Talk:Charan

Author name removal
I have removed the following text from the article and added a cleanup request. As stated below, this article needs real work to become a source of coherent information on the subject. Text removed: "posted by rahul gumansinh gadhvi ". NoelyNoel (talk) 21:40, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

In charan community The most Famous name or Poet is ishar das ji of bhadresh. He had wrote hariras and deviyan. It Is said that he was beloved bhakt of lord vishnu and infact he had saved prince karan ( he was the chela of ishardas, bt a day before wedding he was bitten by snake and died on spot. Ishar das ji gave him life back by requesting to lord. he is praised and hailed as Ishara so parmeshwara.

Karan Alawat 8553344069 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.139.107.102 (talk) 19:29, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Expert request
I've requested expert attention to this article because, in copy-editing it, I encountered a number of things that seemed to make no sense (an assertion that Muslims worship someone named Naradji, for instance) as well as a large number of sentences and paragraphs that badly need to be explained to those unfamiliar with the context. There are also a lot of things not referenced which may or may not be true; I've tagged the most unexpected claims with s, but I think the entire article would benefit from more depth and references. Akatari (talk) 16:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I've come across similar things when I tried to look over. It was very hard to understand what the original author wanted to get across. Dreambeaver (talk) 21:45, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Shankardanji Detha
Someone with anonymous edits added following text about Shankardanji Detha into the article. I have removed it from article and pasted it below so someone can expand it and made encyclopedic.
 * Limbdi State Poet Kaviraaj) Shri Shankardanji Detha has compiled & published, Kishan Bavani,Shamala Smaran mala ( duhas- chand on god krishna), Prem PukaR,  Hariras ,SUKAYA SANJIVANI - WROTE BY DURSAJI AADHA AND Published by Kaviraaj Shankardanji Detha, Pandav Yashendu Chandrika, Deviyan ( song of mother's worshipin Hindi & Gujarati verses), , Jwalamukhi devi ni Stuti( song of mother's worship), and he has also wrote Sukavya Sagrah (means beautiful/refined poems )

THE AVATAR CHARITRAWRITTREN BY SHREE NARAHARDASJI - & TRANSLATED BY MISHAN MAHESHDAN NARANDAN AVTAR CHARITRA, THE HUGE GRANTHA OF 24 INCARNATION OF GOD WRITTEN BY CHARAN MAHATMA SHRI ANRHARDASJI, 200 YEARS AGO IN A VRAJ AND MIX LANGUAGES. THE GREAT GRANTH IS NOT READBLE WITH ITS MEANING ONLY THE ORIGINAL SCRIPT IS AVIALBLE BUT IT IS NOT UNDERSTANDABLE AND SO A GREAT GRANTH IS UNKNOWN TO THE WORLD LITERATRE. A GREAT POET AND CRITIC OF GUJARAT WHO IS KNOWN AS A MOBILE UNIVERSIY AND A SANSKRIT LITERATURE AS WELLL AS CHARANI LITERATURE IS ON HIS TIP OF THE TONGUE. HE IS SHRI MAHESHDAN NARANDAN MISHAN BRON AND GROWN IN MORBI, DISTRICT RAJKOT,GUJARAT STATE, INDIA.WHO IS JUST RECENTLY AWARDED THE KAG AWARD BY MORARI BAPU THE RENOWNED RAMKATHAKAR AND A GREAT SAINT OF GUJARAT. SHRI MAHESHDANJI MISHAN HAS STARTED IN 1990 TRANSLATION OF THE AVATAR CHARITRA INTO GUJARATI LANGUAGE WITH ITS DEEP MEANING TWO BIG INCARNATON OF AVATAR CHARITRA THE RAMA AVATAR AND THE KRISHNA AVATAR. NOW ONLY SMALL AVATAR ARE REMAINED TO BE TRANSLATED. THE WHOLE CHARAN CASTE IS TO BE PROUD OF SHRI MAHESHDANJI MISHAN FOR HIS GREAT WORK OF SOCIETY.BECAUSE HE IS AT PRESENT 82 YEARS OLD AND STILL WORKING ON THIS MEGA TASK. NOBODY HAS TOUCHED THIS GRANTH FOR 200 YEARS,ONLY THE SINGERS HAVE BEEN SINGING FEW LINE FROM AVATAR CHARTITRA WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE MEANING OF IT. ALL THE CAST LOVERS SHOUD PURCHASE AVATAR CHARITRA TO GIVE HOMAGE TO MAHATMA NARHARDASJI. YOURS FAITHFULLY AND SON OF MAHESHDANJI MISHAN JAYESH MAHESHDAN MISHAN, SECTION OFFICER IN SACHIVALY ,GANDHINAGAR, GUJARAT  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.18.131.151 (talk) 08:30, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Conflation
I am concerned that this article might be conflating Charan with Charana. While the former may be a caste, the latter is a more complex beast. For example, see this. In conflating things, we're making assumptions about individuals such as Duraso, whose article makes no mention of either term but whose single source (the Sahitya Academy encyclopedia) says that his style of writing was similar to charanas.

