Talk:Koeri

Plagiarism

Most of this article seems to be written by Plagiarizing Jogendra Nath Bhattacharya's book. Please see WP:Plagiarism. I don't think it is good to have plagiarized material on WP.MW ^ℳ 11:52, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Here's a link to the book at archive.org [1]-MW ^ℳ 13:49, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Do you know what plagiarism means? True, it is not great to rely mostly on a single source but whoever it was that did so in this instance appears not to have had many options available to them. If you know of alternative sources then feel free to use them. - Sitush (talk) 15:21, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

If you think I am talking about something other than "plagiarism", but using the word by mistake, you have poor powers of perception. You need not deal with everything that happens on caste articles. Stay away from things you do not understand.MW ^ℳ 15:33, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Plagiarism means to use the work of someone else without suitable attribution. Please can you indicate where in the article the work of Bhattacharya has been used without such. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 15:52, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

That is not the only meaning of plagiarism. Using someone's else's wording can also be plagiarism. Much of this article is using wording which is borrowed from the Bhattacharya book. That is what I mean by "plagiarism" here and that is what I find unbecoming of WP to do. The methods of getting over "plagiarism" concerns are described in the policy which I linked.MW ^ℳ 16:00, 4 October 2011 (UTC) In any case, the book is too old and from a non RS. Material from this book should be deleted.MW ^ℳ 16:03, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, you mean that there is close paraphrasing, not plagiarism. Please give some examples & I will address them for you. - Sitush (talk) 16:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing is a form of plagiarism. So, it is incorrect to give the impression that close paraphrasing is not plagiarism. It is. There is only one page of that book which is being used here. So, it should be easy to locate which parts of the wording is being copied in the article.MW ^ℳ 16:34, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

If you make an "accusation" then you must follow it through. Please do so. - Sitush (talk) 16:40, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

This is absurd Casteism is still alive here You ppl won't let us move forward. Even after knowing our political status and social position you have made us backward here on Wikipedia.

Kuswaha (talk) 12:51, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia is losing credibily as you people are monopolising it. Today I edited this article about caste group to which I belong a total 23 times and every time your rollbacker and managers deleted whole necessary changes even after I put reliable sources. This is injustice Kuswaha (talk) 12:53, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a Complaint Box. Put your issues in a proper format instead of complaining. See WP:TALK#USE. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:55, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Newspaper are not source s absurd Kuswaha (talk) 18:37, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Newspaper articles later become s chapter of history Kuswaha (talk) 18:37, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Shudra category

I have added back the Shudra category which was removed earlier today. The article does refer to this point and it does not at present appear to be in dispute, and neither is the existence of the category itself. - Sitush (talk) 17:17, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Sitush whatever you are doing knowingly or unknowingly could have grave consequences on socio-economic situation of people of this particular community in India. Farmers of India were particularly rich and we have so much gold with us that British never afford to leave us until they steal all our money and resources and left farmers in their misery. And what they left for us is just Shudra status as stated by so called William Pinch and some noble scholars from India who were born with silver spoon. It is very easy by an outsider to declare any community as Shudra in India but the consequences will be grave and maybe you don't understand the political situation in India. Sitush I have heard you earlier had some discussion on Indian castes especially Kushwaha. You took the note of William Pinch to call the caste Shudra. But do you know about Varna System in India. If you really need to adhere to the facts then according to correct Varna system as introduced by Aryans a person who is a blacksmith is a shudra but since his father is serving in an army then the father is kshatriya.In a family in varna system, family members could belong to different varnas according to their occupation. But since in most of the cases a son copies his father job, so also started doing the same job and then people recognised them according to the work done by family for generations so varna system collapsed and caste system came. But now in present scenario caste depicts social status of a person in India. Suppose you are a scholar of some low caste then you won't be getting respect that you deserve . Your caste will overshadow your knowledge. Keep yourself in the feet of those who suffers such discrimination. Instead of wrongly editing these articles you should try to go to the base problem of anything. Before declaring any community as Shudra you should check the present and past of that community. Wikiknowcorrect (talk) 19:55, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia requires verifiability by use of reliable sources. I am well aware of the way the varna system operates and the historic and current situation in India, thanks, but Wikipedia is not censored - we present things as the reliable sources show them. - Sitush (talk) 20:42, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

I have added latest Political status and a reliable source please help me to ward off stigma from my caste

Kuswaha (talk) 11:19, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Caste is a sentitive issue. You should better discuss your changes here (talk) before making any changes in the main article. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:30, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

You ppl will pay for it. Monopolistic strategy by forward caste on Wikipedia is not good. Actually it's you who made ppl enslaved Kuswaha (talk) 12:57, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

In absense of reliable sources there is everything good written about forward castes on Wikipedia. You are hiding truth from world.My making koeri Community a backward and useless community you are showing ugly face of casteism Kuswaha (talk) 12:58, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia ensures to prevent vandalism but you are promoting it. Kuswaha (talk) 12:59, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

There is no historical proof of other communities like Rajputs being Kshatriya but you readily made them Kuswaha (talk) 13:00, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Even you have given heavenly origin of Rajputs from fire and kayastha from chitragupta do you have the proof that a person can take birth from 🔥 fire .same on you Kuswaha (talk) 13:02, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

You people also removed all controversial fact about plight of Rajput and other forward community to make them seem higher than us. And you talk of neutray Kuswaha (talk) 13:03, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Lastly I would like to warn that this may cost Indian society heavily as in future when our children will read this stigmatized editorial it will create problem. Kuswaha (talk) 13:05, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

On pages you can leave us behind but you can't do it in three dimensional world.

Kuswaha (talk) 13:06, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

It is violation of my right.you are regarding us as shudra based on book of a guy who has no relevance Kuswaha (talk) 18:39, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

please can we remove the Shudra category ?

