Talk:Jats/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

→

Archive 10

Traditionally non-elite but non-servile tillers

Mr Fowler&fowler«Talk» is very pertinent to qualify entire Jat community with "traditionally non-elite but non-servile tillers" on the basis of a Bayly, Susan (2001). All Jats are not tillers. At present all cultivators use tractors, harvesters and other modern equipments of farming. No farmer is doing traditional tilling. So this term does not qualify for entire Jats Community. Presently majority of Rajputs and Brahmans are also in Agriculture. Use of this term shows a colonial bias. We object to it propose to delete. We should call Jats as a community only. Other reference quoted by him is Glossary which tells: Jat: title of north India's major non-elite 'peasant' caste. Jat is not a title as is referred. This again is objectionable and has a colonial bias. Non-elite but non-servile is a useless term which can be applied to any community not only to Jats. Ref d proves the Colonial bias : "In the later nineteenth century, this thinking led colonial officials to try to protect Sikh Jats and other non-elite 'peasants' whom they now favoured as military recruits by advocating legislation under the so-called land alienation." My advice is not to use these colonial references for Jats. British were biased against Jats and their references can not be taken as reliable references. It has been discussed on Wikipedia at proper forms. So better be constructive and do not write negative things. It is a community edtiting and no body has monoploly rights. Mr Fowler&fowler«Talk» has deleted very well references huge content from this page. Deletion can be done after proper discussion only. Regards,burdak (talk) 08:05, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I too have a generally poor view of Western sources, particularly British sources on indic topics. They seem to be too biased and ill informed.MW ^ℳ 08:17, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, then both of you take it up on the appropriate forum on Wikipedia and get around the Wikipedia guideline on reliable sources. Please challenge my edits on teh forum of your choice, all the way up to ArbCom. All the best. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 08:29, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

PS If you want to make a List of actors of Jat heritage, be my guest, but they don't belong here. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:01, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

I see no need to take to WP:DR as yet. (The arb does not deal with content issues AFAIK). It is not necessary that I see all Western sources in a poor light. I see a large number of Western or British sources as being valuable for this topic. And I also see a large number of non Western sources as "rubbish quality" for these topics. But will take to DR as and when necessary.MW ^ℳ 09:43, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

It is necessary the very moment that you start playing this broken record again. Which it seems that you are doing right now, unless you have no objection to Bayly et al referred to by burdak above. Let's not drag it on: do you have a problem with those specific sources? If affirmative then do as Fowler suggests; if negative then say so. - Sitush (talk) 10:49, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

The Jats (in India) are a very prosperous and influential community. They can hardly be described as "tillers" or "non elite". LRBurdak is correct. It is misleading to describe Jats as "non elite" or "tillers". I will show sources. Don't worry. What Bayly et al are saying seems to be ill informed/misleading/ undue at least.MW ^ℳ 11:24, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

So take Bayly to the appropriate forum instead of spraying vague accusations of "ill informed/misleading/undue at least" like some sort of wayward machine gun.

You did see the word "traditionally", I hope? This is not the place for revisionist and/or nationalist history & that comment will stay in the article regardless of what sources you produce here, unless the appropriate forum considers your vague opinion to be correct; at best the comment would be set against what ever it is that you turn up. - Sitush (talk) 11:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

It says "...are a community of traditionally", there is an are there. That tradition is long gone now (whether such a "tradition" did exist or not is besides the point). And the article does have an undue focus on the British period. The images are also misleading. Particularly the top one. Looks like it has been written by folks who are still living in the 19^th century or are nostalgic about it. Just wait.MW ^ℳ 12:30, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

So rephrase it, although I think that the problem is really your inability to fully understand the phrasing as it stands (or, more likely, your pedantry). How about "are a community, which traditionally was ..." ? There is no need to call a source "rubbish" etc just because you cannot appreciate the subtleties of the language. - Sitush (talk) 12:49, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I know, I know, you are going to be uncivil endlessly. If you are unable to conduct yourself in a civil fashion, just keep shut.MW ^ℳ 14:17, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

So, it does not need rephrasing? And Bayly is ok as a source, rather than "rubbish" etc? As so often, you leave me confused with your statements. I am trying to be constructive in suggesting a way forward by rephrasing the "offending" part but I can do nothing if you decide to walk away because it seems at present to be only you who has trouble understanding what that phrase means. I am sure that it would be easy to fix if I can work out what is going on in your head but, alas, I am not a mind-reader. - Sitush (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

The only reason why the Jats are Jats is that traditionally they were non-elite tillers who in the later British period became landowners in Punjab and rulers in a few princely states of the Rajputana Agency. The caste system was abolished in 1947. There is no new identity they have developed in their new professions, be they doctors, lawyers, politicians, or bad actresses with boob jobs. Other than a name which identifies the endogamous group for marriage and politics, what is there in the modern Jat identity that is different from a modern Yadav identity or a modern Brahmin identity? If there is, I'd like to see a secondary source describing it. Does the Jat physician have a different bedside manner than the Yadav physician? Or different speciality? These caste identities are all traditional identities. Without the tradition there is nothing. Zilch. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

"The only reason why the Jats are Jats is that traditionally they were non-elite tillers who in the later British period became landowners in Punjab and rulers in a few princely states of the Rajputana Agency." Fowler&Fowler, you should be ashamed of referring to yourself as a professor. You seem to be very ill informed about history in general, especially when quoting from sources such as "India Before Europe" which conclude the contrary. If Jats became landowners in Punjab in the "later British period", why on earth would Captain Falcon look for Jat yeomanry and gentry to recruit in his newly formed Sikh Regiment (if they didn't already exist), and why on earth where 11 of the 12 misls founded by the Jat Sikhs, and titled themselves "zamindars" of the vast amount of north-west India. Why do most land-records in Punjabs tehsils (if you have ever actually BEEN IN ONE) of ancestral land owned by Jats go back to atleast the 1630s (14 generations average). Because contrary to your "belief", and it really is a "belief" because you are not stating any facts (rather you just seem to be conveying your ignorant attitude, Jats have been actually had rights over the land they farmed during the 1600's. Every single peace of historical text would suggest that.

Mr Fowler&fowler«Talk» You have not read the very definition of community which Wikipedia itself defines. You come out of the British Era. Jats were here even before British came to India. According to your definition all people doing tiling are Jats be of any caste or religion. If a Jat stops agriculture he will no more be a Jat ?

I would request to observe the edits of Mr Sitush on Ahir article on Wikipedia. There he has no problem in calling them Martial Race. But here on Jat people page does not like them to be called Martial Race. Though the source is same which calls Ahirs and Jats Martial Race. Here this line is again and again deleted. On Ahir article he has no problem calling Ahir as an ethnic category. But here he is bent upon to call Jats tillers. This creates doubts about intentions of both these editors. They have not understood so far what Jat is but claim to become experts on Jats. On the basis of above discussions these two disputed matters be deleted from this article. burdak (talk) 03:44, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

UserFowler&fowler«Talk» what proof u have that jatts were not elite? they were always landowners in punjab the main jatts were always landlords ..see there are also inequalities in jatts..u are stuck on british peroid even if u dont know the truth about the community at that time! everything changes with time ..now the jatts are elite as they were before but we can say taht they are modern like rest of the world they have great respect by all the indians and all jatts are sikhs so u have to see how prosperous sikhs are ! have u ever met a jatt or visited punjab or watched their movie or listened to their songs? i know u have not so u cannot comment about a community by just reading some old biased or irrelevant resources ! modern jatts are more prosperous than be they yadavs or brahmins ,brahmins are just poor people who now have no respect left! i challange u that if u think that jatts were not elite at british time then delete the world martial race and delete that they were rulers of princley and that they were kshatryas ! and u have no right to to say anything about a community ,what are u first go find your own identity india has become a democracy demolished all the princley states but england is still paying taxes to their queen! u still are slaves of the queen!(Wiki00756 (talk))

Final warning, because you've been doing this for days now: Wikipedia requires that information be based on reliable sources. If all you are going to do is to print your own, unsourced opinion, and make borderline attacks on other people and cultures, then you presence is not welcome, and I will request that you be blocked. We do not write articles based on what "everybody knows" or based on your own personal experiences. If you're not going to work from references, then there is nothing we can do to help you, and you need to find a website that just allows people to have open discussions and voice their own opinions--this isn't it. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:55, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

...bad actresses with boob jobs...Does the Jat physician have a different bedside manner than the Yadav physician? Fowler&fowler, I would suggest that you may avoid making sexist comments like those. There is no need for sexist comments like those here. This is not an article on pronography. How are boob jobs and bedside manners related to this article? Please behave yourself. Caste article eds getting taken to WP:ANI and getting blocks and bans is becoming an almost daily feature of WP:ANI. You can watchlist the WP:ANI and keep an eye on it if you do not believe. I am being lenient with you this time. But I may not be so lenient if you continue to make sexist comments.MW ^ℳ 14:41, 22 October 2011 (UTC):If you are too interested in things like that, you may consider joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography. People are unlikely to mind if you continue to say things like that there. But those portions of your comments are unwelcome and irrelevant here.MW ^ℳ 14:56, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Sexist? Pornographic? Really? I'm making the point that in a visual image an actress who has self-admittedly gone under the plastic surgeon's knife with a view to enhancing or maintaining her "brand," has nothing specifically "Jat" to offer, in contrast with the unadorned Jat girl from 1868 whose life was circumscribed by the rules and rituals of her community. Why don't you cut to the chase and take me to ANI. I've had enough of your shenanigans. Whatever page I edit, you turn up nipping at the heels. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:01, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

"Bedside manner" has absolutely nothing to do with sex/porn etc. It looks to me like another instance of someone not understanding English language colloquialisms and the like. The phrase refers to the attitude of a doctor to their patients, be they bed-bound, walking wounded or whatever: a doctor with a good bedside manner might have an empathy with their patient's problems, which might be otherwise be lacking. But I agree, MangoWong is showing stalking/hounding behaviour and it is becoming tiresome. - Sitush (talk) 15:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

I didn't even see the beside manner bit. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Qwyrxian (talk) i think you are blind as i gave u so many "reliable sources" but if u are not bothered to see then i cant do anything. and as i said every book or source is not available on the internet especially about communities!and if a user will make any offending,abusive or personal comments about the community or a nation then he has to get it back or be blocked so first go block that person who started this! who is interested in writing articles m just presenting a right picture of the community so that if u say this to anyone else u don't have to be ashamed .u cant rely on the articles written by other people who are not related to that community .and m please dot give me warnings do as u wish ,wikepedia is not the world,i dont care weather u block me or not ,it will make no effect to me.nobody relies on wikepedia for information or knowledge and no body reads your edited articles if u are so interested in writing then u should write books or novles or in the local newspaper,go show your writing skills there..(Wiki00756 (talk))

Fowler&fowler has brought up Mallika Sherawat's boobs at least twice on this talk page. What does Fowler&fowler have to do with Mallika Sherawat's boobs? Why does Fowler&fowler need to bring it up again and again. Is Fowler&fowler trying to suggest that a Jat girl becomes non-Jat by virtue of having her boobs enlarged? And I know very well what "bedside manner" means. How can you guys suggest that it has nothing to do with porn/sex etc.? A perverted doctor who looks leeringly at his/her patients or explores his/her patients to derive pleasure would be having an extremely bad bedside manner. It is Sitush who has been displaying poor understanding of English. For example, Sitush had said at talk:Kurmi that they do not understand what is meant by phrases like "nipping at heels" and "nickling and diming" and Sitush also could not understand what is "Strawman argument" without me providing a link (at talk:Yadav). And rather than me, it is Fowler&fowler who has been following me around on caste articles. And Sitush has been following me even on non caste articles. You guys are the ones who are hounding me. Fowler&fowler has also been hounding Zuggernaut for a long time now.MW ^ℳ 16:59, 22 October 2011 (UTC) Mallika Sherawat is much more representative than an 1868 girl, boob job or no boob job.MW ^ℳ 17:06, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

as far as punjabi or jatt sikh actors or actresses are concerned there are many good ones who are highly regarded and respected in bollywood and in India like - Dharmendra singh deol ,Akshay Kumar original name rajiv bhatia,Dara Singh,Jimmy Shergill,Raj Babbar,Gurdas Maan,Harbhajan Maan,Om Puri,Kanwaljit Singh (actor),Bobby Deol,Abhay Deol,Jassi Sidhu etc and actresses are like- Juhi Chawla,Pooja Bedi,Gul Panag,Divya Dutta,Mahi Gill,Kulraj Randhawa,Neeru Bajwa,Esha Deol,Gracy Singh,Minisshia Lamba,few and many more rather singers are more than actors..these are only few names if u want i can mention many many more names,,and there are many jatts insports also who have won many gold medals for india if u want i can mention hose names also! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki00756 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 22 October 2011‎

In what sense are they Jat? They are urban nontraditional Indians. The caste system was abolished in 1947. What specific community rituals do they practice other than, perhaps, endogamy that specifies them as Jat actors? It is like the Irish who moved to America. Though they are sometimes referred to as "Irish," they are really Irish Americans. Similarly, these people are descendants of Jats, or people of Jat heritage. Is there a secondary source that identifies the kinship and social organization of Jat actors, their child-rearing practices, gender relations, their verbal and nonverbal communication? Where are the volumes of the latter-day revenue specialists (as there indeed are those of the British revenue specialists of a century ago) extolling the work ethic of Jat actors? I will gladly read them. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:40, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

PS If you'd like to start a page, List of actors of Jat heritage, be my guest, but they don't belong here. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:04, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