I'll try to dig deeper into this issue because caste puffery is a known problem on Wikipedia. - Sitush (talk) 16:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Unsourced and poorly sourced statements
Aside from the point I raise in the preceding section, I am concerned that people are reinstating material such as this, where the only source is a translation of ancient texts and most of the statements are completely unsourced.

Wikipedia requires that almost all statements made in our articles are verifiable and this is achieved by citing reliable sources. In the case of caste-related article, no citation basically means no mention of the statement, and the Puranas etc are not reliable sources: they are very old, ambiguous and contradictory glorification myths. The only way such old texts should appear in an article is when we are referring to an independent, peer-reviewed modern author (usually academic) who has analysed them and drawn a conclusion worthy of note. - Sitush (talk) 13:00, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Merge Gadhvi into Charan
I don't know why there is a separate page for Gadhvi. This page explicitly mentions that Gadhvis are Charans. The Gadhvi page must be merged into Charan -Mohanbhan (talk) 04:46, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Support. Grant  &#124;  Talk  08:43, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Khushi Parmar Add Details of All Mogaldham which is in Gujarat
I request to please give some details about all Mogaldham(Temple of Mogal Maa(Devi)) that in Gujarat with Address and Map.

Assessment comment
Substituted at 00:58, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Sourcing
Raj era sources and those from medieval India etc are not considered to be reliable for use in caste articles. It is for that reason I keep removing material recently introduced by various accounts, who may or may not be the same person. - Sitush (talk) 21:35, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

As for my removal here, a small part of which I subsequently reinstated, we really do need page numbers and we should not be telling the reader in the article that they should search the book for the word "charan". - Sitush (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Recent revert
I reverted here because the Rajputs of Saurashtra book has long been considered unreliable on Wikipedia. I would appreciate a translation of the Quora source because I suspect some pov-pushing going on. I note that a large chunk of that series of edits was also completely unsourced, although perhaps that is a timing issue. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 11:52, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Krayon95 comments
Hi. Thank you Ekdalian for taking the time to examine those edits and finding out the exact proportion of 'not acceptable content'. I am still not at that level where I can say that I understand all about Wikipedia editing. Now, these are the sources on which that content was based(I am sorry for the clutter):

1. [Economics and Patriliny Consumption and Authority within the Household by Rajni Palriwala 1993]

2. [Raj Marwar During British Paramountcy: A Study in Problems and Policies Up to 1923 Book by P. R. Shah 1982]

3. [Census of India, 1901, Volume 25, Part 1]

4. [Fertility Behaviour: Population and Society in a Rajasthan Village 2006]

5. [Transaction and Hierarchy Elements for a Theory of Caste By Harald Tambs-Lyche · 2017]

6. [Folk Theatre of Rajasthan: Introducing Three Marwari Khyal Plays Translated into English by Dr. Cecil Thomas Ault Jr. 2017]

7. [In Praise of Death: History and Poetry in Medieval Marwar (South Asia) 2008]

8. [The Ain i Akbari Volume 2 By Abū al-Faz̤l ibn Mubārak, Henry Sullivan Jarrett · 1993]

9. [The Tale of the Horse: A History of India on Horseback By Yashaswini Chandra · 2021]

10. [Nomadic Narratives A History of Mobility and Identity in the Great Indian Desert By Tanuja Kothiyal · 2016]

11. [Gazetteer Of The Bombay Presidency Vol-v by Cutch, Palanpur, And Mahi Kantha] 1880

12. [THE SONS OF A GODDESS]

13. [The reincarnation of the Charans - India: the children of Shiva]

14. [The Valmiki Ramayana Vol. 1 · Volume 1 By Bibek Debroy · 2017]

15 [IITK Valmiki Ramayana]

16. [Valmiki Ramayana by P.P.S. Sastri 1935]

17. [THE MAHABHARATA of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa Complete 18 Parvas By Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa · 2014]

18. [Mahabharata Vol. 1 Volume 1 By Bibek Debroy · 2010]

19. [Environmental Crisis and Social Dismemberment in Northwest India by GSL Devra 2012]

20. [The Imperial Gazetteer Of India (Volume Xxi) Pushkar To Salween] 1908

21. [Rajasthan District Gazetteers: Nagaur] 1975

22. [First Report of the Royal Commission on Opium With Minutes of Evidence and Appendices · Volume 6, Part 1] 1895