If the Shudra varna is disputed we cannot put them in this category. In fact, having a "Category:Shudra_castes" in wikipedia is a bit too much IMHO although I understand that it is uncensored. Thanks Acharya63 (talk) 04:38, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Shudra status should be removed its not true Kuswaha (talk) 18:40, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Koeri

What is the meaning of relevant source for u. Even after providing details from newspaper you are not changing status of koeri Kuswaha (talk) 18:35, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Relevant sources in this case would be reliable secondary sources like books, not newspaper articles. Secondly, how the political alliance of Yadavs and Koeri has anything to do with the social status of these castes, not to mention you only added some Wikipedia links which are not reliable as per WP:UGC. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:42, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello I am extremely offended to see it here I don't know how to post it m giving you a source please see it Community head (talk) 11:12, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

https://books.google.co.in/url?id=wWDnTWrz4O8C&pg=PA404&q=http://www.abc-clio.com&clientid=ca-print-abc_clio&linkid=1&usg=AFQjCNGHGp6gYA1tW4ebviH54aVvG7ihdg&source=gbs_pub_info_r Community head (talk) 11:14, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello a link added it's reliable plz approve Community head (talk) 11:45, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Why sitush removed notables

Plz add list of notables Xxxxxxxxy (talk) 05:50, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

@Queercofeminist sir y removed list of notables Xxxxxxxxy (talk) 06:50, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Why list of notables added by me removed plz reply Xxxxxxxxy (talk) 06:58, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Baidyanath Prasad Mahto .jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:07, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Keshav Prasad Maurya.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:23, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi sitush

@Sitush: Dear sitush thank you for writing about koeri community.I would like to suggest that it need expansion i.e latest political development and landholding.if u really want to improve article I m suggesting some source and making some changes.i would like it if u review and fix it in right place.I think we need not move to admin noticeboard and fix the issue here only about critical debate on new addition Sanghamitramaurya (talk) 12:13, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sitush: since u are writer of this article I think u should make new addition as flow of article should continue Sanghamitramaurya (talk) 12:19, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sitush:the picture shown in this article is not perfectly true of present scenario ....koeri are now developed community so plz add new things I m adding sources here}} Sanghamitramaurya (talk) 12:20, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

1.Kunnath, George (2018). Rebels From the Mud Houses: Dalits and the Making of the Maoist Revolution ... New york: Taylor and Francis group. p. 31. ISBN 978-1-138-09955-5. Retrieved 2020-05-29.

.Reddy, D. Narasimha (2009). Agrarian Reforms, Land Markets, and Rural Poor. Concept Publishing Compan. ISBN 8180696049. Retrieved 2020-06-16.

Yes, I agree that it needs to be expanded & brought up to date. There is information at the Kushwaha article that can be used here. I am just too busy on other articles at present but this one is on my list. However, it isn't my article - other people can change things directly or propose specific changes here. - Sitush (talk) 13:15, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sitush: dear sitush I have spent two days to find book sources to expand this article.As u were busy I have used my first experience as writer.I would be very grateful to u if u approve my writing after checking all sources and scrutinizing my mistakes.I see no problem in adding jagdish mahto as he was mass hero and a lot of standard writing exist for him and similar heroic man exist in various caste articles

Ok Sanghamitramaurya (talk) 13:30, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

As Sitush was busy I expanded it with quality book source.

Ok Sanghamitramaurya (talk) 12:39, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I've not looked at your changes closely but the gist of them matches what I have read over the years. I will try to tidy things up. If this was your first go at editing an article, it isn't bad at all. There are issues with your style (example - things that should have capital letters, thus Koeri rather thankoeri) but it is easily fixed. - Sitush (talk) 20:50, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sitush: hi sir ,i think something is still left which could make this article perfect even after mam @Sanghamitramaurya: had spent a lot of time editing it.I found some useful stuff in books that were used at article kushwaha.so i want consent of both of you to add a new section on myth of origin. ??

Feel free to add stuff, as I said above. Just remember that if you are copying actual text from the Kushwaha article then you should make a note of that in the edit summary, eg: "copied from Kushwaha". - Sitush (talk) 07:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sitush: tq sir ....for quick reply.actually not copied but i went through source books listed there and found stuffs which i tried to write in my own words. further,i went on some google search to find more source.

As you said i added it.But i m little cautious about whether it appears good with an article already written by someone or not.can you pls help.sir, Do you think that sources i used are worth existing on Wikipedia. Must reply. ..tq

Added more Heba Aisha (talk) 07:40, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Just a quick query - you say in your edit summary here that there is no caste census. I don't know what is planned for next year's census but I think there was a caste census in 2011. Am I right? - Sitush (talk) 08:16, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes sir....there is a census exercise every 10yrs but that just gauge population but population of particular community or caste is not calculated specifically

So need to rely on news source and rough estimate as all caste article does. https://www.indiatoday.in/amp/india/story/lalu-prasad-makes-fresh-pitch-for-caste-based-census-in-npr-1632263-2019-12-29&ved=2ahUKEwif6JX-zKbqAhWk7XMBHRasDKcQFjACegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw1Eyo1Wtq93YUZr9Hthd4r1&ampcf=1

See here sir, you can understand from it

K Heba Aisha (talk) 20:12, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Schazjmd

@Schazjmd: hi sir....ur copyedit was necessary and i m thankful to u for helping me in improving this article.plz keep going with punctuation etc thank you Heba Aisha (talk) 18:07, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Heba Aisha, some tips: names are capitalized; do not put a space between a word and the punctuation (comma or period) that follows it; always put a space after the punctuation at the end of a word; always put a space after a </ref> tag and the next word. Schazjmd (talk) 18:45, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Also, just to clarify, I accepted your pending edits as they looked sourced and didn't appear to violate policies. However, the sections you added are very wordy and repetitive. It's likely that other editors that are more familiar with this topic may want to tighten the language and remove some redundancies. Schazjmd (talk) 18:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for that i m in touch with @Sitush: who has more idea on the topic.i would like to mention that u have removed one note which was added along with reference and one quote which was present since beginning of the article.would u like to clarify?

Thank for ur reply in advance Heba Aisha (talk) 18:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@Schazjmd: Also since i m not the real writer of this article it is possible that some facts could be repeated.would you like to mention which facts seems repititive? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heba Aisha (talk • contribs)

I removed a sentence that was redundant, I don't believe I removed any references. Schazjmd (talk) 19:18, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Also, I removed a claim that was not supported by the source (the "primary motivation" for forming Kushwaha Kshatriya Mahasabha). Schazjmd (talk) 19:26, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you please tell the repititive sentences which you were talking about Heba Aisha (talk) 20:05, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

