Talk:Jangid

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... this article consist a lot of value and importance to the people of jangid Brahmin society . it is related to the honor and the detail information about the 20 % strong community of jangid brahmin in the population of India ,many belong to this caste only. if wikipedia can not help to spread the information regarding this community then what is the use of having such a great space like yours where we can put our views and historical facts about such communities . I do not know how to correct some mistakes, cant you help me for such a minor thing just for the sake of someone's feeling attached to this article. I kindly request you please do not delete this article as I am not aware of tge of computers but I tried to give it a nice shot but everytime I fails I need your help if you can please help me ...thank you --Jangidbrahmin (talk) 03:16, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello @Jangidbrahmin:, you must understand that the version you keep trying to place on the page is not encyclopedic:

• It is not properly sourced
• it spends too much time discussing the concept of Brahmins in general (not necessary since we have a full article Brahmin)
• overall seems written to promote the Jangid people rather than objectively describe them.

Please step back from trying to edit this article, and build up your skills on less-controversial articles until you are more familiar with Wikipedia requirements. MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:33, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, but I didn't know the page was copyedited. @Jangidbrahmin:, your version of this article was not encyclopedic. It would be great if you could source any other edits you do, but thanks for trying to contribute. For now, you could try and fix uncontroversial things, like spelling errors or errors in punctuation. Once you know the rules of Wikipedia, you could try your hand at this article again, but just remember to source your information! RileyBugz^{Yell at me} | _Edits 17:53, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Contesting moving of the page

Referring to the same citation in page, the page is moved under same category mentioned in the article. Pinkeshsharma (talk) 09:01, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, it should not have been moved to Jangid Brahmin. As with Bhumihar, Vishwakarma etc, we do not title as Brahmin if it is an internalised claim, not generally accepted outside of the community itself. That appears to be the case here from the sources - they claim to be brahmin seems to be as good as it gets. We do not pander to the vanity of caste communities. - Sitush (talk) 09:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Jangid Brahmins.jpg

Please refer the text from the source. And please refrain from making personal threats and comments. Thank you. Start a conversation if it’s not valid I’ll revert my changes myself.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/Jangid_Brahmins.jpg

Please refer the text from the source. And please refrain from making personal threats and comments. Thank you. Start a conversation if it’s not valid I’ll revert my changes myself. Pinkeshsharma (talk) 09:58, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Pinkeshsharma, I'm not seeing any personal threats here. If you think the article should be moved (ie renamed), you need to request a move and seek consensus for it. See WP:RM for more information. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:04, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Boing! said Zebedee Please read the text here, on which this whole article is based on. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/Jangid_Brahmins.jpg . "Seventeen of these artists belong to the caste of Adi-goud Brahmins and the rest belong to the Jangid caste of the Brahmins.(talk) 09:58, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

This guy sitush made a personal threat on my talk page. And again the move was totally based on the proof I cited. Pinkeshsharma (talk) 10:08, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I've explained what you need to do if you think this article should be moved. You should follow the instructions at WP:RM. If you request a move and get a consensus supporting you, the article will be moved, and if you do not, it will not. I do not wish to be involved here other than in an admin capacity, and I have no opinion and will offer none on the best title for the article. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:31, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Oh, and I don't see anything that I would consider a personal attack on your talk page either. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

"and to be honest you will not get it" This is a bias personal attack that I will not get it although I'm making a good case for it. Pinkeshsharma (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:55, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure what book you used for that excerpt Pinkeshsharma but pp 62-63 of this one says it is a claim, p 112 of this one suggests that in the past they were engaged in sanskritisation efforts for the Raj census. - Sitush (talk) 11:02, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm using the same book on which this whole article is based on, https://books.google.com/books?id=xUjjBHmHMXEC&pg=PA73 pp-73 Pinkeshsharma (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:07, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

p 112 of this one suggests that Jangid Brahmins should be enumerated separately, this adds up to the fact that they were identified under a different umbrella and they should be put under their own bucket, it's doesn't talk about the validity of them being Brahmins, in fact it lowkey accepts them as Brahmins. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkeshsharma (talk • contribs) 11:14, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Reading the text from the first book, it's talking about the claim of the people that they belong to a certain caste. This reference is saying that adi-goud and jangid are brahmins and the artists belongs to the respective caste. Now Sitush (talk) can you help me move this article?Pinkeshsharma (talk 11:16, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, the source that this article is based on and which you link above say on p 74 Here live mostly Jangid Brahmins, who were originally carpenters but their Sanskritization gave them the status of a new high caste of Jangid Brahmins. The emphasis is in the source. It continues (same page) It is interesting to note that these caste groups, the Adi-Gouds and the Jangids have been traditionally engaged in occupations associated with some kind of artistic craft - no Brahmin community that I have ever heard of engaged in such things because, by definition, Brahmins were priests etc. So, we have a source I mentioned earlier that says they claim to be Brahmin and your own source that says they were sanskritised, which is a fairly recent phenomenon (I think M. N. Srinivas, who came up with the term, dates it from the Raj era when people were jostling for position ... and that ties in with the census petition I mentioned earlier here). Unfortunately, there do not seem to be many sources about them at all except in the context of their paintings but clearly there is doubt about the status. I note also that my earlier source above said that they adopted the name Sharma to assert their Brahmin claim. - Sitush (talk) 11:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

It isn't reliable but it is interesting that this says they're a part of the Vishwakarma. Now which group of putative Brahmins did I mention at the outset of this thread as an example of why we don't put the word "Brahmin" in the article title? - Sitush (talk) 12:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

And can anyone see the full view of this one? The snippet view says The tribe studied considered the carpenters as ritually superior. The carpenters managed to acquire this position partly by imitating Brahmanic way of life and they call themselves as Jangid Brahmins Note: call themselves. - Sitush (talk) 12:11, 3 August 2020 (UTC)