23. [The Modern Anthropology of India: Ethnography, Themes and Theory 2013]

24. [Greener Pastures: Politics, Markets, and Community Among a Migrant Pastoral People by Arun Agrawal 1999]

25. [Between the Desert and the Sown- Pastoralists of Western India through the Centuries] 2008

Now, out of these British era sources are:


 * Census of India 1901


 * Gazetteer Of The Bombay Presidency Vol-v 1880


 * The Imperial Gazetteer Of India (Volume Xxi) Pushkar To Salween 1908


 * First Report of the Royal Commission on Opium With Minutes of Evidence and Appendices · Volume 6, Part 1 1895

There must be some way we can use these mythological texts. Mahabharata by Ganguli is still one of the most authentic works on the epic. And the version of Bibek Debroy, from what I've read, is even superior. Debroy uses the critical Sanskrit version produced by BORI Institute for his 10 volume interpretation, which was made by examining all the variants of sanskrit Mahabharata from all over India, eliminating all the verses which seemed later additions & interpolations. Sources used for mythological epics are:


 * The Valmiki Ramayana Vol. 1 · Volume 1 By Bibek Debroy · 2017


 * IITK Valmiki Ramayana


 * Valmiki Ramayana by P.P.S. Sastri 1935


 * THE MAHABHARATA of Krishna-Dwaipayana Vyasa Complete 18 Parvas By Kesari Mohan Ganguli · 2014


 * Mahabharata Vol. 1 Volume 1 By Bibek Debroy · 2010

Which among the rest of them are to be considered Primary Sources?

Finally, even after this, I am unable to find any problem with these Sections:

1. Recorded Beliefs of Origin

2. Arrival in Rajasthan

3. Dingal

4. Modern era

5. Clans

5. Mode of Greeting

Please, I would request you to take this into consideration. My only intention was to contribute to this topic in a meaningful way. Thanks.Krayon95 (talk) 15:20, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Moved from User talk:RegentsPark--RegentsPark (comment) 15:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello Krayon95, I completely understand that your intention is to contribute to this article. But, apart from the fact that we don't accept primary sources (I personally believe re-writing as well as translation of such epics should be considered nothing better than the respective primary sources), I have one question for you! This is basically an encyclopedia; so do you consider all these mythological content to be relevant and encyclopedic?? Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 17:36, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello Ekdalian, can you point out from the list which ones are primary sources except for the British-era ones & mythological ones?


 * And about your question: I don't consider all mythological content to be relevant. As I said earlier, there are more than a hundred verses involving "Charan" in these epics, I was trying to include only the most relevant ones like the creation myth in Bhagavata Gita. I understand the difference between myth & actual history, but as I've seen in many other good quality Wikipedia pages such as Kshatriya or Brahmin pages which include verses directly from semi-religious/mythological texts like Bhagavata Gita, Dharmshashtras, even Buddhist texts. So, why shouldn't we include a few(or fewer) verses? Thanks.Krayon95 (talk) 18:12, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi Krayon95, Ramayana and Mahabharata (or their modern translations), are primary sources. Can you find some modern academic references for the content you want to add?LukeEmily (talk) 18:17, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi LukeEmily, Though, I was asking "which ones are primary sources except for the British-era ones & mythological ones", can you please go to Kshatriya and see the quotes under 'Later Vedic Period'. Or go through the Brahmin page see loads of quotes from such texts. This is how I got the same idea to put such quotes(to a minimum).

Please, can you also check other sections which were deleted and which were not from Primary Sources: "Finally, even after this, I am unable to find any problem with these Sections:

1. Recorded Beliefs of Origin

2. Arrival in Rajasthan

3. Dingal

4. Modern era

5. Clans

5. Mode of Greeting "

ThanksKrayon95 (talk) 18:30, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I have removed most of the content related to primary or equivalent sources from the article on Brahmin. Ekdalian (talk) 06:57, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, Ekdalian. That was strict. Btw on the same Brahmin article, are quotations from Dahrmshashtras & Manusmriti not considered Primary sources? Also, the quotation from 'Cula Dukkha Kkhandha Sutta, early Buddhist text' is to be considered a Secondary Source as it's not a direct translation of the text? Again, the quotation from Bhagavata Gita is still present on the Kshatriya page, that too without any source! Thanks.Krayon95 (talk) 11:18, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Removed as per our policies. Anything else? Ekdalian (talk) 12:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, please read WP:OTHERCONTENT. Even if such content exists in other articles, it hardly makes any difference. We will not accept any content in violation of our policies and consensus. Ekdalian (talk) 12:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, Ekdalian. I apologise if all this seems irritating. The quotation from 'Cula Dukkha Kkhandha Sutta, early Buddhist text' on the Brahmin article is left out. Does this represent an example of a good Secondary source as the subject of this book is not directly related to the Buddhist Sutra:
 * Piotr Balcerowicz (2015). Early Asceticism in India: Ājīvikism and Jainism. Routledge.
 * Krayon95 (talk) 13:27, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey Krayon95; removed now. Ekdalian (talk) 14:31, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Ekdalian RegentsParkLukeEmily. Then, is there no reliable secondary source for such things? any example of such a source for mythology related texts?