I promise that I will get round to looking at this but, as Schazjmd says, it seems to be basically ok. I am a bit concerned about the statements about sanskritisation but cannot see the source that is used (that is, I don't have a copy and Google Books does not let me view it). The opening sentence - Every caste in india traces its ancestry to some epic hero or the lead character of a folk tale which is described by a term called Sanskritisation - may be what the source says but it isn't right. It sort-of applies to many castes but certainly not all of them. I've never been convinced by books about caste which are published by Atlantic and so may try to find a better source and work with that. Do you have any idea what expertise the author (N. Jayalapan) has? - Sitush (talk) 13:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi it is not a big issue.As u already know what sanskritization is?.The sentence you have issue with just describes the meaning of sanskritization and there is nothing to worry about.I have added it just to give the section a good beginning.There is no doubt regarding it.Heba Aisha (talk) 13:21, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I know what it is but does the source say what you have written? I would dispute that all castes have created myths of origin in order to present themselves as further up the ritual scale, if only because the Brahmin castes are already at the top and because it is clearly hopeless for many dalit communities to even waste their time on it (hence, for example, so many Mahars opting for Buddhism). - Sitush (talk) 13:28, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Not actually the source goes worb by word that i have written.I think the word every* is creating problem here.If you think there is issue you can suggest better version of that.tqHeba Aisha (talk) 17:01, 30 June 2020 (UTC) Hey , and Atlantic Publishers are also not worth questioning.see i saw the books of same publishers on articles like Jat.Another problem i encounter is that it is very difficult to find the source book of Cambridge University Press and similar high quality books for writing an article related to indian castes.As they only present a macro level view of the subject and for delving deeper we need to go through the local publishers and writers to some extent. I thnik you will also agree with this.Heba Aisha (talk) 21:35, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

And sir, not all dalits go for budhhism.As for example Paswans.They call themselves gahlot kshatriya and their folk hero is chauharmal.I will work in future on an article on chauharmal as he is very popular in local culture of bihar and it will be a notable topic.Heba Aisha (talk) 21:38, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Can we add a new section on inter caste issue?

I have seen it in Maratha article. Heba Aisha (talk) 23:16, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://books.google.co.in/books?id=oDeFAAAAIAAJ&q=koeri+women&dq=koeri+women&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiIj4um2KrqAhWr8HMBHWn6B3cQ6AEINDAC. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. {{reply to|Can I Log In}}'s talk page! 05:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Why removed sourced material?

@No Great Shaker: hey i saw that my pending changes which were sourced is now removed by you.I want to request that if you have problems with the sentence and its placement you can replace it written in ur own words.tq Heba Aisha (talk) 22:52, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Koeri and Kacchi

Koeris are also known as Kacchis. They specialize in growing of vegetables (शाक/साग in Sanskrit/Hindi). Kushwaha is Sanskritization of Kachhi. Shakya a modern term used in some regions.Malaiya (talk) 23:28, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

References

Dubious tag

Infornation from the British-Raj era is generally avoided. Also, there is questions as to what relevance a quote from 1941 has on a modern-day caste group.RuudVanClerk (talk) 16:11, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Transfer of British era image and removal of image

I have transferred the British era image to respective section as per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE.Heba Aisha (talk) 09:47, 21 April 2022 (UTC) a

Further wrt to image added by another user apart from WP: Verifiablity issue, the WP: BURDEN and WP:ONUS lies on uploader to verify that this image is of people from Koeri community.Heba Aisha (talk) 09:56, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I am happy to provide proof of the identity of these Koeri individuals to an admin. Please contact an admin and I will provide them with the proof as required. RuudVanClerk (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

• There is no problem with the sourcing or verifiability of the Raj-era image. It is from the 1868 The people of India: a series of photographic illustrations, with descriptive letterpress, of the races and tribes of Hindustan, which can be accessed here. However, I don't think this image (or, any other from that work) should be used to "illustrate" what people from a particular caste supposedly look like anywhere on wikipedia. The 1868 book is now widely recognized as an misbegotten attempt to "scientifically" classify people along strict caste lines and represent them through photographs of 'typical specimens', which reflected the racial attitudes of the era. Here is how Thomas Metcalf describes the endeavor:

Denied a history of their own, the peoples of India were defined by unchanging racial and cultural identities. The most important of these, by far, was caste. As Bernard Cohn has written, for late Victorian anthropologists 'a caste was a "thing", an entity which was concrete and measurable; above all it had definable characteristics - endogamy, commensality rules, fixed occupation, common ritual practices'; and these 'things' could be ascertained and quantified for reports and surveys...This increasing systematization of caste was intimately connected with the development of photography. As much of the effort of ethnological classification was directed by a search for 'scientific' precision, the recording of 'exact' images by photography logically complemented the compiling of statistical information. Insofar as different castes were conceived of as representing distinct racial types, a photograph of a 'typical' member of an ethnic group could be used to identify the precise characteristics, of physiognomy, dress, and manners, that defined the group as a whole...Those, above all the educated Indians, who rejected the notion of their country as an ethnographic 'museum', vigorously endeavoured to distance themselves from this collection. Shown the volumes in the India Office in 1869, Sayyid Ahmad Khan was horrified to see his countrymen portrayed as 'the equal of animals'.

— Metcalf, Thomas R. (1994). Ideologies of the Raj. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 117–119. ISBN 978-0521589376.

While the project and publication remains of historical interest and it is okay to use illustrations from it when presented in its proper historical context (as at the The People of India article), uncontexualized use of the image in this article (either in the lede or the body) just perpetuates the Victorian era prejudices. Pinging @Sitush, Fowler&fowler, and TrangaBellam: in case they disagree or have further thoughts. Abecedare (talk) 17:50, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Update: I didn't realize that there were two images being discussed. Namely:

1. this Raj-era image, and
2. this user-generated photograph

My above comment concerns the Raj-era image and I have tweaked it to clarify that. I agree that the second, user-generated image, raises veribiability and self-identification concerns distinct from the issues I mentioned, and should not be used in the article either. Abecedare (talk) 22:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

• About the other image (photo uploaded by RuudVanClerk): A group of Kushwaha Koeris in Nalanda district of Bihar@RuudVanClerk:,@Heba Aisha:(copying my comment from common), Although I do not have much interest in images, I have been reading the current disputes. IMHO,we cannot use this image on a caste page even if there is consent from those people. This image - just like the Bihar Rajput image does not satisfy WP:BURDEN for caste as pointed out recently by another editor. Also, see User_talk:Abecedare#Discussion_on_photos_in_our_caste_articles. Even if there is a video of these people or a signed document self-identifying as Koeri, it does not matter. Because the "source" is the editor RuudVanClerk and wikieditors are not considered WP:RS. The evidence needs to be published or given by a reliable source. For example, if you had the same set of people in another pose and posted by a newspaper(and self identifying as Koeri), then you could use it. This is different from the picture of a historic place which is not contentious. Both of you may be correct in identifying the community of the people in the two images(they could be Bihari Rajputs and Koeris). But even then, it is better to rename these images - for example "a group of young men from XYZ area" for the Koeri image and "some people watching Fishermen in XYZ area" for the Bihari Rajputs image. It is better not to use random unverifiable pictures of living people on wikipedia to represent what X caste looks like. My 2 cents. ThanksLukeEmily (talk) 21:58, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Can this be used to make a point