PPS I want to clarify that in traditional situations caste is experienced (a) as a web of status categories. In both pre- and post 1947 India caste has also (b) displayed cluster formation driven by economic and political forces. Both those manifestations of caste are legitimate for such a page. If Jat actors, say, were banding together and keeping actors of other ethnicities out of Bollywood and we had a reliable secondary source for it, that would be a legitimate subject for this page. The Jat girl from 1868 satisfies (a), a political leader, such as Charan Singh satisfies (b), but people who don't satisfy either (a) or (b), for whom "Jat" is a vestigial ethnic identity, a mark of heritage, do not. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

see you are not trying to understand ,traditions change with time,are all Christians same as they were centuries ago? no cause things change, these all people are jatts cause for the simple reason that they were born jatts (i.e) they were born into jatt community ,their parents were jatts.its like if you are born into a christain family then you are a christian weather u practice their religious beliefs or not. and how can you say that they dont practice jatt community rituals ,all these actors are famous for their jatt attitude. and do u even know what rituals and practices? see practices and rituals remain the same but they modify with little modernity in it. and please name some particular practices which u think that these actors dont practice?

many practices and rituals change with introduction of reforms and globalization. and you cannot decide weather they are jatts or not,itz the community that has to decide and all these people are loved by the community,and by their caste u come to know that they are jatts. in hindusim and sikhism it is believed that if a person is born into a particular community then he is of that community.until he converts to another religion. btw they all practice the basic and important rituals of jatts. these names were important to mention here as u thought that mallika sherewat was the only jat actress.and if u are so concerned .or worried about their tarditonal identity then u may add an additional section named traditional identity of jatts as that would be better(Wiki00756 (talk))

Like I said produce a reliable academic source that discusses Jat actors if they are organizing in some fashion, economically or politically. And please sign your posts. We can't keep cleaning up after you! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:43, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

The Jats are not a marginalised group by any reckoning. In fact, the Dalits in the region have traditionally regarded themselves as victims of Jat domination.[1]

See anything there? It appears to be in direct contradiction with what Susan Bayly et al are saying in the article. This source is from India and would be vastly more familiar with the landscape than Western sources on Indic topics. It is obvious that the Western sources are saying ill informed things here. They should be deleted when they are in contradiction with vastly better informed sources.

Fowler&fowler also does not seem have any idea about what makes a Jat a Jat and seems to be speaking from gut feeling only. At one time, Sitush had asked at WT:IN whether "Krishnaji" is just another name for "Krishna". It speaks volumes about their knowledge of Indic topics. Anybody who knows anything about Indic topics woud never be found asking a question like that. And they also seem to be having an obsolete colonial POV. And Fowler&fowler is supporting Sitush. No wonder. Birds of the same feathers stick together.MW ^ℳ 03:28, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

We flock, MW, not stick. When you harangue vacuously we flock away, in my case to the pleasant land of counterpane. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 03:48, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Will someone please define elite here ?

If this were not an encyclopedia , The introduction .."non elite" would be humorous.
If political pre-eminence is any measure than , Both Pakistan and Indian states have had a surfeit of Jat Chief ministers ruling states ( let alone any other politico/government functionary ..chief justices, foreign ministers , speakers , Prime ministers ) In Pakistan...Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi ,Sardar Muhammad Arif Nakai , current chief ministers of both Haryana and Punjab states in India are Jats .

Jats are not elite today ?....someone's smoking dope or the usual gang of naughty boys scholarly contributing misinformation , naughty naughty !!
Intothefire (talk) 04:57, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Being from the Jat community myself I have resisted making major edits due to WP:INVOLVED, however I don't like the turn of converstation here, which seems to be getting personal. This article should not be about "bigging up" any communtiy, but being encyclopaedic. So far I agree with Sitush and Fowler and Fowlers edits, as they tend to has a dispassionate view. I would suggest however, they do listen to other points of view. The reliability of this article on WP:VERIFIABLE sources has alwas been a problem. I don't consider authors who talk about the Martial race theory as valid. I don't consider Indian sources like Jattan da Ithias as valid either. So I suggest look for recent sources from the late 20th century and the 21st century. Lets make this a great article. SH 07:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

oh! now fowler fowler u come to reliable source!i feel like laughaing man!its clearly written in their pages that they are from jatt sikh families! now u seem so dumb asking for sources ,go see that page! and btw in india acadmeic studies or chapters are not based on film actors we have others things to learn about.u know yor problem is that u think jatts have not moved further they are same as in the british period,itz been more than 60 years and a lot of things change in 60 years. and now most of the jatts prefer to be called as sikhs so if u want some more resources try finding on sikhs.but if u want traditional identity of jatts to be included then u may add that in the article who is stopping u?.one more thing u havent seen the picture in Dharmendra page in front of the political section, in that image is of the all india jat sabha its written in hindi if u can read hindi,and dharmendra and Dara Singh are sitting there as cheif guests.and ya by their caste also we come to know that they are jatts!now i say and i know that they are jatts but if u think they are not then please provide some reliable source proving that all these are not jatts!can u do that?and u say that Charan Singh is a jatt cause its written on his page so it also written on all the pages of these actors! n btw Charan singh was the prime minister of india so how can u say that jatts were not elite ? this is contradictory to you own statement! and these caste based issues are were sensitive issues ,so if u dont have full knowledge about that community then please dont comment about their issues!and one more example of how elite jatt sikhs were Rajinder Singh father of maharaja Bhupinder Singh of Patiala was the first person to own a car and an aircraft in the whole of india!!and captain Amarinder Singh was th cheif minister of punjab from 2002 to 2007!!u being a britisher shoulsd know that before british annexed punjab the maharaja of punjab was Ranjit singh a jatt sikh!! and before that also jatts were rulers of different states in punjab.. i agree that main occupation of jatts was agriculture only and even now it is but they are not small peseants they are big landlords who have thousands of acers of land..they are jatts of good families the real jatts..just tell me who ruled punjab before british annexed it it was ruled by jatt sikhs ,u dont even know a litle about punjab history! people think u are against jatts because u are not ready to listen to them which is right ,i just had to bring the right position of jatts now its ur wish e=weather to agree or not , mnot writing here to prove anything everybody knows who ae atts and where they stand whole of india has respect for jatts they know what they are they ar the real decendents of kshatryas!!or even above kshatryas britishers can be fooled very easly they still think that india is a country of snake charamers but it is not!!india is above all i dont care if u block me gfrom wikepedia as u dont like the truth cause truth is always bitter! nobody looks to wikepepedia for knowledge and the bravery and position of jatts is already mentioned in this article and other acadmeic books so i dont need to write further!u cant delete that jatts were kshatryas and u cant rule out the facvt that jatts were rulers of punjab before british! (Wiki00756 (talk))

Jaypal Agencies (publisher)

Can anyone explain to me why Jaypal Agencies are a reliable publisher? Works published by them appear in dodgy, POV-ridden wikis such as jatland.com and they appear not to have a website of their own. The sort of stuff that they are publishing seems to be niche and possibly even of the Lulu.com variety, which would make them hopelessly unreliable. It may, of course, be that I am searching in the wrong place. - Sitush (talk) 15:29, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

OK, let me put this another way. There are plenty of people contributing to this page. I shall be deleting all items sources to Jaypal unless someone comes up with a decent response to the above query in the next few days. - Sitush (talk) 08:36, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Non-elite, non-servile

Echoing a comment above, do the terms "non-elite" and "non-servile" in the first sentence mean something specific to India, or are they to be understood in the general sense of non-privileged/powerful (see elite) and non-enslaved (see servile)? Pfly (talk) 07:55, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Building broader Consensus

• This article on Jats covers Jats from all the three religious denominations Muslims , Sikhs and Hindus ,
  
• By all counts it is the main and root article for not only the three sub articles (Jatt Sikh, Jat Muslim ,Hindu Jats )religious denominations but also the sub clans , tribes etc

Therefore the import of content should be germane to all the related articles .

• the opening statement that servers to introduce the Jats now introduced in the article states ,
  

The Jat people (Hindi: जाट Jāṭ, Punjabi: ਜੱਟ Jaṭṭ) are a community of traditionally non-elite but non-servile tillers in Northern India and Pakistan

lists four citations a-b-c-d , corresponding to citation nos 1-2-3-4 in the reference section ,

are all taken from one book Caste, Society and Politics in India from the Eighteenth Century to the Modern Ageby Bayly, Susan . She is a scholar , but is one scholar the authority ?

I think this phrase Non-elite, non-servile to describe Muslim Sikh and Hindu Jats is a broad brush too far as an introduction

• I completely disagree with such an introduction
• But Sitush , Fowler&fowler , and the user Sikh-history stoutly support that Jats are appropriately described as Non-elite, non-servile
  

Its only fair that this discussion about the description shored up by these editors also takes place with other editors working on Jatt Sikh, Jat Muslim ,Hindu Jats .

Next we should also discuss the appropriate specific issue of pictures curated by Fowler&fowler
Intothefire (talk) 14:05, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

(Reply to Pfly) Both "non-elite" and "non-servile" are terms used by anthropologists of India's caste system to describe people who were "peasants." The Indian caste system had traditionally paid a lot of attention to the "elite" (the ritualist, the patrician, or the landowning Brahmins and Kshatriyas) or the "servile" (certain types of shudras) who the elite could press for unpaid labor and employ as servants). They largely left out of formal caste consideration large groups of peasants (tillers and pastoralists), who had traditionally lived in the hinterland and with whom the elite did not have close day-to-day contact. The Jats, Kurmi, Kunbi, Ahir, Yadav belong to these groups. By the early 19th century, the elite—itself pressed from above by the revenue demands of the British East India Company—tried to assign formal caste categories (varna) to these peasant groups, in a bid to exact unpaid labor). However, by that time, the British had come to admire the work ethic of many of these peasant castes, who they felt were not bound useless upper-caste prohibitions (for example against touching the plow, etc.) These peasants groups, consequently, began to advance economically, the Jats and Kurmi at the forefront of such advance. Jats, in particular, had also come to rule small princely states in west in Rajputana and in the northwest in the Punjab region. During the Indian rebellion of 1857, which was confined to the Gangetic plain, most princely states, sided with the British. In particular, the Sikh ruled states, who themselves had been subdued by the British only some ten years before, did not join the rebellion. After the mutiny, the British Indian army, which had up to then largely recruited for its elite troops from the Bhumihar Brahmins and Rajputs of the Gangetic plain, but who now had rebelled, began to look elsewhere, especially in the Punjab and farther west, among people who had shown loyalty. Among the new recruits were Jats, Sikhs, Pathans, Afridis, Baluchis, ... the so-called new "martial races" of India, and so began a tradition of people of these backgrounds joining the Indian army, which in British times, offered important avenues of advancement, both economic and social. By the first third of the 20th century, the Jats had become landowners in many areas of the Punjab, and in some areas had joined the ranks of the elite. Religiously the anti-Brahmin Arya Samaj had become very popular among them. After, India's independence in 1947, they continued to prosper, joining ranks politically to elect India's first Jat prime minister, Charan Singh, and much like middle-classes anywhere, moving out of traditional roles. All this needs to be said and I have barely begun. To be sure, I have got distracted by other "little fires," but I wish the editors here would cut me some slack, and let me write the proper history. I am not against the Jat people as they seem to have impulsively concluded. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:44, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

breahmins were only preists they never owned land specially not in punjab! and as i said cultureof punajb was different from the rest of india! brahmins were never given high status in punjab! and the rajputs who settled in punjab were caslled jatts ,and brahmins were never recurited in the army they are regarded as most coward people! u have read some false history! u dont know any thing about india(Wiki00756 (talk))

Fowler and Fowler , four references from the same book by one author , to disingenuously attach a deprecating phrase , with a presumption to state let me write the proper history ,... Will Durant move over . Your vanilla summary is a giveaway , a pedantic phrase for a people of diversity , covering as vast an area present all over Pakistan , North India . Other than operating with an army of helpers , your turning of articles is an unmitigated sham . Intothefire (talk) 18:24, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Meanwhile ,the best answer Stush can come up with is a pedestrian and uncivil comment on the form of my posts instead of the content .Sitush suggest you improve your academic reading because google book searches will only serve you this far
Intothefire (talk) 18:35, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

i agree with intothefir....and fowlower fowler what proof u have for your above statment? jatts were kshatryas so u cant call them low caste ,if not then who were rulers of punjab cause there are only jatts who rule punjab and hindus and brahmns are considered cowards and low caste!! u are btw brahmins were not considered above kshatryas also its only written in the text! cause brahmins wrote it 1! as stated in the article and as all the people know pride is every thing for a jatt he can loose his life but not pride so there is no question that they were supppresed! they simply cannot be suppresed! they were not at all shudras u can call them vaishayas (below kshatryas that also only some jatts) but not shudras as they were agriculturists and shudras were the people who were not engaged in any agriculture activity! british people like u are dumb! u are just u are just jealous of jatts! it is said that when u are successful then people start talking against u!in punjab seats in elections to the parliment are reserved for scheduled castes(shudras) and from these seats no jatts contest elections only chamars and churas do! if jatts weere klow caste then they could never rule a princely state! no low caste has ever ruled a princely state in india!jatts never worked as labour instead they employed labour! i feel like laughing at your false statments and analysis of history! people like u only create false thinking among other people!and u call punjab a small princley state?? from this i can see ur level of understanding!and not all people of a community ar elite the jatts of main supreme castes were elite and were rulers of punjab! like all britishers ar not royal! people of another community can never tell the truth or can never understand another community! (Wiki00756 (talk))

Reverted recent conference image added to infobox

I have reverted the recent addition of a conference image to the infobox. This is for two reasons:

• the same image is shown elsewhere in the article, and so there is no need to duplicate it
• purely subjective, but the image is incredibly "washed out" & I am unsure whether that is due to overexposure or just the colour ranges of the subject matter. In either event, it is not a great photo to "headline" the article (in my opinion). - Sitush (talk) 10:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Hm, actually it seems that my revert clashed with exactly the same action by Fowler&fowler (no edit conflict flagged, so we're talking seconds). Still, it is the same outcome. - Sitush (talk) 10:52, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

huh!that image was much better than this black and white image,which is so old and thest dont even look like jatts!they look like laboures of jats my image shows a more recent view of jatts!(Wiki00756 (talk))

indented your post for you. I would not know what a Jat looks like. I don't see how anyone can make such a sweeping statement, but in any event that was not my reason. - Sitush (talk) 11:45, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

ok i will find another better picture than that.and i found 1 more link see this it tells that jatts were always a warrior tribe and were never low caste

http://sheokhanda.wordpress.com/2010/04/01/jats-in-general/(Wiki00756 (talk))

indented your post for you. Fine. Preferably one that is not connected to a modern political movement, a film star or similar. Such images are not usually representative of the community & can be viewed as promotional or undue weight etc. Your link is useless - please read the reliable sources policy - this is a blog-type website and fails the test. - Sitush (talk) 12:05, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

so u say that some old villagers are a good representative of a community? y not the people who are famous and who are of a particular community cannot be their representatives? as i said first of all the jatts and jat are very different from each other jatts consider themselves the real people of the jatt community! u know nothing about jatts so please get yor facts right!this may be unreliable but its written the same in this artilce!(Wiki00756 (talk))

Indented your post for you. Generally, add one more colon than in the previous post. Let's take an example. shall we? You put up an image of a political group at the head of the article. Someone else, who perhaps has different political sympathies, decides to replace it with an image of another political group. You change it back; they change it again ... and so on. It is a recipe for edit warring & POV pushing. Equally, you put up an image of a really beautiful actress who has just starred in a new blockbuster film. She has none of the pock marks of real life due to airbrushing/cosmetic surgery etc. Someone else comes along (perhaps even from a rival movie production/PR company) and decides that actress is no good but they like that hunky actor from some other film that has just been released - off we go again, bouncing images around for entirely the wrong reasons. Very few actors and very few politicians are really representative of their community: they generally live lives divorced from the reality "on the ground" and the choice of image becomes either "glorification" or "aspirational", take your pick. - Sitush (talk) 12:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

The black and white images I have added are historic images. They are some of the first photographs taken in India. The camera had only just been invented a decade before. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:55, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Even the British library's on line version of the Bharatpur durbar 1862 is not as high resolution as ours. I had to locate old books and then carry out clever image processing (but no enhancing) to create that image. It might be grainy and old, but that is only because it reflects the state of early photographic technology. And you want to replace these with scanned pictures of Bollywood actors in second careers as politicians. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:06, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

i did not put up a picture with had politicians in it.it was a picture of jat conference i which jats from all parts of india participated and they honoured dara singh...ok it must be amongst some of the first pictures taken in india but it was a picture of some people other tan jatts.and there are many more black and white pics even older than this in british records of jatt landlords and maharaja try finding one of those.and if u love these pictures u can create anther page like some of the first pictures of india(Wiki00756 (talk))

I am requesting that there be no picture in the infobox, at least until the picture issue has been resolved. Wiki00756 (talk · contribs) has been inserting a picture of Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, who is a controversial figure in recent Indian history, which shows him with compatriots carrying machine guns. This is hardly a representative picture of the Jat people, and contested by many among that community. Moreover, Wiki00756 has been edit warring. I request some admin to remove all pictures from the infobox. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:13, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

It is also probably a copyvio, since the pic exists on a BBC website. - Sitush (talk) 17:17, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

that was inserted by mistake i removed it! now happy?(Wiki00756 (talk))

You need to get the image itself deleted (you uploaded the thing) if it is a copyvio. - Sitush (talk) 17:53, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry but I have removed some images again. Let's hash this entire issue out here, please. The article is going to turn into a photo album if we are not careful. There may be a good reason for changing an image but adding more just seems ridiculous. As things stand, there are probably already too many. - Sitush (talk) 19:19, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

this is no reason for doing this i think u are just jelous of any images i put up here now these images were the images of jat sikh rulers of punjab,fradikot,and patila, i had pud them in front of paragraph sikh states! please stop removing my images and mind your own business!btw images help people to understand better!(Wiki00756 (talk))

You are assuming bad faith, again. I didn't even look at the images because that was not my point. Yet again, you seem not to have read my rationale: this article is intended to be read, not viewed. We have to be sensible regarding selection of images and, as important, regarding how many images are presented. Once images begin to overwhelm text then the article loses its purpose. I did not say that your latest images were inappropriate but that we're already at or beyond that point. We'll need to drop some existing images if we include some new ones - the image of a regimental button is a prime candidate for the trash bin, I suspect.

I am not particularly familiar with the process but there is a way to link to a Commons category so that people can view a much larger selection of images than can feasibly be included in the article.

Another point: there has been a note up on the article requesting that people did not edit it for a while. You have been consistently ignoring that note, despite being advised otherwise on your own talk page. Perhaps your reading of the language is not too good (& that might explain your desire to fill the thing with pictures also), but if in doubt then ask rather than act. HTH. - Sitush (talk) 20:01, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

see whos talking!first i suggest u to improve your understanding of English language!on above of the article the note reads "This article or section is in the middle of an expansion or major restructuring. You are welcome to assist in its construction by editing it as well. If this article or section has not been edited in several days, please remove this template.".in simple words it says that you are welcome to edit this article .but if this article has not been edited in severaldays then remove this tempelate .it nowhere says that u cannot edit this article!and if u think that this page is only meant for reading then delete all pictures from this page!(Wiki00756 (talk))

And if you check the history then you will see that is not the notice that I was referring to. Is there any chance that you could even do some small things correctly? Eg: it really would be appreciated if you followed WP:TPG and indented your replies. - Sitush (talk) 20:13, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

hahah then to what were u reffring to i cant see nothing else up above there!(Wiki00756 (talk))

Geez. INDENT YOUR REPLIES, please. This is what I was referring to - the notice on the article at the time of your last insertion of images. I've had enough: I think that you are now being deliberately disruptive and your several invitations to people to block you are likely to come to fruition. - Sitush (talk) 20:37, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

even iv also had enough from u! now u will teach me who are sikhs and jatts i myself am a sikh from 18 years(from birth) iv spent 18 years amongst sikhs. i did not want to disclose but i think u should know that i am from the royal family of faridkot!! i personally know all politicans and royals of punjab now dont teach me who sikhs are!and for the last time i am telling u that jatts are very different from jats of haryana!u just want to show poverty and illiteracy in india u britishers never show the other side of the coin!thats why u were kicked out from india but u are so shameless that u are still editing articles related to india please leave india on its own we dont require any help from britishers!!everybody today has great respect for sikhs nobody dares to say them anything! we dont need any clarfication from wikepedia which can be edited by any user which knows nothing about that community!these pictures are very old and are of not jatts or they may be of low castes portraying as jatts! anybody who will see these pics will think that today also jats are like this wheras jatts are not at all like this they are tall and strong and fair not black!today with globolisation international stores and malls have opened up in punjab and nebroughing areas and with the world jatts also changed they wear western clothes ,have imported cars but they are still brave and posses other characteristics of jatts ,they spend their time in hunting,playing golf,collecting cars,etc.all the jatts have their houses in chandigarh most of the rich people are jatts and recently chandigarh was the city with highest per capita income in india!(Wiki00756 (talk))

now please dont oppose my image of jatt sikhs during a rally which has been clicked by my personal cameraman!(Wiki00756 (talk))

Title?

Someone moved the article to Jatt people under the argument that that is the correct pronunciation. A quick glance at our sources seems to indicate that "Jat", not "Jatt", is the common spelling. I haven't read as many of the sources as most of the other editors have, though, so, if I'm wrong, let me know and I'll move it back. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:43, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not even clear why "people" is part of the title, especially since Jat redirects to Jat people. The other similar communities are simply Kanbi, Yadav, Kurmi, Ahirs (there too, I'm unclear about the plural form), Gujjar. Could some old timer here please enlighten me? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

It is well before my time and I too have never understood it (nor the Ahir/Ahirs one). Perhaps at some point in the past someone thought that there might be confusion with Jati? In any event, I would support reversing the pages in that is possible: make Jat the article page and have this one redirect to that. Might be a lot of maintenance issues, though. - Sitush (talk) 14:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

There are elements of the Jat Sikh community that spell Jat as Jatt, because they see themselves as distinct from Hindu Jat's. It's a purile attempt at trying to reinvent history. Thanks SH 17:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, S-H. Btw, which is the largest subgroup in the Jat community? The demographics section suggests that the Jat Muslims are 4 million strong, the Jat Sikhs 3 million, and Jat Hindus another 3 million. So really, by population, a significant part of the article should be on the Jat Muslims. Or is this article only about the non-Muslim Jats? Any clarification will be welcome. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:05, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I always thought Hindu Jats first then Muslim and then Sikh. ThanksSH 19:58, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea where the Britannica gets it numbers from in the first instance. There have been two Indian censuses in the 21st century, and the first one (which was the only one available to EB at the time) definitely did not query caste etc. I've never been too happy relying on that publication, at least in its web form. but in this instance it really does need some sort of support for the statement. Do Pakistani censuses cover caste/community identity? - Sitush (talk) 20:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Have a different article for muslim Jats

Muslim jats or pakisthanis are different from Indian jats. Indians jats are real khastriyas and warriors where as the muslim jats are non elite group. Indian jats never want to be associated with paki jats. there is lot of historical proof that the Jats are the true Aryan race. Combining the muslim jat and indian jat could bring disrepute to the JAT community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.206.253 (talk) 02:59, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

We could conceivably split, if we could get reliable sources to show that the groups really are separate, and that there was enough to say about the Muslim Jats to make a reasonable article. We absolutely will not split them because you have prejudicial feelings towards them. So if you want to present some sort of reliable info, please do so, but take your hatred elsewhere. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:29, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

We also have a seperate article for Jat Sikhs, so what is the big deal? Thanks SH 07:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

There is no big deal. But before we split, we need to ensure that there are enough sources and information to justify a separate article. Also, there is one more issue--if we're splitting of "Muslim Jat", we need to consider what this article should be about; in other words, we can't just automatically say that "Jat people" is about Hindu. Perhaps what we need is one article covering Jats as a whole, with a sub article for each of the three religious groups.

Also, I removed your section header; we don't need a separate section for every new post. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:29, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

This article is the mother article for Jats on Wikipedia .

There is already an article for Jat Muslim as well as Hindu Jats and Jatt Sikh .

Therefore absolutely no need to split/ merge this article .

Should I assume that the simultaneous truncating of The Hindu Jats article by Sitush who forms part of your collaborative group consisting Qwyrxian ,Fowler and Fowler , Sikh History , Janette Doe and Mathew Vanitas is not part of a plan of what is being discussed here . ?

If need be each of those existing articles should simply be individually worked upon

Intothefire (talk) 11:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm not part of any collaborative group. I happen to edit some of the same edits that those people do (though mostly quite different), and we do not coordinate our work (in fact, there is a lot of disagreement between several of the people you mentioned). Personally, I was unaware of the existence of Jat Muslim; as such, you are correct that the article should not be split, as it basically is already. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:50, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I dont have any prejudicial feeling or hatred towards muslim jats. There is a great difference between the two. Hindu jats in india are a powerfull community who are warriors and rulers. where as muslim jats or paki jats are economically backward who stayed behind in the modernisation. I think its a clear case to bring disrepute to the great hindu jats. kindly seperate the hindu jats from muslim jats. There is nothing common between them. Its like comparing the king and the worker. There is ample proof that Hindu jats are true khastriyas with pure ARYAN blood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.206.253 (talk) 16:40, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I think that you are misunderstanding. There are already articles for both the Muslim and the Hindu Jats. This article is an "umbrella" version covering all of the Jats. Now, we could delete this article entirely, turn it into some of of disambiguation page, restrict this article merely to an exposition of the early history prior to whatever divergence may have taken place, or we could keep it. But in any event, there is no need to split because the separate articles already exist. BTW, those articles are very poor - will need a fair bit of work doing to them. I've dabbled on them in the past but never really got to grips with the things due to lack of time. - Sitush (talk) 18:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Every Picture Tells a Story

Fowler and Fowler , Your made the following remark about Jats in your edit of 15th October
History: Sorry, but removing bogus history; the Mughals would have whupped the Jat butt with both hands tied and both eyes closed; Please no fantasy history

Whupped the Jat butt with with both hands tied and both eyes closed ?

Such intemperate words for the community of Jats - Muslims , Sikhs , Hindus ?
You have made several such remarks about Jats , and it bodes ill will towards a large section of people about whom you are engaged in ostensibly writing a history page.

Scores of edits and pictures have been both deleted and added by you , and several others ,in tandem , to construct an article ostensibly encyclopedic , but in reality thoroughly imbalanced . Had you (along with your other collaborating team of editors...Sitush ..Sikh History) editors not aggressively deleted other citations and content , your edits could have have been reasonable .But you have deleted content and citations en mass which I will revert to later .

No doubt the sheer quantum of your and Sitush edits are formidable and unmatched by mine , but with the few edits per day I make , I try to respect the contribution of others , by neither deleting presumptuously nor flocking together to browbeat other editors .

Here's a small summary of your curated imagery of Jats ....it reeks of condescension . If bigging up was a problem , what does this illustrate ?