Afterwords, can we talk about these Sections:

1. Recorded Beliefs of Origin

2. Arrival in Rajasthan

3. Dingal

4. Modern era

5. Clans

5. Mode of Greeting These aren't from Primary Sources. If there's any problem with their writing, let me rewrite it properly and reinstate them. Thanks. Krayon95 (talk) 16:50, 6 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Please understand that if a secondary source simply quotes the corresponding primary source or rephrases the same, it would not be acceptable. In case there is an independent analysis/interpretation of the same by a modern reliable author, that may be considered depending on the context. Ekdalian (talk) 17:50, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Ekdalian.

For Recorded Myths of Origin:

1. [The Ain i Akbari Volume 2 By Abū al-Faz̤l ibn Mubārak, Henry Sullivan Jarrett · 1993]

2. [The Tale of the Horse: A History of India on Horseback By Yashaswini Chandra · 2021]

3. [Nomadic Narratives A History of Mobility and Identity in the Great Indian Desert By Tanuja Kothiyal · 2016]

Tanuja Kothiyal & Yshashwani Chandra are both modern writers & reliable.

For Arrival in Rajasthan:

1. [Environmental Crisis and Social Dismemberment in Northwest India by GSL Devra 2012]

2. [Between the Desert and the Sown- Pastoralists of Western India through the Centuries] 2008

3. [In Praise of Death: History and Poetry in Medieval Marwar (South Asia) 2008]

Again all reliable & modern sources.

For Mode of Greeting

1. [Rajasthan District Gazetteers: Nagaur] 1975

This again just states the common mode of greeting that community members practice.

For Dingal:

1. [Folk Theatre of Rajasthan: Introducing Three Marwari Khyal Plays Translated into English by Dr. Cecil Thomas Ault Jr. 2017]

A modern reliable source. About Dingal language.

Please tell me how content from these sources break Wikipedia? Thanks.Krayon95 (talk) 19:15, 6 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello Krayon95, I sincerely believe you have now understood our basic policies & all. I have devoted quite some time for this article now, and will let other senior editors to take it up from here (due to paucity of time). I shall keep on observing and monitoring this article, and will get involved as & when required. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 05:42, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Ekdalian RegentsPark. Thanks again for taking the time. But, I still don't understand how this section 'Recorded Myths of Origin' can't be reinstated. This content is not from any mythology text which was the case in the verses from Ramayana, Mahabharata, and Bhagavata Gita. These origin myths were recorded by ethnographers & historians & have been used by many modern authors. I believe these origin myths, which are briefly summarized in this section, present an encyclopedic view of changing self-narratives of the community throughout history. The myth in Ain-i-Akbari in the 16th century or the 19th-century Mardum Shumari Raj Marwar 1891 Census are used/cited & interpreted by modern authors. And origin myths such as these are present in almost all community-related Wikipedia articles.

Recorded Beliefs of Origin

RegentsPark LukeEmily Heba Aisha: Please also share your views.

Thanks. Krayon95 (talk) 06:57, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Krayon95, Tanuja Kothiyal source is reliable. Please note that translations of pre-independence sources are unreliable generally speaking with some exceptions - see WP:PRIMARY. You can look at how Baidya is written and acceptable vs. why the sources in Talk%3ARajput are not acceptable. The difference is that the former uses secondary sources. The Purana is not referenced directly. Can we look at your sources one by one? The Tanuja Kothiyal source is reliable - it is modern and academic (Cambridge University Press). Can you quote what she is saying? Please note it has to be relevant to this page.LukeEmily (talk) 20:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, LukeEmily.