Here: it is just the print, article on a web portal . To use this article for making absurd mythological claims in the article shouldn't be allowed. I am raising this issue here. RS6784 (talk) 14:33, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

I’ve just looked through the edit log and it looks like the use of this third-rate source was included by @Heba Aisha. Unfortunately there has been a trend of them using unreliable sources in multiple articles including Bihari Rajput and Zamindars of Bihar. It might be worth him familiarising himself with Wikipedia:Reliable sources to gain a better understanding of what is and isn’t a reliable source. RuudVanClerk (talk) 15:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Dear @RuudVanClerk:, I had only pointed about this particular case and for the rest cases I cannot comment here without seeing into it. Thanks and Best RS6784 (talk) 15:51, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Content and reference not matching

Some Koeris like Shivcharan Bhagat were well known for their knowledge of Persian and they also contributed to the Ramanandi Sampradaya and their disciples later became major contributors to Ramanandi literature., please, just look at the quotes ??? RS6784 (talk) 16:39, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

This has happened due to copyedits by other editors. You will find everything in the book cited. I have the hard copy of Peasant and Monks and this book is available freely on Google too. You may glance for the particular content you want to find, page numbers may vary but search for shivcharan bhagat and you will get it.Heba Aisha (talk) 21:28, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

If it is not corrected then it needs removal. Why did you responded here? I didn't tagged you as such as I could be again get accused of "harassing" the editor, I just observed something casually after going through this article so pointed it out. It needs to be corrected or has to be removed. RS6784 (talk) 07:51, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Issues some of the content here

A lot of content added here is just 100-120 yrs old ( late 19th Century to Early 20th Century) sanskritisation claims of this non-elite community traditionally involved into horticulture. Unfortunately it has been presented on this article like history giving a lot of WP:WEIGHT than it requires. This is a case of WP:Puffery and it needs some sort of corrections or even trimming. The particular community has been regarded as shudra or low caste by all the writers, not even single contradicting it. They were anyday involved into serfdom, or non-elite jobs, so rather than building on it, the content has given more weightage to the absurd claims which just needed 3-4 lines and not more than that. RS6784 (talk) 06:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree, but this is with all caste articles. See Kayasthas or Yadav. This is because, caste is all about social status and most of the stuff we have for these articles deals with attempt of Sanskritisation. I have identified some problems regarding static nature of Bihari Rajputs too. When i was giving more time to Wikipedia, i had a lot of sources to add things that i identified recently on talk page.But, due to paucity of time and other issues i dropped my plan. I am now thinking to do major changes. Infact, in Rajput article too the politics section need complete overhaul. Christophe Jaffrelot has written a good book on politics across all state in contemporary period and he has identified that these people are now dominated by various castes in various states. In Rajasthan itself, Gujjar and Jats have assumed power. Go ahead, i will think according to my situation to do major edits on respective pages. Happy editing. Heba Aisha (talk) 05:26, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

RS6784, you have deteriorated ref38. Please rectify that, it's showing error. Heba Aisha (talk) 14:19, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Heba Aisha, since you added one quote, please correct it otherwise the tag should remain. Secondly, as far as what I can retrieve it talks about one ward not the whole region, as the table doesn't says so. Therefore, to use it to make such big statement might be WP:OR, if you have references from other sources then you may add it, till that time tag should be there. RS6784 (talk) 14:50, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

I checked it, the data talks about one ward probably where many castes were not present. Please provide better reference to remove the tag as the claims looks dubious. RS6784 (talk) 14:58, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Problem with the above content

In a study conducted in 1991, in villages of the Buxar district of southwestern Bihar, the Koeris were one of the largest landholding castes. The above content is misleading as it includes just 10 villages of a panchayat ward block not Bhojpur district or even South West Bihar as such in the reference. The table on the pages given also points out "per capita landholding", it doesn't suggest any higher for this group. So, to extrapolate a particular panchayat ward data to make such a big statement looks gross exaggeration. RS6784 (talk) 11:59, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

as per the table of the ward, it suggests out of 286 Koeri families 44 families were landless and 100 owning just 0-1 acre. That is equal to 50% of Koeri households. The per capita land holding is also not big for Koeri as per the limited data presented there. So, it is unwise to make such a conclusion like "Koeri were the largest landholding caste in Bhojpur" based on a just 10 villages panchayat ward and the data says the radius of the proximity of those villages are also low. RS6784 (talk) 12:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Rather than outright removal, you may tag it or change the language to make it in this way: " at some places in Bhojpur". If you want disruption, then go ahead and remove the sourced content. But, it's a public Platform and all of your disruptions are being counted. It could be used later to show the neutral admins that you are destroying caste articles in order to glorify a particular caste.Heba Aisha (talk) 12:39, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

“all of your disruptions are being counted”. Sounds like a threat to stifle good-faith editing. RuudVanClerk (talk) 12:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, this can the reworded and attributed to the author rather than removal IMO. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:52, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, agree with you. Always better to fix or move or make specific rather than to remove sourced content.(talk page stalker)LukeEmily (talk) 18:45, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Fair point LukeEmily, but there has to be context for the statement. Looking at the details of the data, it doesn't look like the lines are correct and we definitely cannot extrapolate it to make such a statement the way it has been done here and adding to it this reference openly calls them here as - Kumar, Ashwani (2008). Community Warriors: State, Peasants and Caste Armies in Bihar. Anthem Press. p. 36. ISBN 978-1-84331-709-8. The Koiris are known as great horticulturists and engage primarily in agricultural operations in the capacity of small landowners and poor peasants. Unlike Kurmis and Yadavs, they are generally considered non aggressive and disinterested in caste riots. They also attempted to attain higher social status by claiming to be descendants of Lord Ram's son Kush. They formed the Kushwaha Kshatriya Mahasabha as their nodal caste association and held the first session of the association in March 1922.. It says poor peasants and small landholders, even the reference used above to say they are landholders explicitly gives data which has 144 out of 286 families having either 0 or less than 1 acre of land, clearly equal to 50%. Considering all this, I think we should have a relook on it. I also found a lots of newspaper references being used in this article and the same is not done on some other cases. So, why all this shouldn't be corrected ? This is one of the article where lots of unnecessary glorification is present. RS6784 (talk) 07:35, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

RS6784, Newspapers are good only for non-contentious issues and some events. (for example : A newspaper reference that says X politician belongs to Y caste is OK but for anything that needs scholarly analysis and deep study (such as Varna etc.), newspaper are not OK.) All views by good reliable sources - especially academic sources and peer reviewed journals should be added as per WP:NPOV. LukeEmily (talk) 21:05, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

