Jump to content

Talk:Yadav

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles on Abhira or Ahir

[edit]

One can refer gamit of articles Yadav_(disambiguation) by various communities including historical, mythological reference, pre-sanskritization, sanskritization, modern, post-indepdence. Good to improve this articles using pre-sanskritization reference for example:

  • A book written long before sanskritisation by James Todd "Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan 1829" [1]

References

  1. ^ James Todd. Tod, James (1829). Annals and Antiquities of Rajast'han or the Central and Western Rajpoot States of India, Volume 1. London: Smith, Elder.

Non elite?

[edit]

The article mentions “non elite” in the header which is derogatory and non representative of existing facts. The grouping that exists today is comprised of mixed representation, both elite and non elites, and terming the whole community or grouping as non elite is somewhat biased and inappropriate presentation. Requesting senior editors to make changes as necessary. 49.43.118.87 (talk) 12:09, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 February 2025

[edit]

please change non-elite word Yadav I don’t why they are this page portraying Yadav in such a bad way 103.237.158.189 (talk) 13:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - Achieve consensus for these changes at the talkpage. - Ratnahastin (talk) 13:24, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 February 2025

[edit]

Change non elite peasant pastoral to traditionally agricultural community. The glossary given in refrence also refers to Jats as non elite, but it was removed from, the article as no consensus was obtained on the topic, similarly here also all the editors have tried to provide the refrences and no one is objecting so the consensus is built for the change. Refrences [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Page Number 28 of Government of India Official District Gazetteer of Gurgaon
[8]
 Not done: sorry, such changes require consensus among concerned editors! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 13:05, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
how can we establish that can you please start the discussion or tag any of them, i mean no ones replies or counters why it should not be removed and than everyone just repeats the same 2409:40D0:1F:C2B5:71B7:9797:B277:FB6E (talk) 12:16, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly speaking, this version represents the consensus version among experienced editors. Achieving a fresh consensus is a difficult and lengthy process, especially since your request is regarding the lede, which must have been written carefully after discussions or through an implicit consensus! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 13:24, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But this lead was given at the time around 2005 and after that many castes pages like Jat have removed the word to match the current status of the community and the source given for non elite is weak source, WP:SOURCE, So which experienced editor should i tag? 2409:40D0:1C:12D9:E092:C420:EED3:EE4B (talk) 08:21, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]