 * Narratives A History of Mobility and Identity in the Great Indian Desert By Tanuja Kothiyal · 2016


 * Page 148:


 * "Charan origin myths also associate Charans with Shiva, as they claim to have been created by him to graze the bull Nandi. Charans claims that they were created to herd the celestial bull Nandi"


 * Page 223:


 * "The fable of origin of Charans claims that they were created to herd the celestial bull Nandi, after the Bhats could not graze him as they were scared of the lion of the goddess Parvati. Pleased by the devotion of the Charan the goddess granted him a unique position encompassing all three qualities of the Charan, that is, the priestly feature of devotion, the Rajput fearlessness and the dexterity with herds."
 * Krayon95 (talk) 20:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * She is calling it a myth/fable/claim. Raj era ethnographers are not WP:RS. Her analysis of the primary source and how it was used historically is more important IMO. Can we just summarize the mythological claims in one line in the article instead of full quotes for celestial origin?LukeEmily (talk) 01:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)


 * BTW, this source has some good information on the caste and its customs. If you are interested in this page, you can also use this source to expand it.LukeEmily (talk) 03:01, 8 January 2022 (UTC)


 * What else should she have called it? That's why the section was named "Recorded Myths of Origin".
 * Can you please wait before adding about the professions of Charans? I had provided a better description of professions with the sources. And I still have more of such sources.


 * I was already using this source(if you see the above list of sources) & was going to add more from this:


 * Transaction and Hierarchy Elements for a Theory of Caste By Harald Tambs-Lyche · 2017


 * I just wonder how more than 15 of the modern sources I provided(which are neither primary nor Raj-era nor mythological texts) don't hold up? Krayon95 (talk) 11:39, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Lead section
Hello, can you please check the lead section and comment on the same. Multiple sources have been introduced by Krayon95, who is keen to promote the caste (pinged a number of senior editors earlier). Needless to mention, Krayon95 is inclined to keep their version in the lead section. Would request you to review the current version as well as their version.

Krayon95, don't discuss on your talk page; rather, you may mention your concerns here, if any. And no edit warring please during the ongoing discussion regarding the dispute. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 05:59, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Hey, Ekdalian LukeEmily. I am not here for any "edit warring" or "promote the caste", which is why we have been discussing this issue. How can it be termed promoting when I have tried to give a complete view by providing various diverse occupations in the introduction itself? It shouldn't be termed as a dispute either but as a disagreement on the order & sentence structure of the introduction.
 * This is the introduction Ekdalian has provided on the article introduction:
 * "Historically, Charans have been engaged in diverse occupations like bards, poets, literateurs, pastoralists, agriculturalists and also jagirdars and warriors and some even as traders."


 * While this is what I believe is a better one in terms of sentence structure as well as the order of occupations:
 * "Historically, Charans were poets & literateurs, as well as warriors and jagirdars. They specialised in diverse occupations as literateurs, soldiers, pastoralists, agriculturalists, traders, and merchants."
 * Also, LukeEmily and maybe others users are ones who you are already familiar with which leads to more chances of him/her agreeing with your view.
 * Ekdalian, can you please move the discussion from my talk page to here?Thanks.Krayon95 (talk) 06:18, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Ekdalian, Krayon95, what was their main traditional occupation? That should be mentioned first in my opinion. Then we can also add other occupations.LukeEmily (talk) 01:12, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, LukeEmily. There is no one main occupation in case of Charans. However, their role as court poets & historians is what they are most prominently known for. As you can see from the sources provided in the intro, they were involved in various occupations such as traders, soldiers, and agriculturalists.
 * As explained in source 8- Hastings, James M. (2002). Poets, Sants, and Warriors: The Dadu Panth, Religious Change and Identity Formation in Jaipur State Circa 1562-1860 Ce. University of Wisconsin--Madison.
 * "In Rajasthan, the Charans are a highly esteemed caste seen as occupying a social position slightly lower than that of Brahmins but above that of Rajputs, with whom they maintain a symbiotic relationship...Like Rajputs, with whom they often shared company, Charans would eat meat, drink liquor and engage in martial activities...Although, in a way, poetic composition and recitation was for them a “pastime” subordinate to the primary income producing occupations of military service, agriculture, and horse and cattle trading."

Recent edits
@Ekdalian. @RegentsPark. What were the issues about the recent edits? The below text was added in the intro:

"References to the Charans are found in ancient texts including Rig-Veda, Yajur-Veda, Ramayana, Mahabharata, and Bhagavad Gita as well as in Jain Prabandha. In the Puranas, the Charans have been described as chanting hymns eulogizing the gods and as priests worshipping temple icons.