That is what I am saying like in this article many news web portal the print etc or even others have been used to make point wrt what you are calling as deep study. One reference I had corrected it. I would say the editors who are interested in looking for puffery, should better help in improving articles like this one. For the last line, I would say right rationale is also needed as we cannot extrapolate any vague statement made in a book to have a new research. RS6784 (talk) 04:31, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

There is another reference which says 20% of Koeris work as hired labourers, I will share the reference for the same, again it is related to odd villages. So the question would arise is it justified to do extrapolation of it but the same situation is with the present selected claims from a book. RS6784 (talk) 08:05, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

RS6784, IMHO, we should be as specific as possible on each caste page. If the landholding is specific to 10 villages, we can reword it that way.Thanks,LukeEmily (talk) 17:30, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Please see the data, out of 286 Koeri families 144 have less than 1 acre land ( equal to 50%). And there is another survey as per which 20% Koeris are landless labourers open for hired work. I will share it as well, but again can we do the extrapolation using either of these small surveys, the answers in my view should be negative. This is where the problem is present. RS6784 (talk) 06:21, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

When i was editing this article. I tried to put genuine references and at present, i am not able to view many of the sources which were visible at that point of time. You may remove or tag that as per your wish. Whenever, i get time to search for more sources, i will keep adding the things here. I am on cellphone and many sources are not showing preview, so finding it difficult to search the content in the pages i read to add the content here. Heba Aisha (talk) 07:37, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Reddy, D. Narasimha (2009). Agrarian Reforms, Land Markets, and Rural Poor. Concept Publishing Company. p. 279. ISBN 978-8180696046. Retrieved 16 June 2020.. This source says that the social mobility in Koeris was towards big landlords and many other sources also talks about the changing socio-economic condition of this caste under naxal pressure. Hence, it's not about that particular village only where that survey was done. That particular small scale survey can be reworded and retained as an example as we can see that in many other articles too, the things of local concern are added. Heba Aisha (talk) 07:42, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Please stop coming up with accusations, I just found an issue and took it to the talk page. Such kind of regular "accusations" is harassment. RS6784 (talk) 13:27, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

This here - Kumar, Ashwani (2008). Community Warriors: State, Peasants and Caste Armies in Bihar. Anthem Press. p. 36. ISBN 978-1-84331-709-8. The Koiris are known as great horticulturists and engage primarily in agricultural operations in the capacity of small landowners and poor peasants. This openly contradict the above and even the data of survey that I pointed out openly says ( 50% 144 out of 286 koeri families own 0 to 1 acre land) , there is another reference which says 20% Koeri work as labourers or into hire out labour. RS6784 (talk) 16:50, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

References

caste community

The first line says "caste community". Should that just be caste or community? Is it a typo? There is some Hindi source added for caste.What does it say?LukeEmily (talk) 14:45, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Why should contents related to political parties or political leaders be added on caste pages?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

A lot of the content in the article is related to political parties and their style of politics, why it should be added on community page? No political party in democracy or a political leader claim to be sole representative of his community or any community. There may have been unofficial favours by parties to specific community. But I don't think such political party perspective is added on most community pages unlike it has been done here. In my view, it shouldn't be added. The correct place should be political party pages or that leader pages. It needs to be re-looked again and even removed or moved to right pages RS6784 (talk) 16:56, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

There is Luv Kush politics page, I think the content should be added there. RS6784 (talk) 17:00, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I think it needs to be moved to either politician's page or political parties page rather than putting it here on a community page. At this rate, we may have Narendra Modi politics on Teli community page. RS6784 (talk) 15:53, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Caste has remained a tool for political mobilisation and most of the post independence history of caste and communities has been about attaining political power and improving economic status. There is no community consensus on this thing that politics related stuff can't be added on caste articles. Also, it's in summarised format and it's ok to keep that much here. Admantine123 (talk) 21:45, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Also, many minor caste related articles are stub as of now. In future, when me or someone will expand them, it will be expanded in this direction only, i.e political empowerment, economic status. See Bhumihar for example. If these stuff are removed, we need to remove them from all caste articles and in such case many articles will be converted into just "definition" of that particular caste and you must be aware of WP:NOTDICTIONARY. Admantine123 (talk) 22:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Question is larger here: will we add Narendra Modi politics on "Teli page" ? Subtle community related part can have casual mention but using politics of leaders and political parties on community page looks very "absurd" and there should be question of WP:REL. FYI, you must read WP:REL. Here, I am talking about this page and if such stuffs related to political leaders and political parties are added on caste pages then it needs to be removed. RS6784 (talk) 06:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

No political leader can be said to be leader of only his community, this is democracy and no political party official manifesto says that it is related to certain community. Any bias or leanings should be mentioned on leader's and political party page rather than community pages. It is laughable a leader Upendra Kushwaha has been mentioned here in detail when in fact he is a political leader and his biases or political leanings should be on his page or his political party page not on this page. RS6784 (talk) 06:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

That mobilisation part has some noted writers to provide description of it and they do it without naming lots of leaders etc. We cannot use books primarily dealing with leaders and politics parties to have it here on Community page. The main part is in democracy, no political leader or party's official views are only restricted to a community. Using them on caste community looks very absurd and definitely not encyclopaedic. RS6784 (talk) 06:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

It's ok to mention some leaders not each and every member of legislative assembly, who have made significant contribution to the mobilisation of community. As for example the political mobilisation of Yadav,Kurmi and Koeri was started first during pre independence period, when they formed Triveni Sangh. The leaders who were founded were Shivpujan Singh (Kurmi), Sardar Jagdev Singh (Yadav) and Yadunandan Mehta (Koeri). Later, in 1960s, leaders who took mobilisation forward were Ram Lakhan Singh Yadav and Jagdeo Prasad. In the meantime, large number of MLAs and MPs were also elected but they are not important as that's not the part of mobilisation of community, they did it for the sake of their own interest. I can give examples like Babu Veer Kunwar Singh and his role in 1857 revolt can be mentioned on Bihari Rajput pages but not the name of minor leaders who are not given significant important in published sources and they just participated as a part of "mob of common people", who took part in revolt.Admantine123 (talk) 10:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Please understand post independence politics works differently. It would be futile attempt to compare two different things. The fact is in democracy no party or political leaders officially claims that he or his party does politics of only a group. Those biases can be mentioned on the political leaders and political party pages. And FYI Koeri is not only in Bihar. I can understand if we mention about reform movements on a community page keeping WP:UNDUE and WP:DUE in mind as it is community centric. What has bias of a leader got to do with any group ? RS6784 (talk) 11:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Question is larger here: will we add Narendra Modi politics on "Teli page" ?, Definitely not. His politics is of different kind. But, you are aware of politics of Bihar, i think. It's difficult to seperate it from caste. As for example, search anything about Upendra Kushwaha, every source will describe the Koeri caste and their relationship with kurmi and the background of political empowerment of these castes. This is similar to Jyotiba Phule on Mali caste. In case of Narendra Modi, his ascent is not a result of mobilisation of Telis. He share an ideology, which is supported of large section of upper caste, that's what resulted in his rise. Admantine123 (talk) 10:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Kumar, Sanjay (2018-06-05). Post mandal politics in Bihar:Changing electoral patterns. SAGE publication. p. 55. ISBN 978-93-528-0585-3.. Source like this have traced the evolution of caste politics of Bihar. If one reads it, he'll get to know that in Bihar voting are done on caste lines and the social mobility of castes is also attached to politics. I was surprised to see the sentences like this in this book, when i was reading it.