Date	Edit by	Edit Summary	Picture Description Caption	Date of Photograph
15 October 2011	Fowler&fowler	replacing collage with old ethnographic print	Jat Hindoos Jats in the vicinity of Delhi	circa 1868
15 October 2011	Fowler&fowler	Origins and genetic studies: ethnogrphic print of Jat girl Aligarh 1868	Runnea Jatnee girl of the Jat tribe Allyghur A Jat girl from Aligarh (then North-Western Provinces, now) Uttar Pradesh, India,	Circa 1868
15 October 2011	Fowler&fowler	Jat states of the 18th century: jat zemindars rajpootana	Jat Zemindars Hindoos Rajpootna Ethnographic photograph of Jat zemindars (land owners) in Rajpootana(now Rajasthan), playing pachisi	Circa 1874
15 October 2011	Fowler&fowler	Jat states of the 18th century: +pic of teenage jat bharatpur ruler	Maharaja of Bhurtpoor Hindoo Jat in Durbar , Rajpootna Maharaja of Bhurtpoor Hindoo Jat in Durbar , Rajpootna	Circa 1860
15 October	Fowler&fowler	Sikh States: +pic Jat Sikh	Sikh Jat of the Sindhoo Clan . Lahore Jat Sikh of the "Sindhoo" clan, Lahore	Circa 1872

• When you started there were pictures of Churaman|Maharaja Churaman] • Bhagat Singh • Gurdas Mann • Bobby Deol
  Bhagat Dhanna • Foolabai • Maharaja Kishan Singh • Simi Garewal.] ....List could have been improved with addition of some Muslim Jats and a change here and there .
• When you had finished with your removal and insertions , we have this ... pathetic pictures of native Hindoos and Sikhs ...from sources that you and Sitush normally trash .
  

• A picture of a Sikh sitting cross legged on a charpoy ...from 1872 ..... my friend when was the last time you saw a Sikh Jat ...get real  ?
  

For that matter when was the last time you saw any Jat ?

Your pictures gallery is dated 1860 to 1874
Were you guys working on one aspect , say history or 18th century one could still understand .....but since you along with a whole team is rewriting entire articles and throwing out rehashing any contrary content ,it doesn't cut ice . Next I will revert on your wholesale deletions , on which you have received commendable cooperation from various editors who throw the rule book at the first instance on other editors .
Intothefire (talk) 14:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, they are all going in the history section. A history that shall trace the pastoral origins of the Jat people in Sind and eastern Baluchistan, the migration then into Western Punjab, and then subsequently into East Punjab and the present-day Rajasthan, Haryana, and western UP. What is the point of spending so much time and effort making a table? I have already addressed the question of actors etc in my post above. Here is is again repeated:

In what sense are they (actors) Jat? They are urban nontraditional Indians. The caste system was abolished in 1947. What specific community rituals do they practice other than, perhaps, endogamy that specifies them as Jat actors? It is like the Irish who moved to America. Though they are sometimes referred to as "Irish," they are really Irish Americans. Similarly, these people are descendants of Jats, or people of Jat heritage. Is there a secondary source that identifies the kinship and social organization of Jat actors, their child-rearing practices, gender relations, their verbal and nonverbal communication? Where are the volumes of the latter-day revenue specialists (as there indeed are those of the British revenue specialists of a century ago) extolling the work ethic of Jat actors? I will gladly read them. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:40, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

PS If you'd like to start a page, List of actors of Jat heritage, be my guest, but they don't belong here. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:04, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

PPS I want to clarify that in traditional situations caste is experienced (a) as a web of status categories. In both pre- and post 1947 India caste has also (b) displayed cluster formation driven by economic and political forces. Both those manifestations of caste are legitimate for such a page. If Jat actors, say, were banding together and keeping actors of other ethnicities out of Bollywood and we had a reliable secondary source for it, that would be a legitimate subject for this page. The Jat girl from 1868 satisfies (a), a political leader, such as Charan Singh satisfies (b), but people who don't satisfy either (a) or (b), for whom "Jat" is a vestigial ethnic identity, a mark of heritage, do not. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:19, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

A picture of a Sikh sitting cross legged on a charpoy ...from 1872 ..... my friend when was the last time you saw a Sikh Jat ...get real? :) Apparently, you are embarrassed (ashamed?) of this photograph! Although the photograph is grainy, the man in question (regardless of choice of furniture) is a splendid example of a human being—handsome, well built, and what is more, proud. I don't see why you want to see pictures of effeminate (and alcoholic) princes (who the Brits condescendingly called "Maharajas") or flabby has-been Bollywood types, who this man would whup (in his sleep) with his pinkie finger. The average Wikipedia reader, by the way, is much too discerning to be fooled by pretence. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:12, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Fowler&fowler, I hope I'm misunderstanding what you say above. To me, it seems like you are implying that only the historical Jat belong in this article, and that modern people who identify as Jat, and are identified as such by the government, in academic sources, and in the popular press, do not belong on this page. Is that your meaning? If so, I think that I must disagree with such an approach--we cannot wall off this topic and say that all modern, reliable sources discussing "Jat" are not relevant. As an extension of that, the article should include some pictures of "modern" Jats. In fact, rather than recommending that someone else start List of actors of Jat heritage, it sounds like you may need to start a History of the Jat people article, as a sub article of this one. Or am I just misunderstanding what you're saying? Qwyrxian (talk) 05:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Fowler and Fowler
I really did more than smile to look at your strange response , did I read right ?
I dident know what to make of your going on about Bollywood , List of actors of Jat heritage ,Jat Actors , In what sense are they (actors) Jat? etc .

Either that there is a huge gap in my knowledge or that you have access to some secret information which is going to be revealed on Wikipedia .
The first movie (Silent) made in India was Raja Harishchandra (1913) and the first Indian movie with sound sound Alam Ara (1931),

Here is where you started and the pictures you removed and replaced with archaic colonial stylized pictures of Hindoos and Sikh Jats from Allyghur Rajpootna and Bhurtpoor to represnt Jats included those of : See table

Name	Date	Known Vocation by rest of World	No of years before first Indian talkie film 1931
Churaman	1695–1721	Zamindar	Died 210 Years before
Bhagat Singh	1907 –1931	Communist Revolutionary	Died same year
Gurdas Mann	1957	Renowned Punjabi Folk Singer and has also acted in Punjabi and Hindi Films	Living
Bobby Deol	1967	Bollywood Actor	Living
Simi Garewal	1967	Bollywood Actor	Living
Bhagat Dhanna	About 1415	Saint whose compositions are in the Guru Granth Sahib	Died 516 years before
Foolabai	Wikipage says 1664–1682	Saint	Died 249 years before
Maharaja Kishan Singh	1899–1929	Raja of princely state Bharatpur	Died 2 years before

2 out of the 8 are Bollywood actors .( as if being a Bollywood actor were a crime)
but here you go on and on about Bollywood and Lists of Jat actors in Bollywood
Pray how can someone 516 years before the first Indian talkie movie be termed a Bollywood actor
But you deleted because they were ostensibly according to you Bollywood actors

Unless off course you are carrying the meaning of Shakespeare's words a bit too far
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players

Really as far as I am concerned this choice of pictures isent sacrosanct , they could have been changed , improved - but is a good example of , the representative nature of the whole process you and your team have adopted on many related articles,
using bluster to clear all other shades and sides of content , donning high academic stature . Both Sikh History here and Sitush have poor records of deletions as well as deleting talk pages , but have no qualms to threaten at the slightest pretext .

Fowler and Fowler please stop your aggressive takeover of articles along with your dedicated team , deleting content ,citations, inserting nonsense , trashing sources when others use them , then using the same yourselves , trying to overawe other editors and admins .

Intothefire (talk) 17:53, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Please don't waste my time with sweepings of delusional daydreaming, appropriate to Uncle Swell's family history, but not to an encyclopedia. 3 out of 8 pictures in that laughable montage were drawn by Wikipedia's own LR Burdak. Based on what? We are not told. Did he see apparitions or have visitations of these dear departed Jats of the pre-pre-pre-photography era? Where are the great Jat political leaders of the 20th century? Where is Ramji Lal Hooda the founder and main organizer of the first Jat Mahasabha (oops, he doesn't even have a Wikipedia page, but the Keystone Cops-wannabes from Bollywood have finely honed biographies). Where is a picture of Chhotu Ram the greatest pre-1947 leader of the Jat people, and Charan Singh, the greatest Jat leader of independent India, and briefly its Prime Minister. They are barely mentioned in the article, but whole sections are devoted to alcoholic, defunct, degenerate, and politically impotent Maharajas (of the cis-Sutlej states or of Bharatpur), the pageant Great Kings whom a fresh-faced 20-something British political agent would upbraid every time His Highnesses went out of line. I know a great deal more about Jat history, real Jat history and not Uncle Swell's fawningly dogeared family fantasy, than you might have imagined. Cut me some slack, will ya? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:58, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

68.75% Lies or 31.25% truth

Fowler and Fowler :

By a simple calculation , of objective truth against lies by your own statements in this discussion with me
Fowler and Fowler scores 2/8 or with benefit of doubt 3/8 . Which translates to an average of 68.75% Lies or 31.25% truth .

You forcefully argued right here above that pictures were removed because they were Bollywood figures ,
See the table again , which specifically turns out , your statement and arguments are 68.75% lies or 31.25% truth .

Which is about the normal trend in your edits on articles .

Naughty boy !! do your homework honestly
Intothefire (talk) 12:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Intothefire , however veiled it is, the above constitutes a WP:Personal Attack. From what I can see Fowler&Fowler has done some sterling work, in some very difficult circumstances. His edits maybe aggresive, but they are fair. Thanks SH 18:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

fowler fowler its not about who knows more of history,its about a community and we cant ignore what others say,and dont think that whatever other people say is false,cause confidence is good but overconfidence is not good!and see if u are writing about a history of community then write about their present also!and include some modern sources,and be neutral,cause things change in thousand years.!u havent included jatt idols like Bhagat Singh,Udham Singh!and Abhinav Bindra a gold medalist at Olympics in shooting,Yuvraj Singh indian crickter,Harbhajan singh crickter,and Milkha Singh gold meadlist in 1958 and 1962 olympics in 200m and 400m! one more thing its written that jats used to practice widow remarriage but they used to practice only when it was allowed after reforms in the society and so what if they used to practice it afterall it was an evil practice,and let me tell u that even rajputs started practicing widow remarriage and rajputs and jats made their own rules cause they had power brahmins were only preists they had no actual power!cause kings and warriors have always more power than preiests!(Wiki00756 (talk))

I'm afraid that "let me tell u" is not a reliable source, and material supported by nothing more than your personal assertion is of no interest to Wikipedia - if you want to help improve this article, go find some proper sources -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:15, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, that's wording it a little strongly. "material supportable by nothing more than your personal assertion" would be more accurate. Rich Farmbrough, 17:39, 29 November 2011 (UTC).

Charan Singh

Speaking of pictures, does anyone have a hi-res (at least 1Kx1K) picture of Charan Singh the first and only Jat prime minister of India? Failing that any decent picture will do. I can't seem to be able to find any good ones. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:38, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I've found a historic picture, which I've now added to the infobox. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:49, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

just for information you may include it or not but just general information about jatts belive it or not

1st jats are kshatryas as rajputs both have inter marriages.and majority of sources state them as kshatryas by only one unreliable source u cannot say them shudras.btw logically also u cant call jats shudras as they were farmers and farmers were called Vaishyas!. 2nd the relationship between jats and rajputs was like america and russia during cold war as both were almost equally powerful. 3rd in punajab region jats were only dominant people. 4th jats of rajasthan are not real jats. 5th u can compare jats to romans cause just like romans jats are brave courageous and only bravest of brave became kings like that only bravest of brave jatts became kings. 6th today jats are rich and high class people and are very prosperous. 7th every one aspires to be famous and become a actor,sportsman,etc,so its not a crime if a jat is a actor.a jat may be a actor but it dosent mean that his basic characteristics have changed they always remain close to their community and some are famous for their being jat only.(Wiki00756 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 18:46, 14 November 2011 (UTC).

Without sources the above is utterly pointless. This page is not a forum for general discussion but rather for improvements to the article. - Sitush (talk) 16:16, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

iv provided sources before in previous disscusions,and iv written this so that other people can find sources!(Wiki00756 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 16:40, 16 November 2011 (UTC).(Wiki00756 (talk))

I cannot recall seeing any mention of any sources - just to pick one of your points at random - comparing Jats etc to America, Russia or the Cold War. If you did provide them then perhaps you could give me a diff, link or even date/time so that I can check them out. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 17:24, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Jat Polyandry

This article has nothing about widespread practice of polyandry among Jats. It is a very well recorded practice by scholars. Here are some Google Books links about it:

https://www.google.com/search?q=jat+polyandry&hl=en&prmd=imvnsbfd&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1024&bih=537&wrapid=tlif132156442743710&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbm=bks&source=og&sa=N&tab=wp

Please make a good study of this topic and include a separate section about this intersting practice among Jats. Regards

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.42.208.187 (talk) 21:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Populated areas etc

Is there any chance that we can have some sources for the various areas where Jats live? Or, failing that, can we not cut out the list and just say that they live "in India and elsewhere" (or some similar formula). If we are going to name specific places then presumably we need to be able to verify that they are more predominant in those areas than in other areas of the country. - Sitush (talk) 19:26, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Tagging for citations

It is my experience with Indian caste articles that we get better results when we tag for citations at the statement level rather than the section level. There are often individual statements which are WP:OR or POV but surrounded by perfectly ok statements that simply lack a source. The combination of detailed tagging and the datestamps enables these to be weeded out over a period of time. - Sitush (talk) 08:30, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request on Military Culture of the Jats, and their Origin

"According to Barbara D. Metcalf and Thomas R. Metcalf:

Upstart warriors, Marathas, Jats, and the like, as coherent social groups with military and governing ideals, were themselves a product of the Mughal context, which recognized them and provided them with military and governing experience. Their successes were a part of the Mughal success.[10]"

Fowler&Fowler, can I kindly suggest that you also provide an opposing academic view of your point, and not only the point which you wish to portray (whether due to bias or not), as we are both aware, they're are alot of historians on India and Jats, and not all of them share the same view:

• 1* According to many sources, the Jats independantly defended Mahmud of Ghazni's attempt to conquer India (or rather, cross to the opposite bank of the indus). Thus it can be concluded that they already had a fairly strong federal military organization of some sort to defend from a Sassanid Emperor.