Perceived of being associated with a divine origin, the Charans were considered a sacred people, killing whom was a sin comparable to brahmahatya.  Because of the institutionalized and religiously sanctioned protection which the Charans enjoyed, they could fearlessly criticize and admonish the rulers and their actions, however bitter it might appear to the latter. " Krayon95 (talk) 18:23, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey Krayon95, please note that mythology, even if well sourced doesn't quality for lead section as per convention. Also, this is a classic example of WP:UNDUE as far as lead is concerned. Thanks! Ekdalian (talk) 08:39, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ekdalian. I searched for a parallel example, found this on Kayastha:
 * "In the Sanskrit literature and inscriptions, it was used to denote the holders of a particular category of offices in the government service. In this context, the term possibly derived from kaya- ('principal, capital, treasury') and -stha ('to stay') and perhaps originally stood for an officer of the royal treasury, or revenue department. "
 * Here, without naming the mythological texts, it uses the term 'Sanskrit literature' instead and goes on to state the position or occupation associated with the term. That is exactly what I added in the first para. Krayon95 (talk) 13:55, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * No, I believe these are not at all similar! And most importantly, you need to achieve consensus here before incorporating such content. Anyway, I shall check if any part from the content (added by you) can be incorporated in the lead. Thanks! Ekdalian (talk) 14:49, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ekdalian. Replace a few words and its essentially same. About the 2nd para:
 * "Perceived of being associated with a divine origin, the Charans were considered a sacred people, killing whom was a sin comparable to brahmahatya. Because of the institutionalized and religiously sanctioned protection which the Charans enjoyed, they could fearlessly criticize and admonish the rulers and their actions, however bitter it might appear to the latter."
 * This is something that's already mentioned multiple times in the article, also explaining their favorable position such as non-taxation of Charan lands or any business they were involved in. Krayon95 (talk) 17:13, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The article on Kayastha mentions Sanskrit literature in the context of their actual profession, nothing related to mythology! Your proposed changes are all related to mythology including the words 'divine' & 'sacred', hence do not qualify for the lead section IMHO. You may request for other opinions from experienced editors on caste & social groups. Thanks! Ekdalian (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ekdalian "The article on Kayastha mentions Sanskrit literature in the context of their actual profession"
 * Same was my intention. The role/profession of Charans as priests & 'eulogizing gods' in ancient era (pre-medieval times) has been true also for medieval era for which we have reliable sources available.
 * "Your proposed changes are all related to mythology including the words 'divine' & 'sacred', hence do not qualify for the lead section"
 * If you are talking about the 2nd para which includes words 'divine' & 'sacred', it is not at all related to mythology. Read the sources, they are talking about medieval and modern times which is historically correct.
 * For the first para, I suggest something like: "In the Sanskrit literature, the Charans have been depicted eulogizing gods and as temple priests." Krayon95 (talk) 18:47, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Pinging, for their opinion. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 12:38, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Ekdalian, LukeEmily, Kautilya3. I have provided a reasonable argument in my view. I believe this part should be reinstated in the lead. Krayon95 (talk) 18:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * ?? Krayon95 (talk) 15:56, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
 * First, can we narrow down on the sources and quotes? Are all sources mentioned reliable?LukeEmily (talk) 16:46, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ekdalian. @LukeEmily. Have you checked the sources yet? Again pasting the statement here:-
 * References to the Charans are found in ancient texts including Rig-Veda, Yajur-Veda, Ramayana, Mahabharata, and Bhagavad Gita as well as in Jain Prabandha. In the Puranas, the Charans have been described as chanting hymns eulogizing the gods and as priests worshipping temple icons.
 * Perceived of being associated with a divine origin, the Charans were considered a sacred people, killing whom was a sin comparable to brahmahatya.  Because of the institutionalized and religiously sanctioned protection which the Charans enjoyed, they could fearlessly criticize and admonish the rulers and their actions, however bitter it might appear to the latter.
 * The souces are fine and alternatives are available if there's any problem. The argument is over whether it should be included in the lead or in other sections. I agree that rewording may be needed and have suggested a better one above. Please read above comments and replies. Thanks. Krayon95 (talk) 13:03, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I have already expressed my views. I have clearly mentioned above, "Your proposed changes are all related to mythology including the words 'divine' & 'sacred', hence do not qualify for the lead section". Please note that the above statement doesn't mean, all your proposed statements may be incorporated in the article body; such statements need to be analyzed first. As far as I can remember, you were first reverted by RegentsPark when you added such content, and was advised to approach experienced editors on caste. You have to wait for other opinions! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 13:36, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * "I have already expressed my views. I have clearly mentioned above". So have I.
 * "proposed changes are all related to mythology"
 * You are wrong. The second para is striclty related to the medieval era.
 * And for the first part, i have already suggested using 'Sanskrit literature' instead as done on Kayastha page. Krayon95 (talk) 14:02, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Your last statement is equivalent to WP:OR/WP:SYN. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 14:32, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * How so? Krayon95 (talk) 15:48, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Your last statement is equivalent to WP:OR/WP:SYN. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 14:32, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * How so? Krayon95 (talk) 15:48, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Hey Krayon95; the term 'Sanskrit literature' is used in the source itself in the other article mentioned above, while you are saying, "Replace a few words and its essentially same." The sources you have cited do not mention the term 'Sanskrit literature', but you are applying your own logic in order to arrive at this acceptable term; that's the reason, it would be considered as WP:OR/WP:SYN. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 17:56, 13 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clarifying. Although, it seems far fetched to really call it WP:OR, just for compressing the various sources as 'Sanskrit literature'. Anyway, there are multiple sources using 'sanskrit lit' term and we can use that.
 * The Position of Charans in Medieval Rajasthan by Rashmi Upadhyaya (2010) [RAJASTHAN HISTORY CONGRESS PROCEEDING VOLUME XXVI]:
 * "In social hierarchy their status was equal to the brahmins owing to their sacred character as prescribed to them in Ancient Sanskrit sources like the Ramayana, Mahabharata etc." Krayon95 (talk) 18:13, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Article Lead expansion
RegentsPark, LukeEmily, Ekdalian. After above discussion, the proposed addition to the lead is this:

"In ancient Sanskrit literature texts, the Cāraṇas are depicted chanting hymns eulogizing the gods and as priests worshipping temple icons.

Historically perceived of being associated with a divine origin, the sacrility of the Cāraṇas was corollary to their inviolability; harming whom was considered a sin comparable to brahmahatya.  Because of the institutionalized and religiously sanctioned protection which they enjoyed, they could fearlessly criticize and admonish the kings and their actions, act as mediators in political disputes among the rulers, and serve as protectors of mercantile activity throughout the conflict-ridden regions of western India. "

If there's any issue regarding the above proposed para, whether about the sources used, the sentence wording or structure, please inform here. The proposed addition to the lead is not something new, most of this is already explained in the later sections, with high quality sources. This is a summarisation of sort. Again, please feel free to suggest any improvements in the wording or structure. Thank you. Krayon95 (talk) 10:56, 26 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, it is well sourced. The only dispute is whether it should be in the lead or not. I have not done enough academic reading on the community to give an opinion on consensus. My suggeston is to use RFC to resolve the dispute amicably. Thanks, LukeEmily (talk) 13:35, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 * LukeEmily. Not familiar with RFC. Can you link to it? Thanks. Krayon95 (talk) 11:25, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Krayon95, WP:RFC. ThanksLukeEmily (talk) 12:28, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Rfc on the proposed addition to the article lead
The proposed addition to the lead is this : Diff. The content of the proposed addition to the lead is already explained in the later sections, and this is a summarisation of sort. Suggestions for improvement in the sentence wording or structure are welcome. Thank you. Krayon95 (talk) 08:04, 2 August 2022 (UTC)


 * ====== Diff ======
 * In ancient Sanskrit literature texts, the Cāraṇas are depicted chanting hymns eulogizing the gods and as priests worshipping temple icons.
 * Historically perceived of being associated with a divine origin, the sacrility of the Cāraṇas was corollary to their inviolability; harming whom was considered a sin comparable to brahmahatya.  Because of the institutionalized and religiously sanctioned protection which they enjoyed, they could fearlessly criticize and admonish the kings and their actions, act as mediators in political disputes among the rulers, and serve as protectors of mercantile activity throughout the conflict-ridden regions of western India.  " Krayon95 (talk) 08:05, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 September 2022
Charan Were Considered As Great Warriors Had Love For Poetry — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:4900:5B86:CEB4:3481:66FF:FEED:C7F0 (talk) 11:35, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Discussion
@Ekdalian. The previous lead and Rfc issue hasn't yet resolved thanks to you. And now again this "POV" issue which you might never specify.

Please suggest alterations now that all the citations are added.