If any (class/caste) could compete with the upper castes in terms of the social, economic, and political muscle, it was these three upper backward castes—Yadavs, Kurmis, and Koeris. The social coalition of the 1980s was much more politically oiled than the coalition of 1930, during the days of "Triveni Sangh".

Interestingly, it was said in the context of vote bank politics, but the writer has involved castes.Admantine123 (talk) 10:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

One more peculiar thing about politics of Bihar, which is different from those of Uttar Pradesh is that every leader is associated with caste. Every political position is connected to caste. Presenting a recent article from Indian Expres [2]

The elevation of low-profile Vaishali leader to the post of the state president has come as a surprise to many as he was not counted among even second-rung JD(U) leaders. With R C P Singh, an OBC Kurmi leader, as the party national president and Kushwaha, an OBC Koeri leader, as the party’s state president, the JD(U) appears to be trying to cater to its core Luv-Kush support base, as the combination of the two caste groups has come to be known in state political circles.

Even a shuffle in the ruling party and appointment of a leader to one of the important portfolios was covered as part of political mobilisation of this caste. Admantine123 (talk) 10:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Admantine123, RS6784, there is no restriction to adding modern politics on caste pages. As long as it is relevant, and the source mentions caste explicitly, it is fine. Ancient history is also historical politics and we add it on caste pages. The structure of the administration has changed over time (ancient India had unelected kings and Diwans, after independence it has elected CMs and Governors and political parties), but both are politics. Please use high quality sources for any controversial opinions. Thanks, LukeEmily (talk) 11:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)(talk page stalker)

Dear editor, I am not talking about restrictions here but my point was on relevance. Books mostly centred on political parties and leaders are being used on caste/community pages and that too using vague lines. It is like searching X word and when one finds it just paste it on a page. That is not how it should be. RS6784 (talk) 11:46, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

How can you define a state politics to your version? no political leaders or political parties officially say that their politics is restricted only to a certain community. This is true for all states and Bihar is not special here. What next politics of bjp on Brahmin page ? I would say it doesn't fit into WP:RELNOT - we all must be aware of this- Content must be directly about the subject of the article. Claiming relevance because of an indirect relationship to the subject of the article suggests the item is more about something else than it is about the subject of the article. RS6784 (talk) 11:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

For people like Upendra Kushwaha, their politics has been based on caste only. See this report [3]. There is lot of difference and this is not the case of WP:REL as you pointed out. The removal of content related to politics is not fair as it is added on castes like Bhumihar too and had been approved by editors like Sitush in past. Any such edit removing them will be disruptive editing, as a lot of high quality sources are there for the same. Admantine123 (talk) 15:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Also, we have sources saying the things that are mentioned in this article. Same is not true for the BJP and their Brahmin caste affiliation. I agree with LukeEmily on this. Further, i want to say that it's not me who is saying anything about politics of Bihar, everything is supported by sources. Tagging Fylindfotberserk. Example this one:-

Thakur, Baleshwar (2007). City, Society, and Planning: Society. University of Akron. Department of Geography & Planning, Association of American Geographers: Concept Publishing Company. ISBN 978-8180694608. Retrieved 16 June 2020.

While Samta with its leader Nitish is considered to be the party of Koeri-Kurmi, Bihar people's party led by Anand Mohan is perceived to be a party having sympathy and support of Rajputs

Admantine123 (talk) 15:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

It says considered to be- read the words. Officially no political party operates on caste. And whatever related to Nitish Kumar has already been added on Luv Kush page, this looks like case of content forking. RS6784 (talk) 16:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

please understand Heba Aisha with living personalities you require WP

BLP and here we add them on caste article pages and also do note whether the book talks about communities or only political leaders/parties. RS6784 (talk) 16:26, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Please don't do WP:OR, give party policy where it says that RLSP only deals with Koeri. Rest the party's or its leader leanings towards Koeri community should be on their pages not here on community RS6784 (talk) 16:28, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

WP:BLP, is what you are talking about. I am aware of it and it just says that we need high quality sources to justify what we write about living people.First of all, there is nothing controversial we are writing here and second sources itself say, what's written here. It's not about person, it's about caste only and removal or transfer on personal opinion will be disruptive editing.Admantine123 (talk) 16:31, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

The content you are sharing should be on Luv Kush page or RLSP page, JDU Page and their leaders page and not here on the community page. This is a case of WP:RELNOT RS6784 (talk) 16:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Nothing like content forking here. The source are supporting everything. If it's about this caste, it should be here and similar things has been added on other articles as well. The sources here talks from the point of view of caste and not the individual politicians. This is my last reply on the question any further disruption willl be considered as content blanking. Don't engage is disruptive editing.Plz. Admantine123 (talk) 16:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

the same reference materials are added on Kushwaha, Luv Kush page, this is case of the same. The fact is many of the Google books reference being quoted here are primarily talking about political parties, leaders and not communities/castes except casual mention. We cannot just search "Koeri" on Google and paste here. RS6784 (talk) 16:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Admantine123 don't put false accusations. You have been continuously putting wrong accusations against me and unfortunately unlike you here, I am not interested only in Koeri glorification. I just pointed some of the errors and a lot of it including quotes etc were added by me. RS6784 (talk) 16:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I am tagging other editors who have been recently active on the page Fylindfotberserk, RuudVanClerk for their comments. In the past, as well similar accusations has been put up by you Admantine123, please be aware of WP: Harassment RS6784 (talk) 16:51, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

How much content according to you should be moved to RLSP page or other page. I can't see more than three four lines about Upendra Kushwaha, and that too can't be reframed. It is mentioned in the source book explicitly and it's is not possible to remove the name of leaders to reframe those few sentences.RS6784.Admantine123 (talk) 17:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