Sources: The Pearson CSAT Manual 2011 By Edgar Thorpe, Showick Thorpe The Cambridge Shorter History of India

• 2* And the fact that Rajputs and Jats are almost always found inhabiting the same geographic area, share the same (martial) culture, and even the same "gotras", many historians conclude they share the same lineage or racial ancestry (i.e. Scythian tribes Messagetae and Getae), not to mention that the culture itself resembles that of the Scythians (i.e. buffalo sacrifice and worship of the lunar/solar gods or the martial god/goddess):

Sources: A glossary of the tribes and castes of the Punjab and North-West, H.A. Rose Structure and Change in Indian Society By Milton Singer, Bernard S. Cohn Al-Hind: the slave kings and the Islamic conquest, By André Wink — Preceding unsigned comment added by JagNatha (talk • contribs) 20:49, 12 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JagNatha (talk • contribs)

this also applys to varna status as it coccludes that jatts were kshatryas (Wiki00756 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 17:45, 14 November 2011 (UTC).

who removed indo aryan origion of jats,and there is also not much written about their culture like their folk dance bhangra,their game kabbadi,hocky,their food etc. i also request the removal of the picture jats in the vincity of delhi as it only shows some villagers not jats!and there are 6 pictures from one book it looks as online version of the book we need some more reliable and good pictures.

more info about sikh states we need to write more about sikh states and emperors as maharaja ranjit singhs army was the only army in the history of the whole world who defeated the brave pathans who were more in number and jats were very less but they still defeated them.and some british scholars claimed that if hari singh nalwa general of ranjits army had lived longer and had the sources and artillery of british,he would have conqured most of asia and europe. and i dont know what it means by not well established castes in india,as at that time india was divided into many different small and big princely states and regions jats were well established in punjab,there is no one caste that can be dominant in whole of india it differs from region to region.(Wiki00756 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 19:15, 14 November 2011 (UTC).

Wiki00756, be bold - just remember to abide by the Five Pillars. JagNatha, from which article did you copy/paste that info above? - Sitush (talk) 19:17, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

the info is not a copy paste how can u say it is?and it has reliable source. and so what if it is copiid atleast it is true!and remember we are not here to fight orr show that we can write better articles,if u are editing an article then write it fairly.ad dont rely only on 1 or 2 books for sources!and dont insult any person or community!and sitush to abide by 5 pillars goes for u as well.(Wiki00756 (talk))

JagNatha's opening statement sure looks like a copy/paste to me ("[10]") & although it refers to 2 people called Metcalf there does not appear to be a source. AS for "so what if it is a copyvio", well, if that is your attitude then perhaps it would be best if you do not contribute here. Although I did not myself use that term, copy/pasting even from one article to the next is against the terms of our license unless attributed, as that (+ the lack of details re: the Metcalfs) is why I asked the question. As for insults, hm. I've seen that argument before: in my experience, it is usually a last resort of those who cannot otherwise get things "their way". May I remind you that Wikipedia is not not censored. The project exists neither to make someone look good or make them look bad; it exists to present information that is verifiable using reliable sources, and to present such info in a neutral manner. - Sitush (talk) 16:15, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

but the sources are reliable and true.and we are here to discus about the article not to talk about attitude!if u have any reliable sources then u can share them.but discus only about the article rather than people.and be polite and respectfull.(Wiki00756 (talk))

Er, guys, it's a cut and paste form this article that JagNtha is commenting on. I think chill pills all round. Rich Farmbrough, 22:00, 29 November 2011 (UTC).

Its 2:16am, and I have other work to do,...but for now, let me say: I cannot believe that the current fellowship of wikipedia "article editors" cannot read through the sources themselves (which I have kindly listed), and instead are so busy trying to conclude that I am copying and pasting from a pre-written article. Do you expect me to publish a thesis on the subject? especially when such conclusions have already been made in the sources I have listed...dear God!

--JagNatha (talk) 02:24, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I finally had time to copy up the sources which regard Jats as tradionally kshatriyas, or taking on kshatriya roles in Punjab. The quotes sourced from the Al-Hind book is particularly interesting, it is obvious that the Jat history in terms of their authority in village/local-level politics hasn't been well recorded, and as most villages where any particular Jat clan resides are usually founded by their ancestors, and hence the clan holds authority of the village, as I cannot publish my personal history, or my own first-hand original research of family-tree's, I have listed the following quotes of published research which does:

Regarding common culture of Jat and Rajput, in terms of Animal Sacrifice (influence of Shaivism and Shaktism), and customs: "Near the top and politically controlling the village 100 or 500 years ago one would have found Rajput or Jat gentry sponsoring the annual sacrifice of young buffaloes, certainly themselves consuming at least eggs, chickens, and liquour, as most Jat and Rajput landlords of adjacent villages do today." Structure and Change in Indian Society, Milton Singer

"The Kedara are usually the bards of Rajputs, Gujar and Jat communities" Rajasthan: Vol 1, K.S. Singh (It is btw, common knowledge that Jat villages often have a clan of bards whom traditionally sang for the Chaudhary of the village.)

Overlap of Jat and Rajput gotra, due to similar origin, but difference is acquired tribal social status:

"The Jat indeed, as elsewhere, claims for himself Rajput origin, but a Varaich for instance does not say that he is still a Rajput. He is a Jat and content to be so. The fact is that within the pale of Sikhism Rajputs were at a discount."

"The Jats who composed the great mass of the Khalsa rose to absolute power, and the Rajput who had despised them was the peculiar object of their hatred. Their general policy led them to cut off such poppy-heads as had not sprung from their own own seed." pg 12

"The Jats of this tract are very largely if not wholly true Jats, who preserve strong traditions as to the Rajput tribes from which they claim to be descended."

Rajputs, Jats and Gurjars sharing common origin and culture:

"The Gurjaras gave dynasties to Kanauj, Ajmer, and other states and from their ruling clans are descended the mass of the modern Rajput clans."

"Gurjara family which attained to Rajput or gentle rank", "Kanets which represent those Gurjaras who did not take to warlike persuits but remained cultivators." "the Rajput (Gurjara) fighting men were accompanied by their humbler pastoral brethren."

--- A glossary of the tribes and castes of the Punjab and North-West India, H.A. Rose

Jats converting to Islam due to impact and appeal of Sufism in the extreme North West of India:

"The vast majority of the Jat and Rajput groups of the Panjab that became Muslim in medieval times claim to have converted wither by Shayk Farid ad-din Ganj-i-Shakar (d. 1265 AD), 'Baba Farid' of Pakpattan (the ancient town of Ajudhan) or by his contemporary Baha' al-Haqq Zakariya (d. 1263)" Al-Hind by Andre Wink, also mentioned in "Islam and Empire"

Jats , Rajputs and Maratha tribes being described as Kshatriya Zamindars as early as the 14th Century:

"Rajputs, as Jats, Marathas, and other gentry groups ('tribes') who henceforward were also designated by the generic term Zamindars, lit. 'landholders'..."By the fourtheenth century claims to honourable Kshatriya status were again assertively made by the leading categories of Rajputs." ibid (Al-Hind)

Jats and Rajput tribes unite with Mahmud of Ghazni to resist the Mongol invasions, whereby Khokhars also joined Mahmud, previously being aligned with the Mongols - 12th and 13th Century "By 1249 we again encounter a 'governor of Multan and Lahore' (hakim-i-multan-o-lahur), commading 20,000 chosen horse against the Mongols in Ghazna. This governor, it is specified, was appointed to 'Lahore, Multan, Bha[t]nair, Sirhind, Dipalput, and the other iqta's which were exposed to the incursions of the Mongols'. He not only dealt with the Mongols, but also brought under his control the Jats, Kokhars, Bhattis, Minas, Mandahars, and other similar tribes (tawa'if). [note Bhattis and Minhas being notable Rajput tribes, and Mandahars today being a notable Jat tribe] ibid (Al-Hind.)

Use of Chaudhary and Thakur as a Jat title:

"Thakur = North Indian term for master or lord; used commonly by Rajput and Jat castes."

The Mughal Empire By John F. Richards

"The Jat Thakur is a feudal baron who plunders by night." From the caves and jungles of Hindostan, 1883-1886, Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Boris De Zirkoff

"Thakur" (a man of indeterminate gabut mid- level caste, usually implying a landowning caste, often Jat)” Raja Nal and the Goddess: the north Indian epic Dhola in performance By Susan Snow Wadley

"Chaudhary (as the Jats, the Gujars call themselves)", “They call themselves Chaudhries and dismiss the claim of Gujars and Araeens to this title of honour lending hierarchy.” Justice in practice: legal ethnography of a Pakistani Punjabi village

Jats as Kshatriyas: "In the local social hierarchy the Jat perceive their position at a high level and on a par with the Rajput and Brahman." Rajasthan: Volume 1 - Page 443 – K.S. Singh

"The Jats are the sole occupants of the Kshatriya varna in Badipur.", "the Gaur Brahmins stress that the Jats are Kshatriya since they are the purohit of Jats" From hierarchy to stratification: changing patterns of social inequality in a north Indian village, D.B. Miller

"The power and prestige which landowning castes command affect their relations with all castes, including those ritually higher. This is true of parts of the Punjab where the landowning Jats look upon the Brahmins as their servants, and of Madhopur village in easter Uttar Pradesh where formely the dominant Thakurs refused cooked food from all Brahmins except their gurus or religious teachers. In Rampura village in Mysore state, the Brahmin priest of the Rama tample was a figure of fun; when, at a temple festival, he tried to distribute prasara (food consecrated by being offered to the diety) to the congretion, the peasant youths gathered there teased him" , "In the south-east of the province a Hindu Jat took pride in his caste and even looked down upon a Brahmin who in that area was not a priestly caste but cultivators." Social Change in Modern India, By Mysore Narasimhachar Srinivas

[In Sikh Social Structure] "Kshatriyas are considered lower than the Jats." [due to being landless traders in the Punjab]. History Of Ancient India (portraits Of A Nation) By Kapur, Kamlesh

"Jats consider themselves to compose a category of castes along with Rajputs, Gujars, Ahirs and Sainis. They belong to the same varna or caste category: All are Kshatriyas or "rulers" sharing hereditary martial proclivities or leadership qualities.” State, Society, and human rights in South Asia by Stig Toft Madsen

" The Jat race, who followed and pushed the Rajputs farther into NW India, are eminently agricultural and pastoral" Edward Balfour

"The tasks of Rajputs and Jats, identified as Kshatriyas, is warfare and ruling." Local-level politics: social and cultural perspectives Marc J. Swartz

"It may be inferred from the above analysis that the Kshatriyas, whether Jats or Thakurs, are the "model" or "reference group" with which both the lower and the higher castes identify themselves." L. K. Bala Ratnam

"If the Kshatriya status is claimed by the Rajputs and the Khatris, the traditional role of the Kshatriyas as the fighters and owners of land has been taken over in most of the Punjab by the Jats." Proceedings, Punjab University

"Vishwanath also notes that the Jats and Ahir castes of North- Western Provinces who practiced female infanticide in the nineteenth century called themselves Rajputs and identified with the Kshatriya ideology" Female infanticide in India: a feminist cultural history, Rashmi Dube Bhatnagar, Reena Dube

"As late as 1883, Sir Denzil Ibbetson reported that caste affiliation was not important to many Jats. In Doaba they claim to be Kshatriyas,2 the warrior category of the Hindu caste system." Sikhs In England, Arthur Wesley Helweg

"Groups categorized as kshatriya have been economically and politically powerful as rulers, warriors, landlords, and farmers. In northern India, such prominent groups include Rajputs, Thakurs, and Jats" Encyclopedia of Asian History: Volume 2, Ainslie Thomas Embree

"Imperceptibly, the Scythians readily accepted for themselves the class-name "Rajput", acknowledged the Brahman for their teacher and friend and the Brahmanic temple as their religion, while the class-name "Jat" was coined for..." Discovery of Pakistan, by Abdul Aziz

"The dynamism of the west can also be explained in part by the character of the Jats and other high castes who work with their hands. The Jat area begins in the Punjab and ends in the districts immediately to the east of Delhi. Beyond this area, the high castes often observe the taboo on ploughing."

"Brahmins and Jats sit together in the same chaupal, whilst the harijans are not offered a seat" "(Jats and Thakurs smoke the same Hookah.) Studies in Indian agriculture: the art of the possible By Gilbert Étienne

JagNatha (talk) 05:45, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I am pretty confused with this wall of text. What are you actually suggesting that the article should say? A lot of the sources above look to be pretty poor, and I am concerned about original research and synthesis but we may be able to rescue something. - Sitush (talk) 05:55, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I completely forgot about this issue for a while as I have been busy with other affairs.