Krayon95 (talk) 18:40, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey Krayon95, all the above content directly quotes from primary sources, without any interpretation by modern scholars, (be it quote/sloka whatever), which is not at all acceptable as per long term consensus, especially for caste related articles. The last one is a bit better; but our article already mentions that the Charanas were proficient as poets. Thanks for starting the discussion as per convention. Ekdalian (talk) 13:44, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ekdalian. These are secondary sources, they cite earlier scholars such as Pandit Guleri for Anargharaghava and various others including Rawat Saraswat for Harshacharita and Prabandhacintāmaṇi. Each of them no earlier than 1980. Also, these cited works are in context of the gita and khyata genres of poetry.
 * Furthermore, please check the History section at Kayastha and 'Shrauta Sutras' sub-section at Brahmin, where most sources are dated to be of 1980s and many of even 1930s, 40s, 50s, and 1960s. Krayon95 (talk) 14:30, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Krayon95, I have never said that the sources here are primary. I have clearly mentioned above that the sources either quote or state whatever is mentioned in the primary sources without any interpretation, therefore as per convention, such statements are equivalent to the primary sources only. Hope you understand! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 19:16, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ekdalian. Not correct. They aren't just quoting primary source; see again. For eg, in Dingal Geet, analysis & interpretation is exactly what the author has done. Please do not make assumptions to support your stance. Similarly, full citations from the other sources can be added or you can look yourself if they can be previewed in googlebooks. Full citation from the source :
 * Sārasvata, Rāvata (1986). Dingal Geet: Anthology of Rajasthani songs (in Hindi). Sāhitya Akādemī. pp. 7–9.
 * Krayon95 (talk) 20:17, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Krayon95, you may seek opinions of other experienced editors on caste/social group related articles in order to arrive at a consensus. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 12:22, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ekdalian. The same tactic used to stall previous lead edits. Neither have you still specified which parts of edit are exactly 'POV' and nor tried to define what might be the 'neutral' statements in this case despite full-citations being present.
 * Moreover, the issue raised over the early-period (even British period) sources at Kayastha and Brahmin seem to have been skipped.
 * And, editors such as @RegentsPark must be following this article. They haven't yet raised concern, not only that, some also agreed on the good quality of sources used in the previous edits.
 * As I have repeated multiple times, if there's POV or any other issue, please suggest alternative or changes in language. But what's happening is misuse of revert function and made up assumptions to stall the discussion entirely.
 * This edit should be restored now. Krayon95 (talk) 13:15, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Krayon95, I have already explained above; any experienced editor would understand the reason mentioned for rejecting sources quoting/stating directly from primary sources without interpretation! If you still think you are right, you need to gain consensus here first, for which you may request for opinions of other experienced editors. Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 18:34, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Remove 'Rajpurohits' which is mentioned in patronized section
Rajpurohits were never under your patronage. They are the real jagirdars as they were given jagirs in the Rajput era. Rajpurohits and other purohits are not of the same culture. Charans were not real jagirdars. Charans don't follow the traditions that can be called both brahmins and rajputs. In ancient times they lived a nomadic life. They are only a bards and bhat. Still in many villages their work is only in singing the praises of the great warriors. Charans are called "Bhat ji" in our villages. This paragraph is completely biased which has been written for the purpose of personal enmity. Rahul singh (om) (talk) 13:08, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Rajpurohit name hata do bhai galat information mat dalo
Rajpurohit name hata do bhai galat information mat dalo 150.129.168.76 (talk) 16:32, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 January 2023
Please add a section of notable people of this community as there are many who are well known figures in Gujarat and Rajasthan with 8 padmashri awardess and other great man and the godess that are born in this community. Goodfaiths01 (talk) 07:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC) Please add a section of notable people of this community as there are many who are well known figures in Gujarat and Rajasthan with 8 padmashri awardess and other great man and the godess that are born in this community.
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. &#x2130; mi1y&#x29fc;T&middot;C&#x29fd; 08:47, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

remove word Islam from religion of Charan. Charan were Hindu are Hindu and will Hindu
remove word Islam from religion of Charan. Charan were Hindu are Hindu and will Hindu. I request you to edit that. Vishal12345sharma (talk) 17:57, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Urdu misspelled
Charan should correctly be spelled as چارڻ  in Urdu (as well as Sindhi). Since the article is blocked from editing, I offer this information here for anyone who'd like to correct it once it is open again. (Insert it instead of the present Urdu letter sequence, which does not read "Charan" at all) Yak-indolog (talk) 05:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Done. Krayon95 (talk) 07:23, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 March 2024
2409:40D4:200D:E401:141D:70FF:FED4:8C96 (talk) 03:42, 5 March 2024 (UTC) Charans were not Bards as Bards is an European term used to describe A Group Of People in their society. Whereas Bards Did Not Fight And Charans Did Bards Changed Their Loyalty But The Charans Never Did. Source:- Col.James Tod So Please Edit Charans Were Poets, Warriors, Administrator's, Agriculturalists And Traders.
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: The word bard is used in multiple existing sources, including peer reviewed journals. This term is not limited to a single group. Jamedeus (talk) 04:29, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Improve religion
Remove islam from the religion part 2409:40D4:107C:35FA:4CDC:DA3F:DB54:9DB9 (talk) 17:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 June 2024
2402:A00:400:B11:80F1:BFF0:501:25A (talk) 12:39, 20 June 2024 (UTC) Show limbdi kaviraj shankardan ji detha in names of charan kavi and dula bhaya kag
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.   [[User:CanonNi ]]  (talk • contribs) 13:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)