynasty as their ruling clan as the king of this dynasty was from chamar community Kvjr0604 (talk) 09:08, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

The Chamar dynasty Kvjr0604 (talk) 10:37, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Confusing notes on Chamar caste for Punjab

Under "Chamar population in India by State, 2001", Chamars are listed as 11.9% of Punjab's total population and are then the notes section reads "The Chamar caste cluster (34.93%) consists of two castes of Chamars and Ad-dharmis." The source for this information states that Chamars are 34.93% out of the total scheduled caste population in Punjab. The description is confusing. I think it would read better if it was edited to say something along the lines of "The Chamar caste cluster forms 34.93% of the scheduled castes and consists of Chamars and Ad-dharmis." Lodestar2001 (talk) 22:08, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 March 2023

Chamars in Rajasthan can only be identified in the districts adjoining to the states of Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. The districts of Bikaner, Shriganganagar, Hanumangarh, Churu, Jhunjhunu, Alwar, Bharatpur and Dhaulpur are inhabited by Chamars. In the districts of Bharatpur, Dhaulpur and parts of Alwar (adjoining to Bharatpur) they are known as Meghwal Change Meghwal to others because they are not chamar they are separate caste Mannu098765 (talk) 17:11, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Lightoil (talk) 23:12, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2023

CHAMVAR (talk) 10:58, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

During the medieval period, the Chamar community faced social and economic discrimination due to their caste status. However, they also had opportunities to gain economic and political power by aligning with ruling dynasties.

During the colonial period, the Chamar community was heavily impacted by British policies, including the introduction of Christianity, which led to some members of the community converting to Christianity.

After India gained independence in 1947, the Indian government introduced various affirmative action policies to provide equal opportunities and reduce discrimination against low-caste communities, including the Chamar community.

Today, the Chamar community is a politically active community with several prominent leaders who have played a significant role in Indian politics. Despite progress, the community still faces discrimination and struggles for equal rights and opportunities.

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Raka Is a Punjabi singer which caste is chamar

103.186.73.208 (talk) 19:17, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Xan747 (talk) 19:39, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Avantivarman was the Chamar[2][3]who founded the Utpala dynasty.He ruled Kashmir from 855 to 883 CE and built the Avantiswami Temple in Awantipora, Pulwama.

King Avantivarman belonged to chamar caste but these manuvadis won't let this information come out in open. They have always been oppressive and don't want any so called low caste could reclaim it's status or atleast know it's history. It was clearly mentioned in Ain-e-akhbari that King Avantivarman was a chamar king. I would like to request the editor to kindly go through the book(Ain-e-akhbari) and know the history. 43.247.41.244 (talk) 07:52, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Edit Chamar page

hey i want to edit Chamar page please allow me to edit this page. Maheyyash (talk) 11:48, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

You need to be an extended confirmed editor to edit the page. However, if you have specific changes in mind, you can make an edit request.RegentsPark (comment) 17:49, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Ya, I want to change the history section because that history is related only to one sub group Jatav and not to the entire Chamar community.

so i want to some clean up in the history section and adding the History which is related to Chamars not to the jatavs Maheyyash (talk) 19:54, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Read the page edit request for information on how to make an edit request. Then add your request on this page and someone will take care of it for you. Do note that your request must be specific (e.g., change old specific sentence to new specific sentence) and the change must be supported by a citation that is a reliable source. RegentsPark (comment) 19:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Vandana Kataria

Vandana Kataria Well known Women Hockey player belongs to Chamar Caste. Please add her to Notable Chamar peoples. Sameerdi61 (talk) 18:09, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Rinku Singh

Rinku Singh well known Indian cricket team player belongs to chamar caste. Please add him in Notable Chamar peoples. Sameerdi61 (talk) 18:11, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 November 2023

Please Add some our chamar caste gotra and vansh  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4051:2E8B:1125:0:0:C38B:AA0C (talk) 16:17, 29 November 2023 (UTC) 

Correct the Related ethnic groups

Add Mahar to the Related ethnic groups.

As both have the same work (The leather working) and Mahar is sub caste of Chamar. Rakshit Banjaria (talk) 06:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 December 2023

The description about Chamar caste is creating an inferiority complex within this group. On the other hand atrocities committed by few people cannot be attributed to whole Rajput caste.The mention of sexual exploitation by few upper caste people should not be templated on whole Rajputs.

These references should be removed. 2409:40D5:5A:7F1B:B16D:653A:593A:2406 (talk) 09:24, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Shadow311 (talk) 16:29, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

About Image

we are not belongs to muslims and remove this image 2409:4085:8E83:A460:E843:FCD9:E525:BF78 (talk) 14:22, 31 December 2023 (UTC)