I am firstly suggesting that "The Jat people are a community of traditionally non-elite tillers" should be removed. What the hell is an "elite tiller"? or a "non-elite tiller"? , what exactly is meant by "elite" according to Fowler&Fowler is HIGHLY ambigious. The "elites" change from time to time. Is he suggesting that there has only been a single "elite" community in India? that is absolutely arrogant. He is quoting from the same source on three occasions, where his source ("Caste, Society and Politics in India from the Eighteenth Century ..." by Susan), the source is ill-researched and unreliable, and from what i've read of it, fails to mention at all the existence of any Jat chieftain after the 13th century (though many sources, such as "The Oxford History of India", Smith, mention Jat elites from 16th century). Until Fowler&Fowler provides a quote from his source with regards to what "elite" actually means in his context, the phrase "The Jat people are a community of traditionally non-elite tillers" should be removed.

"Agrarian environments: resources, representations, and rule in India" by By Arun Agrawal, K. Sivaramakrishnan, a well known academic who specialises in research ethnic groups actually suggests:

"Coming from the elite Rajput caste who historically ruled in the region, and from the powerful Jat community that is usually associated with farming", actually contradicts Jats being non-elite in comparison with Rajputs (which is what Fowler&Fowlers following quote is suggesting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jat_people#cite_note-17), unless both can be explained at the same time in the statement, the statement should NOT be included in order to confuse readers, and possibly even offend an ethnic group.

Furthermore, the Ain-I-Akbari (a 16th century documentation recording the administration of Hindustan under Akbar) itself mentions Jat zamindars, thus concluding that Jats did not "arise as landowners after the 17th century, from being non-elites" as Fowler&Fowler would passionately love to put it, but rather, the Jats where already Zamindars during Akbars era.

Quote: "The Ain-I-Akbari records the presence of Jat zamindar castes and well-irrigation in the Doabs of the Punjab. ", "By the time of Akbar, the Subah of Lahore is described as agriculturally very fertile and yielding a healthy revenue...The numerically larger zamindar castes include the Jats, Bhattis, Rajputs and various others" Ancient Indian Social History: Some Interpretations By Romila Thapar

JagNatha (talk) 12:06, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Susan Bayly is in fact a very highly respected researcher in this area. I do not understand the purpose of the quote from Agrawal - it seems to confirm that they were a farming community. The Ain-I-Akbari is not a reliable source. Thapar is, of course, but I have no idea what her opinion of the Ain-I-Akbari may be - merely noting that it says what it does is insufficient. - Sitush (talk) 20:00, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I think you're missing the point here Sitush. Agrawal is confirming that they where a farming community, but throughout the book explains how these farmers (essentially the european equivalent of the yeomans and the 'lower' gentry) had dominion over multiple village politics, and thus had much political power especially after the 15th century. Baring in mind that villages where independent in their political affairs (apart from the fact that they had to pay revenue to the emperors subedar), i.e. there where no "elites" over these villages, the "chaudhary"/chieftain/founder of the village was the elite. More quotes can be provided from all three sources if need be. And may I ask why Ain-i-Akbari isn't in you're opinion a reliable source? I find Thapars source fairly reliable to say the least, obviously the quote was too large to copy, so I broke the large paragraph into essentially three sentences. [[2]], here's the original text. She is stating that by the time of Akbar, the Jats, Bhattis and Rajputs where numerically the largest of the zamindar castes.JagNatha (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I am not trying to debunk Susan Bayly's academic research, but am rather suggesting that having read through the whole book myself, I believe Fowler&Fowler is taking the work out of context. If you look at page 41 of "Caste, Society and Politics in India from the Eighteenth Century to the...", it clearly suggests Jats and many other non-elites had lordly titles. It is clearly obvious (having a quick reading through the book) that by "elite", the author is refering to ritual "kingship" as per brahministic rituals, rather than financial or statutory rights of the Jats of the 18th century (as I have pointed out earlier, there are many accounts of Jat takhurs by the 16th century. I have even pointed out to a photograph of a Jat thakur of Alipur taken in the late eigteenth century. I see no reason why the change I propose should be ignored. JagNatha (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I have been waiting for a response for a month, if I do not hear anything by the end of today, I will assume that my change (in removal of the 'traditionally non-elite') has no valid reason for being averted. JagNatha (talk) 10:43, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I think that the reason why you are getting no response is because Fowler is on and off Wikipedia at the moment, due to personal commitments. However, I disagree with your interpretation regarding elite/non-elite. We do not make up our own definitions of what a reliable source says - we just say it. - Sitush (talk) 10:55, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I understand that wikipedia's policies are not aimed at scholars, but rather book-readers. Many other very reliable sources (both, translations of primary texts of the time, and genuinely well researched secondary sources) contradict with that one quote, in many ways. Surely, if you disagree with the removal of that phrase being used in the article, you must agree to the addition of reliable quotes from the Oxford History of India by Vincent Arthur Smith (and others). JagNatha (talk) 13:28, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, I don't think Fowlers absence/presence on Wikipedia should affect the quality of the article, and I don't think Wikipedia's policies do either. JagNatha (talk) 13:28, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I am not reading all of the above yet again. Can you be more specific? What other sources? What quotes from Smith etc? What actually are you proposing now? - Sitush (talk) 13:37, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

The incorrect use of "Princely States" in the article

"The more triumphant even attaining the ranks of minor princes, such as the Jat ruler Badan Singh of the princely state of Bharatpur.[25] "

Bharatpur was a kingdom, not a princely state, it only became a "princely state" under the administration of the British Empire. Hence why Badan Singh was a Maharaja (a King) and not simply a "Raja" or "Kanwar" (prince). Thus the statement should be corrected in the following manner:

"The more triumphant, such as the Jat ruler Badan Singh, even established kingdoms such as Bharatpur.[25]"

(and fyi, quote 25 even states Badan Singh as a king and not a prince).

The statement "Princely State" is being misused over and over again throughout the article by Fowler&Fowler, and I urge it be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JagNatha (talk • contribs) 22:00, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 3 April 2012

Shreyesh1986 (talk) 06:15, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed.   — Jess· Δ♥ 07:05, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 6 April 2012

Jats in Indian epics Jats are the earliest kshatriyas. The mention of Jat word by the famous Sanskrit scholar Panini of 900 BCE in his Sanskrit grammar known as Ashtādhyāyī in the form of shloka as जट झट संघाते or “Jat Jhat Sanghate”. Which means the terms 'Jat' and 'democratic federation' are synonymous. It proves that the Jats are the most ancient people.

Jats in Shiva Stotra

Shiva Stotra is another most ancient epic, which mentions one thousand names of Lord Shiva, also mentioned in ‘Shalya Parva’ of Mahabharata, in which one of the names of god is ‘Jat’ and appears at serial number 489. Mahabharata Anushasan Parva chapter 17 shloka 89 reads as under:

महानखो, महारोमा, महाकोशो, महाजट: Mahānakho, Mahāromā, Mahākosho, Mahājata

प्रसन्नश्च, प्रसादश्च, प्रत्यो, गिरिसाधन: Prasannasha, Prasādasha, Pratyo, Girisādhana

Meaning - Mahanakha, Maharoma, Mahakosha, Mahajata, Prasanna, Prasada, Pratyaya, Girisadhana are the names of Lord Ishvara.

How old is Jat

According to an ancient story Brahma appointed Kartikeya as the commander of all the beings. Kartikeya got various gifts out of which there was a lord of all commanders named ‘Jat’. (Mahabharata Shalya Parva chapter 44 and 45). The shloka reads as under:

अक्ष: सन्तर्जनो राजन् कुन्दीकश्च तमोन्नकृत । Akshah santarjano rājana kundīkashcha tamonnakrita

एकाक्षो द्वादशक्षश्च तथैवैक जट: प्रभु ।। ५८ ।। Ekaksho dvadashkshashcha tathaivaika jatah prabhu

Meaning – Aksha, Santarjana, Kundika, Tamonnakrata, Ekaksha, dvadasha, and a ‘Jat’ lord of all (O Rajana ! gifted to swami Kartikeya)

It is believed in Hindu mythology that Brahma was the creator of the universe. As per Hindu cosmology the period of creation of the universe by Brahma was 1,97,29,49,108 years back in samvat 2063 (2006). It means the word ‘Jat’ is as old as the universe. [1]

Jats in Rigveda

Jats find a mention in most ancient Indian literature. Over sixty clans are named in the Rig Veda.[2] In the Mahabharata as they are mentioned ‘Jartas’ in ‘Karna Parva’. The famous Sanskrit scholar Panini]] of 900 BCE has mentioned in his Sanskrit grammar known as Ashtyāyī in the form of shloka as जट झट संघाते or “Jat Jhat Sanghate”. This means that the terms 'Jat' and 'democratic federation' are synonymous. He has mentioned many Jat clans as settled in Punjab and North west areas.

Jats in Grammar of Chandra

Jats are mentioned in the grammar treatise of Chandra of the fifth century in the phrase sentence अजय जर्टो हुणान or “Ajay Jarto Hunān, which refers to the defeat of Huns by the Jats under the leadership of Yasodharman. The inscription of Mandsaur also indicates that Yasodharman, the ruler of Malwa, was a Jat of the Virk gotra ( clan). [3]

Jats in the Deva Samhitā

There is mention of Jats in “Deva Samhitā” [4] in the form of powerful rulers over vast plains of Central Asia. For example in the 'Deva Samhitā' of Gorakh Sinha from the early medieval period, when Pārvatī asks Shiva about characters of Jats, Shiva tells her like this in sanskrit shloka-15 as under:

महाबला महावीर्या, महासत्य पराक्रमाः Mahābalā mahāvīryā, Mahāsatya parākramāh

सर्वाग्रे क्षत्रिया जट्टा देवकल्पा दृढ़-व्रता: Sarvāgre kshatriyā jattā Devkalpā dridh-vratāh

Meaning - 'They are, like gods, firm of determination and of all the Warriors, the Jats are the prime rulers of the earth.'

Shiva explains Parvati about the origin of Jats in Shloka –16 of Deva samhita:

श्रृष्टेरादौ महामाये वीर भद्रस्य शक्तित: hrishterādau mahāmāye Virabhadrasya shaktitah

कन्यानां दक्षस्य गर्भे जाता जट्टा महेश्वरी Kanyānām Dakshasya garbhe jātā jatta maheshwarī.

Meaning – 'In the beginning of the universe with the personification of the illusionary powers of Virabhadra and Daksha’s daughtergana's womb originated the caste of Jats'.

In the shloka-17 of 'Deva Samhitā' when Pārvatī asks about the origin of Jats, Shiva tells Parvati that:

गर्व खर्चोत्र विग्राणां देवानां च महेश्वरी Garva kharchotra vigrānam devānām cha maheshwarī

विचित्रं विस्मयं सत्वं पौराण कै साङ्गीपितं Vichitram vismayam satvam Pauran kai sāngīpitam

Meaning - 'The history of origin of Jats is extremely wonderful and their antiquity glorious. The Pundits of history did not record their annals lest it should injure and impair their false pride and of the vipras and gods. We describe that realistic history before you'.

Etymology of the word "Jat"

The most acceptable theory about the origin of the word, 'Jat' is that it has originated from the Sanskrit language word “Gyat” . The Mahabharata mentions in chapter 25, shloka 26 that Lord Krishna founded a federation ‘Gana-sangha’ of the Andhak and Vrishni clans. This federation was known as ‘Gyati-sangh’. Every member of this sangha was called Gyat. over a period of time due to linguistic variaions it became Jat. [5]

The other prominent theory of the word's origins is that Jat came from the word Gaut tribal name of some Indo-Aryan tribes of Central Asia (such as those which later became Gauts/Goths and settled in Europe), which was written in 'Jattan Da Ithihas'. It has also been mentioned by Bhim Singh Dahiya. [6]

According to the historian 'Ram Lal Hala' the word Jat is drived from word 'Yat'. There was a king named 'Yat' in Chandra Vanshi clan who was ancestor of Lord Krishna. The Jats are descendants of King Yat. 'Yat' later changed to 'Jat'.[7]

Need to search epics

Since the word Jat existed from the beginning of the universe it must find place in various Indian epics. The main Indian epics worth mentioning are as follows: Vedas (Rigveda, Yjurveda, Samaveda, Athavaveda), Samhitas, Brahmanas, Aranyakas, Upanishadas, Vedanga (Shiksha, Chandas, Vyakarnas, Nirukta, Jyotisha, Kalpa), Mahabharata, Ramayana, Purana, Smriti, Bhagvadgita, Panchatantra, Kumar Vyasa Bharata, Stotra, Ramacharitamanas.

I searched some of the Indian and Hindu epics and produced as above some examples about the antiquity existence of word Jat and the history of Jats. It will be of great help to find more literature and linkages with the Jat history. In addition to the Hindu literature and epics the Buddhist and Jain books also have a great treasure about Jat history, not explored so far. Thus there is a need to research these sacred epics if we have to reconstruct the true Jat history.

115.246.229.164 (talk) 18:40, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Not done: It is not clear what you would like to change. Please express yourself in a 'please change X to Y' degree of detail and provide reliable sources for any facts. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 23:21, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Another picture of a Jat Thakur of the 18th century

a Thakur for comparison purposes (as all pictures are of the 18th century), most of the current ("openly licensed") pictures chosen for the article only portray the financially/economically/politically mediocre Jats of the time.

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00routesdata/1800_1899/aligarhmao/town/people9.jpg

From Aligarh, ruled by Thunea Jats for quite some time I believe (though I will soon copy quotes to back that statement up), however, the picture of should do for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JagNatha (talk • contribs) 22:10, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Please can you post why you are qualified to comment on this page - i'm only looking to engage with people who have studied, in some respect, the history of the Jatt people.

No recycling please.