If you are talking about last paragraph, in which something about Upendra Kushwaha is mentioned, then you can suggest the ways to reframe the sentence to show what was happening with the political development in those years. Above that, as you said the sources talks about caste only not specific leaders..Admantine123 (talk) 17:08, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Don't tag me, just put your comments here. I will see and reply. And you are wrong here many sources talks directly about the caste and it's political history. I have many of them in hardcopy format at my home. Since, you are able to see only few pages in preview that's why you are claiming as such. No worries, it will give me an opportunity to write this and many articles from beginning once again. I am seperating myself from this discussion and will return once again to do major edits on large number of articles, depending on need. Just chill. No accusations, you do your edits, i'll do mine, whenever i'll plan to return here. Will advice you as a senior editor here that use the opportunity and advantages you have in such a way that, others can't question you. I just remembered one statement, which was said by someone few years ago that everything is impermanent and nothing will remain here for always. So, work in such a way that someone can't repeat the same in future which could be difficult for you to accept. This was said by a famous philosopher and it's not easy to decipher the actual meaning. I am going to be semi-retired as i was really very busy in my real life, it was due to some issues here that i was coming here again and again. Happy editting. Edit with caution. Bye.Admantine123 (talk) 17:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC) and

Admantine123 don't try to put subtle way of threatening msg here like the way you did just now. I can put a lot of things here but that is not my of way dealing with such posts like above where you said- everything is impermanent and nothing will remain here for always. This is suble way of threatening other editors like you said here- So, work in such a way that someone can't repeat the same in future which could be difficult for you to accept. You are continuously crossing the WP:Talk page guidelines with wrong accusations and such subtle messages. Please do know all this will be noted by me. RS6784 (talk)

and Admantine123 there are rules wrt semi retiring and wiki breaks, continuously crossing it comes under WP:FLOUNCE. RS6784 (talk) 17:58, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

And Pls don't say I will have to write it again, nobody is owner on Wikipedia, any editor can write it. I have already pointed a lots of WP:RELNOT, WP:PUFFERY on this page. RS6784 (talk) 18:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Last msg, hope i am not violating the rules regarding wiki break. Why are you taking every statement of mine in a negative way. It will be beneficial if you keep calm while working. Again you tagged me, even after my last msg, where i told you not to do so. I advised you because, i saw you in conflict with many other editors on many other pages from beginning. I am not talking about this article or any article. Yes anyone can write, i know that. I have kept myself aside and left it to you to edit in your own way. That's all. And i am not here anymore to reply, i will return as per my preference, with lot of source but that too is not confirmed as in future i can be very busy and the large scale editing i am talking about on pages of many caste depends on necessity. If they remain in good state, there is no need for me to waste my time there rather i will choose to create some new article. Best wishes (Take it positively). And don't bring me back here. Bye.Admantine123 (talk) 18:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

please do read WP:FLOUNCE, this is the 4th time I am seeing it, if you are on wiki break, enjoy your break rather than constantly reverting, editing and confusing other editors. This doesn't look good overall. Please, I am repeating it for the last time if you come up with fake accusations and subtle threatening msgs like you did twice before your last post than I need to put it out clearly, and don't engage into WP:POINTy behaviour, I don't want to say here but I have seen this and it has been told to you in the past by some more editors as well. RS6784 (talk) 19:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

There were concerns from your side regarding WP:BLP that whether Upendra Kushwaha want to be associated with this caste group or not. Time and again the leader has identified himself with this caste and sources are available. Here is one, hope the issue of removal of content related to him can end here. Also, there is no bar on expanding any article on caste groups in modern period with WP:RS. Keeping the content in such a way that it can portray the situation of Zamindari period and no development then onwards should not be done here.[4]

Kushwaha was addressing a function organised by his party on Saturday to mark the 100th birth anniversary of late B P Mandal, a former chief minister of Bihar, at the S K Memorial hall. “Yaduvanshiyon ka dudh aur Kushwansiyon ka chawal mil jaye to kheer ban sakti hai (kheer can be prepared with the milk from the Yadavs and rice from the Kushwahas),” he said

Admantine123 (talk) 14:27, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

okay, But why his community background in the "Early life section" is not added on Upendra Kushwaha page? Akalanka820 (talk) 16:12, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't want to say this but I see very different perspective when you talk on Koeri related topics compared to activity on certain other pages. I didn't asked for removal of all political content but those that are already there on other relevant page. But I do believe political stuffs should be added on events page of its own, or political leaders, parties etc rather than directly on caste page. Thanks Akalanka820 (talk) 16:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't give importance to such thing like adding name of caste of individuals on their respective pages. You are aware of many policies and same is the case with me. It's very important for me to convince you that i have always edited in a neutral way and i enjoy every period of history for it's own importance. I was one who added the "Raj era image here" and the mention about Shudra status was also done by me only. This article was a stub, before i expanded it and you may check its status before i edited it. There is nothing like glorification/demonisation you have tried to explain me in a different thread at Bihari Rajput page earlier. As an editor, i have always acted neutrally. Best wishes. Admantine123 (talk) 18:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

yes, your neutrality part I can see here. I don't want to go into it. And I think you had contested in the past some of the parts that you claim of inserting here. So, I am not sure how can you use that to talk about neutrality. I am just bit puzzled with very different perspective here including Pro-Kushwaha, Pro-Koeri here and very anti-Rajput, anti-Bhumihar, anti-Yadav pov on those pages. On Yadav page, recently you have added very controversial content in the lead itself when the whole article doesn't even talks about it. Thanks Akalanka820 (talk) 04:39, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Going through history of this page you may find many controversial things like Shudra status added by me. This is not how Wikipedia works. It's UNCENSORED and whatever i have added are supported by source. You should present sources that counter them, but you are presenting your own personal opinion to remove the sourced content, which is not fair. Same is done by you on other pages. You have not presented any source which talk opposite to what is added here and there on other pages. The crux is that, many people are here just for removing things which goes against image of their caste and before me Sitush and other senior editors were also adding those things, which may appear controversial for a person belonging to respective castes. Don't engage in removal of sourced content on the basis of your personal opinion that Caste are not relevant in 21st century. It's nothing more than content blanking as you have not presented any source, which contradict what my source say, on either Koeri or Bihari Rajput. Lastly, i have also massively added content on Lalu Yadav page, which is about some of the best achievement of his rule. That was missing there. So, can't agree with any pro and anti bias with respect to particular caste. I would request all editors including you to not be admant in removing the sourced content which donot glorifies your caste. Admantine123 (talk) 08:00, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