196.215.215.8 (talk) 15:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)Jatt

Important Scholars who identified Massagetaeans as "Great Jits or Jats" of Asia

Important Scholars who identified Jat people as Massagetaeans:

• Sir John Marshall, (Former Director-General of the Archaeological Survey of India) wrote: "These Scythian invaders came principally from the three great tribes of Massagetae (great Jats), Sacaraucae, and Dahae (still exists as a Jat clan of Punjab)[1], whose home at the beginning of the second century B.C. was in the country between the Caspian sea (sea) and the Jaxartes river (Central Asia).[2]

• Professor Tadeusz Sulimirski wrote: "The evidence of both the ancient authors and the archaeological remains point to a massive migration of Sacian (Sakas) & Massagetae (great Jats) tribes from the Syr Darya Delta (Central Asia) by the middle of the second century B.C. Some of the Syr Darya tribes; they also invaded North India.[3]

• James Francis Katherinus Hewitt wrote: "Further evidence both of the early history and origin of the race of Jats, or Getae, is given by the customs and geographical position of another tribe of the same stock, called the Massagetae, or great (massa) Getae."[4]

• Syed Muhammad Latif wrote: "A considerable portion of the routed army of the Scythians settled in the Punjab, and a race of them, called Nomardy, inhabited the country on the west bank of the Indus (river). They are described as a nomadic tribe, living in wooden houses, after the old Scythian fashion, and settling where they found sufficient pasturage. A portion of these settlers, the descendants of Massagetae, were called Getes, from whom sprung the modern Jats."[5]

• Arnold Joseph Toynbee wrote: "It may not be fantastic to conjecture that the Tuetonic-speaking Goths and Gauts of Scandinavia may have been descended from a fragment of the same Indo-European-speaking tribe as the homonymous Getae and Thyssagetae and Massagetae of the Eurasian Steppe who are represented today by the Jats of the Panjab."[6]

• Arnold Joseph Toynbee, also wrote: "It had been carried from the Oxus-Jaxartes Basin into the Indus Basin by the Massagetae themselves, together with their tribal name (the Jats), in their Volkerwander- ung in the second century BC"[7]

• George Rawlinson has also identified the Massagetaeans as "Great Jits or Jats" of Asia.[8][9][10][11][17]

• Satya Shrava wrote: "The Jats are none other than the Massagetae (Great Getae) mentioned in Diodorus as an off-spring of the ancient Saka tribe.... a fact now well-known."[12][13]

• Sir Richard Francis Burton wrote: "The Massagetae (greater Jats or Goths) are opposed to the Thyssa (or lesser) Getae, and both used the sagaris."[14]

References:

(1) Dahiya, B.S., Jats: The Ancient Rulers, Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, India, 1980, pp. 23.

(2) Sir John Marshall, (Sir, Hon. Fellow of King's College, Cambridge University, and formerly Director-General of Archaeology in India), A Guide to Taxila, Cambridge University Press, London, 1960, pp. 24.

(3) Professor T. Sulimirski, The Sarmatians, Praeger Publishers, New York, 1970, pp. 113-114.

(4) Hewitt, J. F., The Ruling Races of Prehistoric Times in India, South-Western Asia and Southern Europe, Archibald Constable & Co., London, 1894, pp. 481-487.

(5) Latif, S. M., History of the Panjab, Reprinted by Progressive Books, Lahore, Pakistan, 1984, first published in 1891, pp. 56.

(6) Toynbee, Arnold Joseph (1939). A Study of History. Volume 2. London: Oxford University Press. p. 435.

(7) Royal Institute of International Affairs; Toynbee, Arnold Joseph (1962). A Study of History (2 ed.). Volume 10. Oxford University Press. p. 54.

(8) Rawlinson, George (1873). The sixth great Oriental monarchy: or, The geography, history, & antiquities of Parthia. Longmans, Green, and co. p. 118

(9) Rawlinson, George (1893). The story of Parthia. G. P. Putnam's sons. p. 110.

(10) Rawlinson, George (2007). Parthia. Cosimo, Inc. p. 110. ISBN 160206136X.

(11) Rawlinson, George (2010). The Seven Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern World: Or, The History, Geography and Antiquities of Chaldæa, Assyria, Babylon, Media, Persia, Parthia, and Sassanian Or New Persian Empire. Volume 3. Nottingham Society. p. 66.

(12) Shrava, Satya (1981). The Sakas in India (revised ed.). New Delhi: Pranava Prakashan, 1981.

(13) http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/common_origin_croats_serbs_jats.php

(14) Burton, Richard Francis (Sir) (2008). The Book of the Sword. Cosimo, Inc. p. 90. ISBN 1605204366, 9781605204369.

— 11:39, 9 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.211.84.74 (talk)

Viva La Truth  !! — 05:42, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I am unsure what it is that you expect us to do with the above information but note that )a) Dahiya is a fringe theorist and (b) almost all of the other sources that you list are way too old to be reliable and some - notably, Toynbee - were not even primarily Indic scholars. Can you find some more recent sources, please. - Sitush (talk) 05:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

• Weer Rajendra Rishi wrote: "Some of the Indian writers including Rahul Sankrityayan and Ujagar Singh Mahil in his book "Antiquity of Jat Race" say that Jats inhabiting the northern India are the descendants of Massagetae, or Malta (great) Getae or Jat."[15]

Reference:

(15) Rishi, Weer Rajendra (1982). India & Russia: linguistic & cultural affinity. Roma Publications. p. 95.

— 14:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.207.61.19 (talk)

Hm, neither a linguist nor a Marxist travel writer seem likely to be great sources for this point. But who is this linguist? Are Roma Publications an academic press, a private publisher, or what? There are various wild theories regarding origins of various Indic groups - connecting them with Russia, Hungary and other places that, on the face of it, seem pretty unlikely. Some claim affinity with the Roma/"Gypsy" community but I seem to recall that was also deemed to be a fringe theory a few months ago. As with those theories, the one that you mention is going to need a rock-solid source in my opinion. - Sitush (talk) 16:21, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

• Steven M. Collins also advocates that the Massagetaeans are none other than the "Great Jits or Jats" of Asia.[16]

Reference:

(16) Collins, Steven M. (2005). Israel's Tribes Today (illustrated ed.). Book 4 of Lost tribes of Israel, Steven M. Collins.Bible Blessings. ISBN 0972584935, 9780972584937.

— 13:25, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Mr. Collins @ Canadian British-Israel Association. — 13:41, 20 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.200.62.233 (talk)

I really do think that you may not understand our reliable sources policy.Collins looks highly suspect to me: what qualifications etc does he have? Has he ever been peer reviewed by recognised academics? Why is his publisher reliable? His own website has the appearance of of representing a fringe theorist/self-publicist. - Sitush (talk) 13:59, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

(17) Rawlinson, George (2012). The Seven Great Monarchies Of The Ancient Eastern World, Vol 6. (of 7): Parthia The History, Geography, And Antiquities Of Chaldaea, Assyria, Babylon, Media, Persia, Parthia, And Sassanian or New Persian Empire, With Maps and Illustrations. Tredition. ISBN 3847205145, 9783847205142.

— 07:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

This is a modern reprint of an old source which is in the public domain. You have been told umpteen times that old sources such as this are not appropriate. I am not going to respond further to your suggestions unless they comply with our policies. - Sitush (talk) 07:19, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

• Balbir Singh Dhillon also advocates that the Massagetaeans are none other than the "Great Jits or Jats" of Asia.[18]

Reference:

(18) Dhillon, Balbir Singh (1994). History and study of the Jats: with reference to Sikhs, Scythians, Alans, Sarmatians, Goths, and Jutes (illustrated ed.). Canada: Beta Publishers. ISBN 1895603021, 9781895603026.

— 13:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.207.58.5 (talk) Please look at this page describing Dhillon. He's an engineer. His degrees are in engineering. He is clearly no authority on Indian history. Not WP:RS. Qwyrxian (talk)

Because: "Until Lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter!" — 13:32, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 September 2012

Requesting to add some information in the History section:

Professor Tadeusz Sulimirski wrote: "The evidence of both the ancient authors and the archaeological remains point to a massive migration of Sacian (Sakas) & Massagetae (great Jats) tribes from the Syr Darya Delta (Central Asia) by the middle of the second century B.C. Some of the Syr Darya tribes; they also invaded North India. { Professor T. Sulimirski, The Sarmatians, Praeger Publishers, New York, 1970, pp. 113-114. }

Please add, .... scholars like Tadeusz Sulimirski have identified the Asian Jats in Continuity of the Massagetaeans.

I have gone through the article written for him on Wikipedia.

Also, I have read WP:RS and WP:BIO + WP:PROF, and I am confident that Tadeusz Sulimirski succesfully meets the criteria to be recognized as reputable source.

The article for Tadeusz Sulimirski on Wikipedia.

Thanks!

117.212.47.184 (talk) 06:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Before I even consider this, 1) is that parenthesis part in the original, or did you add that? 2) do you have any evidence that he was referring to the same people mentioned in this article, or was he just breaking down the etymology (Mass = great, Getae transliterates to Jat)? I guess what I'm asking is, please tell me more about what he said. If this is literally the only mention in the book, I don't think we have enough context to know if this refers to the same people. Is this book available online, or can you provide a copy of the page surrounding it?

Oh, please note that I'm not going to help you do anything if you continue do violate WP:RS. You were told quite clearly in the section above that many of those are not reliable sources, yet you added them to Massagetae. Qwyrxian (talk) 16:50, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

First things first, I have read WP:RS, and I hope that you are fully aware about the practical use of the policy WP:Balance.

1. The quote from the book itself — "The evidence of both the ancient authors and the archaeological remains point to a massive migration of Sacian (Sakas)/Massagetan ("great" Jat) tribes from the Syr Daria Delta (Central Asia) by the middle of the second century B.C. Some of the Syr Darian tribes; they also invaded North India." — which's copy-pasted from here. After-all, What matters is the the academic potential of Professor Tadeusz Sulimirski only.

2. Book's full viewis not available to me, but guess I can help it! As is clearly visible, that Mr. Sulimirski is advocating that the Jats are in continuity of the Massagetaeans. Needs to type a lot to make you understand, guess! Fair, enough! This way of writing (expression) has been adopted by many e.g. George Rawlinson (link for verification); now people may question, 'was Mr. Rawlinson referring to the same people mentioned in this article, or was he just breaking down the etymology (Mass = great, Getae transliterates to Jat)'; the answer is he certainly was referring to the same people mentioned in this article; the proof is Mr. Collins' writing, "When describing the Sacae Scythian tribes who migrated from the Caspian Sea region in the second century, B.C., to settle within the Parthian Empire, historian George Rawlinson notes that the greatest tribe, the Massagetae, was also named the "great Jits, or Jats." I am confirming you is that such ways of expression (may be a bit weird) are not uncommon, and I am only asking you to pick the point that Mr. Sulimirski made. Fair enough! Again, asking just to consider the academic potential of Professor Tadeusz Sulimirski only, that too after being aware of WP:Balance ( good policy ) [ link to verify Mr. Collins' written text (interpretation) - inserted later to cease doubt ]

3. Ok! Actually, no one on the talk page Talk:Massagetae replied so I thought that maybe the admin or reviewer of that page agreed with their research-work, b'coz I still "know" that there are some good refs. You may visit Indo-Scythians, the admin or reviewer has accepted Jats in the continuity of Scythians in India, but this is absent from this main article on Jats. Such a conflict between admins or reviewers, definitely would invite such moves, though I would refrain from doing this. Now, tell me that which admin is at fault? Wait, let me first made the revert and then type more — done!

One thing Mr. Qwyrxian — I am confident that Tadeusz Sulimirski does meets WP:RS and WP:BIO + WP:PROF. Please note that this edit request has been made to consider the academic potential of Professor Tadeusz Sulimirski only. — 117.200.51.62 (talk) 05:18, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Tadeusz Sulimirski is a reputable Realiable Source @ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard — Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Tadeusz_Sulimirski_.26_Rahul_Sankrityayan. Therefore, please answer the edit request. Thanks! — 117.200.59.19 (talk) 04:20, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Alright, given that info, I think we can add something to the article. How about, in History, right after we "community which had its origins in pastoralism in the lower Indus valley of Sindh.", we add, "Tadeusz Sulimirski has said that one of the precursors to the Jats are the Massagetaeans." I think that matches up the source you've provided, since it's clear that Sulimirski isn't saying that all Jats are descended from the Massagetaeans (I'm sure no scholar would claim that all of the Jats came from any lineage, given how this article itself explains that they have multiple sources). Qwyrxian (talk) 05:08, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Did Mr. Sulimirski said any such thing the way you're saying! Is he talking about any specific Jat clans - NO. He's simply mentioned the name of the ethnic group — "Jat". I too, understand the gravity of what you're saying & asking! I didn't started well, but I really want to co-operate & avoid WP:Edit War, that's why I moved to WP:RSN — specially highlighted WP:Balance. I want a full-fledged use of WP:Balance over the descent of "Jat", because - Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard — Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Tadeusz_Sulimirski_.26_Rahul_Sankrityayan.

And, there are a number of scholars that agrees Sulimirski's views, but I have to move to WP:RSN first, to say more, coz we may not agree over their academic potential's conclusion.

The way you've "reacted", I doubt your sincerity over WP:NPOV & your awareness about WP:Balance! Either practically WP:Balance over the descent of "Jat" or avoid answering this edit request? But, please reply fast. Fair enough! — 117.200.59.19 (talk) 06:58, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Okay, first of all, don't tell anyone on Wikipedia to "reply fast"--you did the same thing at WP:RSN. Everyone here is a volunteer, and we answer when we can and want to. And many issues on Wikipedia take days, weeks, or months to work out. On the actual issue, I really don't understand what you're saying with why my sentence is wrong. As I think you realized, we can't say "Scholars such as" without other reliable sources, but should you produce other reliable sources, we can reconsider that. I changed the rest of your original sentence because it literally does not make sense in Standard Written English. You can't "identify" a group in the "continuity" of another group--that has no meaning. In fact, you can't even say that a group "has" a "continuity". But let me try again. "Tadeusz Sulimirski said that one of the origins of the Jat people are the Massagetaeans." Or, what about this: "Tadeusz Sulimirski said that the Massagetaeans migrated from the Syr Darya Delta, and that the name "Massagetaean" may be understood to mean "Great Jat"." Is that more accurate? If neither is correct, please explain it to me--they both seem to me to match the quotation you provided, but I fully accept I may not be understanding it in some way (possibly due to lack of context). Qwyrxian (talk) 08:45, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Apology requested for asking to reply fast! But, I also used a "please" too  !

I have explained in {point 2) of my second post in this section, what I am trying to make you realize — {point 2} clearly states that with an interpreted example (fair enough what you asked). I too understand that even the best recognized scholars of all times have used some "weird style of writing", that may not be as helpful to readers as they've thought, guess! I ask you to reconsider Rahul Sankrityayan, who has served as Professor of Indology in 1937-38 & 1947-48 @ University of Leningrad — in case Sitush's view point is not the final verdict.

The best conclusion to this section's discussion (the way it's written) — "There is another school of thought which suggests that a "significant fragment" of Jats "may have" sprung from the ancient Massagetaeans, who settled in northern India." — 117.212.40.110 (talk) 11:45, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I think we're getting closer. We can't say "significant fragment", because that's not in the source you provided. Sprang is a puffery/metaphoric word, not appropriate for an encyclopedia article. Is this a fair compromise? "Tadeusz Sulimirski said that some of the Jats descended from the ancient Massagetaens, who settled in northern India after migrating away from the Syr Darya Delta." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwyrxian (talk • contribs) 5 September 2012

I don't wish to get involved in this discussion, but I just wanted to chime in and say that since this issue is actively being discussed, I have set the {{edit semi-protected}} tag to "answered" so it doesn't show up as being an old request. Please continue to work on reaching consensus. Thanks! —KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:55, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok! Mr. Qwyrxian, It's a YES. But, I would still suggest — replacing "some of the" in your suggested statement to "a significant proportion" (people can see that the word used by Tadeusz Sulimirski is simply — "Jat", the name of the community)). But, as you are also cooperating fair enough and holds decent experience too — I leave that upto you, fair enough! Please, make the move! Already had enough of it. — 117.200.60.41 (talk) 06:37, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

It is nothing like as clear-cut as is being made out here. I have commented at the RSN thread because I am unsure whether the Indo-Aryan migration] theory is mainstream or fringe. It probably would benefit from a discussion at the WP:FRINGE noticeboard rather than RSN, and probably with a suitably neutral notification being made at WT:INB. Plenty of respected academics nonetheless hold opinions that are dismissed by their peers. - Sitush (talk) 12:23, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

At Wikipedia — people should attempt to avoid rendering judgement themselves, and for the most part defer to the judgement of reliable sources.

Sitush, till there is a world wide consensus over the Origin-Antiquity-Migration of Aryans,Scythians, etc. — please be prepared to proceed by following WP:NPOV & WP:Balance.

I have actively participated in the discussion & now I would like to leave things upto the sincerity of the admins or reviewers working on this article. Thanks! — 117.207.56.161 (talk) 05:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

The point behind the template is for a non-confirmed user to draw attention to a requested edit. You have our attention, and we're discussing it. It is common practice to set "answered=yes" once significant discussion is under way. Second, please note that neither admins nor reviewers have any special say in the matter--content is decided by editors working together in collaboration. At this point, we need to follow up on the matters that Sitush has raised. The question is, what evidence do we have that this is a widely held view--or, at least, that a substantial minority hold it? Qwyrxian (talk) 06:15, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Arbitrary heading 2

Can we start a section on sources of information - there seem to be four main sources so far: Punjabi - mainly Jatt Western - mainly English Middle Eastern - mainly muslim 'Indian' - mainly non punjabi bamans Scientific - DNA

196.215.215.8 (talk) 15:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)JATT

Why would we want to do this? Wikipedia is not sectarian. - Sitush (talk) 15:40, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Arbitrary heading

I am new to this but was appalled at the article on Jat People as demeaning and derogatory.Read the whole article with an unbiased eye and note the words suggesting throughout the article that Jat People are from a low form of life !!! words such as "non - elite", "traditionally involved in peasantry ", " claim higher social status " (12)" traditionally non elite " (R),"the term "Jat" had become loosely synonymous with "peasant,"[19] "During much of this time, non-elite tillers and pastoralists, such as the Jats or Ahirs, were part of a social spectrum that blended only indistinctly into the elite landowning classes at one end, and the menial or ritually polluting classes at the other.[21]" "peasant rebellions," scholars, such as Muzaffar Alam, have pointed out that small local landholders, or zemindars, often led these uprisings.[23] The Sikh and Jat rebellions were led by such small local zemindars, who had close association and family connections with each other and with the peasants under them, and who were often armed.[24]These communities of rising peasant-warriors were not well-established Indian castes,[25]This was a society where Brahmins were few and male Jats married into the whole range of lower agricultural and entrepreneurial castes. A kind of tribal nationalism animated them rather than a nice calculation of caste differences expressed within the context of Brahminical Hindu state.[27](other historians assert a Sansi Caste lineage to Maharaja Ranjit Singh[46])( THIS IS A DIRECT ATTACK ON THE JAT MAHARAJAS LINEAGE), Some specific clans of Jat people are classified as Other Backward Castes in some states, e.g.Jats of Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi,[54][55][56] Muslim Jats in Gujarat[57]The Hindu varna system is unclear on Jat status within the caste system. Some sources state that Jats are regarded as Kshatriyas[71] or "degraded Kshatriyas" Another author reports that the varna status of the Jats improved over time, with the Jats starting in the untouchable/chandala varna during the eighth century, changing to shudra status by the 11th century, and with some Jats striving for zamindar status after the Jat rebellion of the 17th century.[73]

This is an affront to decent Jats worldwide and with an author who is biased in his view should not be allowed to represent such an honorable and culturally proud people.For decency sake this article needs to be removed in whole or millions of Jat Sikhs will be up in arms once they realize they have been demeaned on Wikipedia.Shaanjaan (talk) 06:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I think that a read of our Five Pillars might be of use. We base our content on reliable sources and present the information gleaned from them in a neutral manner. Or, at least, that is our intent. - Sitush (talk) 09:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

well, echoing the same thoughts as talk. With matters relating to "caste" and "varna", we need reliable sources. Funny thing is, most Jats today are either Sikhs or Arya Samaji. I doubt whether that part is relevant.Gagandeep (talk) 17:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Specifically what do you find Unreliable with the sourcing? D.B. Miller is published by Oxford University Press, Dr Khanna teaches anthropology at Oregon State University. What's so wrong with these academics that we should contradict them based on an anonymous person on the internet? If you have reputable sources (not caste partisan sites, Facebook, blogs) that contradict these academics, by all means present them. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:42, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

• Hey guys; I just got an OTRS query similar to this. If I'm understanding correctly, the term "non-elite" or "peasants" was one applied by the British authorities in the 19th century. Would it be acceptable to just make this more clear in the lead? Or, well, not mention it in the lead :). A term used by one administration in one century for a group that has existed since the 8th century maybe doesn't deserve so much prominence. This isn't me saying "we must because ANGRY PERSON" so much as trying to play devil's advocate. Apologies if I've misunderstood where the terminology comes from. Ironholds (talk) 08:44, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

• The term is a modern one and has little to do with the British Raj. The Raj actually adopted the varna classification system and added a few of their own, eg: "criminal tribes" and "martial races". The elite/non-elite is an attempt by modern sociologists to move away from the stigma and confusion of varna, and modern sources also refer to peasants etc. Thus, we are actually emphasising the modern terminology in the lead and this seems just dandy to me. I think that you are being led astray by one of the many members of Indian castes etc who want to whitewash anything that is perceived a being less than honourable. - Sitush (talk) 09:40, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

• In that case, could we make clear that it's a modern term? Surely there's an article on the subject, if it's a common sociological classification system? Ironholds (talk) 11:09, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

• I think WP:DICTDEF would apply. Honestly, this term is used across countless articles and means exactly what it says. It is a phrase, not a construct like varna. I can pretty much guarantee you that the OTRS message had as its aim the removal of the term in order to promote an alleged, but unsourced, elite status ... because that is what happens on caste articles such as this and it is to a substantial degree why WP:GS/Caste was introduced. But I'll let others weigh in with their opinions. - Sitush (talk) 11:34, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

• I don't know what the OTRS says, but I do have quite a lot of experience of exactly the kind of things Sitush is talking about. Many castes/tribes/groups within the varna system were classified as lower status (I'm greatly oversimplifying a complex system, I know), in ways that are horribly discriminatory by modern thought. There are also modern terms (like elite/non-elite, "backward" etc) used by sociologists and by the Indian government, partly to document historical fact as to classifications that actually did take place, and partly to try to rectify and move away from the old discriminatory systems. Unfortuntely, there seem to be a number of people who want to address varna/caste/classification injustice not by trying to bring it to an end, but by rewriting history to deny their caste was ever lowly classified, and to fabricate high status classification that never existed. But they never provide reliable sources - because there are none. And if we were to accept every such claim, everyone in India would be a warrior or a king, and there would be no farmers, manual labourers, etc. Instead of taking the honest "My caste was classified lowly, but that was unjust" approach, they go for "My caste is descended from warriors and kings" nonsense (and some of them even claim descent from gods!). Trying to rewrite history in the way they want would be akin to rewriting South African history to say that black Africans were never discriminated against, but were, instead, always the ruling class. These things should be discussed here on the talk page, out in the open, based on reliable sources. Taking that approach has failed many times (as you can see in the talk history of any caste article), but it has failed for good reasons - and this has led to many ways to try to circumvent our proper procedures, including organised socking, harrassment and personal attacks on the editors who have made massive strides in turning these caste articles from appalling caste-glorification pieces into encyclopedic and well-sourced articles, the same against admins who have helped to fend off these attacks, etc. And you can see the massive support for the discretionary sanctions that are now applicable to people acting disruptively in this area. As I say, I haven't seen the OTRS, but I hope this provides some useful background to the issue. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:00, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

• It does, yep; thanks for clearing this up :). Ironholds (talk) 15:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 16 October 2012

There is contradiction between your two articles " origin of Jats" and "Jat people". The content in "origin of Jats" is more valid as it has all the references starting from the Vedas along with shlokas. However in the article titled "Jat people" the few sentences such as " non-elite tilers and herders" do not appear true. According to the article" Jat people" Jats took to weapons in 17 century after Mughals, which is not correct. In your article "origin of Jats" they are defined as the warriors and rulers since the vedic period. There is evidence of Jat kingdoms such as "Jaglistan" before the mughal invasion. Jats were the people who offered resistance to foriegn invaders. However not every Jat was a king. Hence those who were not in the army or during time of peace were mainly involved in farming. Unfortunately, the have not been represented properly in history as it has been written by people who joined hands with invaders, foriegn mercenaries, and Jats were the people who never compromised, fought for their rights and Land. This community has brought glory to our nation in field of sports and defence. I want that wikipedia should see the details, edit the line" non-elite tilers and herders" and rather start the article from the past as described in "Origin of Jats" as it is sending wrong information to the world. rsingh209.254.249.186 (talk) 15:33, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Please could you read the thread slightly above this one - link. It discusses the issues relating to the need for reliable sources and the problems of POV pushing by caste members etc. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 15:35, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Citations

hey there! does all the sources cited in the article met WP:BIO, WP:PROF, WP:HISTRS, and WP:Reliable ?

If yes, would any edit request made away by citing different pages from the books (and sources) mentioned in the articles be straight away accepted (and answered as ok), or there will then be initiated a consensus ?

If no, then please remove the sources !

One in question is -- Jindal, Mangal Sen (1992). History of Origin of Some Clans in India. Sarup & Sons. pp. 17, 36. ISBN 81-85431-08-6; but after your reply we can go on with the issue ! -- 122.173.208.92 (talk) 09:37, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I am not sure of the relevance of BIO, PROF and HISTRS (the latter is not even an accepted guideline yet). I think you might be confusing our notability requirements with those for reliability. As far as the Jindal book is concerned, I can only see it in snippet view and have no knowledge concerning the author's credentials. I do know that Sarup are a decent publisher, which is a start of sorts. - Sitush (talk) 09:50, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

hey! thank you for your interest in replying to the query!

Ok! you're not sure of the relevance of WP:BIO, WP:PROF and WP:HISTRS.

But, if may ask you in kind of simpler words, does all the sources cited in the articles met WP:Reliable or only a majority of them or a SO-SO proportion of them?

Is the content from throughout the book (Mangal Sen Jindal's) acceptable, I recommend and request this stuff to be added to the article ("linguistic etymolgy")-- http://books.google.co.in/books?ei=tVKvUPaHOMX7rAe1m4DQDw&id=XCtuAAAAMAAJ&q=Jit+Jat#search_anchor . -- 122.173.208.92 (talk) 10:54, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if they are all reliable because I cannot see them all in full. I have assumed good faith that other contributors checked out the reliability but if you want me to be brutally honest, given my experience in contributing to caste articles, my faith is probably misplaced. I think that we need to go through them one at a time.

Bearing that in mind, what do you know about Jindal? Is/was he an academic? Where? What was his field of study? Has anyone else cited him in scholarly works? That sort of thing. - Sitush (talk) 11:22, 23 November 2012 (UTC)