"Going through history of this page you may find many controversial things like Shudra status added by me. This is not how Wikipedia works. It's UNCENSORED and whatever i have added are supported by source."- the history of the page suggests you had also once contested some of it as well, not only that here you have tried to move Raj-Era image to an another section even changing the details of it but on other pages you have constantly added the same even after those getting reverted by many editors. Anyways these are different topics, I will not go into it. For your points here - "It's nothing more than content blanking as you have not presented any source, which contradict what my source say, on either Koeri or Bihari Rajput"- my answer to it your quotes might be perfect but there is something called as right context in which it has been said. I had just recently contradicted the background of Srikanta Ghosh's book explaining you the short brief of the chapter it deals with from page 48-51 but you just looked four lines of page 52. The chapter dealt with Election processes in the region. Lastly, I haven't content blanked anything except on the Koeri, I had only removed some newspaper references to excessively push mythological claims. On the other page Rajput in Bihar, you named did I blanked anything ? The answer is no, but I do see one editor trying to push their way, Please, don't come up with such baseless accusations. Thanks Akalanka820 (talk) 08:21, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

your last line is more applicable to you as compared to me. I have not much of an interest ( including limited edits) into that particular page Rajputs in Bihar. I don't want to go into this statement- your caste. I request you not to comment on ethnic/community background of an editor. Akalanka820 (talk) 08:41, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Ok, considering your comment above, i think we have reached on consensus regarding keeping stuff related to modern politics with the condition that WP:BLP related issues doesn't exist and the "context" should be related to caste only. Thanks.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

One clarification given

Adamantine123, being historically poor peasants and landless labourer part is supported from the reference number 1st, 12th and many others on the page itself, a lot of them were added before me. So here, you aren't right in the edit summary: [[5]], I am just clarifying you. Akalanka820 (talk) 11:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for correction dear Akalanka. I think they talked about the period prior to land reforms. But the recent source which i copied from the article recently edited by LukeEmily tells the situation after that. Hence added it along with the lead, which you added earlier.Admantine123 (talk) 12:01, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

I have modified it per the suggestion, you can have a look at it. Akalanka820 (talk) 12:29, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Shudra Additions

@Aman9750:, Please review the above comments on the talk page pertaining to the addition of Shudra casts. If you have a reliable. secondary source to that supports this claim, please place it here for discussion. Otherwise, the edit will keep getting reverted for lack of references. I would prefer if the matter did not escalate further, especially since you've attempted the same edit 7 times in the last 24 hours. Etriusus (Talk) 03:50, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

sir many caste are come under shudra but you cant show directly but when we search koeri caste then wikipedia directly show they are shudra it creat caste discriminantss please remove shudra status. 2409:4089:A399:B13A:89F7:4A2C:A1BD:9BB (talk) 01:57, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

please sir remove them from shudra status it creat caste discriminante . 2409:4089:A399:B13A:89F7:4A2C:A1BD:9BB (talk) 02:17, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Hii Etriusus. I edit shudra because Koeri are agriculturist caste and very superior. So how they came under Shudra. In our Vedic Verna The Agriculturist caste or works come under Vaishya category not shudra please change it sir. Thank you 🙏🙏. Aman9750 (talk) 04:24, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

From Bhagvat Gita chapter 18 Verse, 44 mentioned that कृषिगौरछ्यावार्णिज्य वैश्यकर्म:स्वभावजम| Krishi-gau-rakshya- Vanijyam Vaishya-karma. Krishi-Agricultute;Gau-rakshya-dairy farming ; Vanijyam- commerce; Vaishya- Farming class and mercantile class ; Karma- their work. Bhagvat Gita is sufficient for evidence that Agriculturist caste or class come under Vaishya not shudra. Please make corrections that Koeri are agriculturist caste come under Vaishya not shudra. Thak you Aman9750 (talk) 08:28, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Remove shudra status

Aman9750 (talk) 06:01, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello sitush how you identified them shudra without any proof or evidence. Please remove shudra status. Aman9750 (talk) 06:06, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. EnIRtpf09b^{chat with me} 07:05, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Kushwaha sudra nahi hote h.

Ye sab tark mujhe galat lagta h, kyu ki sudra ke parchhayi se Brahman ashudh ho jaate h to Kushwaha ke dwara upjaye huwe anaaj ko kaise kha sakte h. Isliye Kushwaha sudra me nahi aate h. 27.63.17.105 (talk) 09:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 February 2023

The Kushwaha community was engaged in farming in the 20th century and the Britishers didn't have good relations with them. Therefore they classify them in Shudra varna. But now the whole India knows that Kushwha community is descendent of Lord Rama's son Kusha and is under Kshatriya varna. The rajput clan such as Kachwha's are also deviated from the same and they also claimed to belong from Kushwaha dynasty . Due to deviation it was divided between Maurya, Shakya and Kachwaha Dynasty. Even in supreme court during the case of Ram Mandir Ayodhya, claims from Jaipur's royal family and MP Diya Kumari has been there that they belong to Kushwaha/Kachwaha dynasty. Even the documents were presented there. Therefore Kushwha's are under Kshatriya varna . Pushkar Singh Kushwaha (talk) 08:19, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Lightoil (talk) 13:27, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 February 2023 (2)

Kindly change the varna claim from Shudra to Kshatriya. Pushkar Singh Kushwaha (talk) 08:23, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Lightoil (talk) 13:27, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Wrong Information

Koeri are not followers of Islam Kumar098 (talk) 16:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Religion

Koeri (Kushwaha) are followers of Hindu and some are buddhist , they are followers of Lord Rama. please remove the Islam from Religion section. 202.142.93.149 (talk) 16:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Koeri - religion

koeri ( Kushwaha) practice Hinduism🕉️ and some Buddhism. https://kushwaha.in/kushwaha-our-identity/ Kumar098 (talk) 16:45, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

See this link: joshuaproject.net/people_groups/17594/IN, are koeri and Koiri are same?––kemel49^{(connect)(contri)} 17:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

I have been through a quora post about that and also gone through many government and other sources and i think Koeri caste have no muslim population.––kemel49^{(connect)(contri)} 17:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 November 2024

Koeris are not Buddhist, it should be edited. Also, the characterization "Koeri caste describing low caste and possibility of aboriginal origin" does not reflect the historical status and significant contributions of the community, there's no valid source of the same. As highlighted by various reports and studies, the Koeris, are recognized for their high agricultural skills and upward mobility, not as labors and such a label does not accurately represent their caste status history. The photo must be removed and Religion 'Buddhism' should also be removed. As you can not find even a single Koeri who is Buddhist, In the caste census they have been counted as Hindu only. They all are Hindu. Ankitspeaks (talk) 15:42, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Bowler the Carmine | talk 20:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)