Talk:Yadav/Archive 14

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 May 2022 (2)
VippyRathore (talk) 04:12, 19 May 2022 (UTC) The picture mentions them as Ahirs but not all Ahirs are Yadavs, All Ahirs are not related to Yadavs. Secondly picture do not even claims they are Ahir. They may reprsent Another Aheer caste.
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. I suggest you bring up the topic of Raj era images at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics to establish a consensus. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:08, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 May 2022
2405:204:112E:73AC:0:0:51A:F8B0 (talk) 06:05, 20 May 2022 (UTC) Dear sir The photo you posted on yadav page. The photo give us wrong information. In this photo you mention yadav comes in soodra class but yadav are warrior caste they are comes in क्षत्रिया class you can confirm any where. In our hindu gant their also mentioned that yadav are kstriya caste for you queries you can check any where like you yadav hindi page on Wikipedia and yaduvanshi hindi page or any where. So please sir remove photo from yadav page
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: See other edit requests. This needs consensus first. — Sirdog (talk) 02:59, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Sir no one said yadav are soodra every one said yadav are kstriya and you can confirm so please remove photo from yadav page Raj1689 (talk) 10:23, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 May 2022
2405:204:112E:73AC:0:0:51A:F8B0 (talk) 07:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC) Sir The photo you posted on yadav page its give us wrong information yadav are not soodra yadav are kstriya You can confirm in our hindu grant so please remove that picture
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as per the previously declined requests. This is obviously going nowhere at the moment, perhaps if you tried to establish a Consensus we wouldn't have all these edit requests cluttering this page. MadGuy7023 (talk) 08:25, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Sir every one know yadav are kstriya because lord krishna is kstriya and lord krishna belongs yadav community So please remove photo from yadav page Raj1689 (talk) 10:25, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 May 2022
Yadavs are called yaduvanshi kshatriya 2409:4063:4D0E:A552:0:0:790B:E710 (talk) 03:20, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 06:43, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 May 2022 (2)
2409:4050:2E3C:2C14:0:0:69C9:5609 (talk) 11:53, 22 May 2022 (UTC) Sir you give us wrong information Yadavs are kstriya they are not soodra you can confirm any where Please remove photo that you posted
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. &#128156;  melecie   talk  - 12:17, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 May 2022 (2)
Raj1689 (talk) 10:18, 21 May 2022 (UTC) Dear sirr I am complaining again please remove that picture from yadav page. Because its give wrong information yadav are kstriya but the photo you post there you mention yadav are soodra.that is totally wrong You can confirm any where you can confirm our hindu grant and many books are their in india. So sir or mam Please remove all photos from yadav page Thanku

Sir everyone know lord krishna is kstriya and lord krishna belongs to yadav community so that reason yadavs are also kstriya So please remove photo from yadav page Raj1689 (talk) 10:27, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Or more confirmation you can read yadav hindi page there Wikipedia mentions yadav are kstriya Raj1689 (talk) 10:29, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Please remove photos from yadav page Raj1689 (talk) 10:29, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please stop requesting this before gaining consensus. ああ、またか.  晚安.  11:48, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Definitely not worth the lead. Perhaps the best place for this image is in the Origin section or Colonial Period., and : thoughts? Dr.Pinsky (talk) 10:59, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Agree as according to MOS:LEADIMAGE, this doesn't fit with the current status of the Yadav community which contains people from variety of socio-economic background. It's better to move in appropriate section. Admantine123 (talk) 11:10, 22 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I think caption has given full description and it definitely belonged to a major constituent of this set up, and as of now there is no such settled discussion, so I would say we should let it remain for now until there is some site wide consensus on the similar issues. After that it can be decided. RS6784 (talk) 11:34, 22 May 2022 (UTC)


 * the thing is Raj-Era photo can be used if the original description of it is verified wrt to the concerned group. Here it is properly verified, no question mark etc by the photographer or even questionable words. It seems it is perfect and till the time the larger issue of raj-era is settled I think it is well within rules to be here. The basic point is there are no questions regarding the background of the people by the photographer. So, no verification problem. RS6784 (talk) 11:41, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It appears you misunderstood, what I intended to say: "Definitely not worth the lead. Perhaps the best place for this image is in the Origin section or Colonial Period. Admantine123, Ranadhira and RS6784: thoughts?". Thanks. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 13:20, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * , But Raj-Era are there on many pages as lead ( condition they are verified wrt community), can't make an exception here unless there is site-wide consensus. It would need moving on most community pages. RS6784 (talk) 13:23, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Not a convincing argument . I do not believe it’s a good idea to include a century old image on the lead. This colonial image has a limited view and may not fit the modern standards. And you might have noticed that there are a lot of requests on this talk page. Sometimes it's hard to find a way to politely decline their request. Besides, we've reached out to all editors involved and I don't think a site wide consensus is needed on such trivial matters. I hope you understand. Finally pinging ; Ranadhira might be unavailable or uninterested. Thanks. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 15:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I just shared the present status of the discussion on it. I don't know how the arguments were unconvincing. There are such images as lead on many community pages. I know that request issue on talk page but those might also be related to some other stuffs on the page. Anyways, if you think right you may moved this to the first section. I think Krishna Kangra painting has nothing to do with this page, neither the painting was commissioned under any person related to this community. So you may replace Kangra painting with this image, the painting was anyday irrelevant to this page and should be on Yadava page RS6784 (talk) 15:55, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * , I have moved it as per discussion to the relevant section. RS6784 (talk) 16:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks . Hope you are doing well. I agree that the Kangra painting has no place in this article. final thoughts? Thanks. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 17:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I noticed you recently relocated the "kangra" image to the Krishna page. But I'm concerned because I see a similar image in the iconography section. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 17:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * the matter is resolved with the other editor and it was decided that it should remain on wikicommons till the time we have appropriate page. This page has nothing to do with a painting related to Kangra state ( neither the state had anything to do with this group). RS6784 (talk) 18:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 May 2022
2409:4050:EC5:3425:0:0:69C9:6C01 (talk) 04:52, 25 May 2022 (UTC) Sir The photo you posted on Yadav page its give wrong information You mention that yadav are soodra but yadav are kstriya you can confirm anywhere any book. So please remove that photo from yadav page
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. &#128156;  melecie   talk  - 04:55, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

यादव समाज परिचय
आप इससे बारे में जानकारी दे रहे उसमे सुधार करे और उसमे भगवान श्रीकृष्ण की फोटो या उनके साम्राज्य की फोटो डाले Hemraj Singh Yadav (talk) 03:56, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Krishna is not mentioned in the mythological origin, so I see no reason for an image. —C.Fred (talk) 13:04, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 May 2022
2409:4050:2EBF:743A:0:0:6909:8B07 (talk) 10:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC) Dear sir remove that photo you posted on yadavs page because you gave wrong information yadav are chandravansi kstriya its mentions in visnu puram and bagwat geeta of hindu grants you can confirm But you wrote yadav are soodra so its wrong and remove photos from yadav page
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. &#128156;  melecie   talk  - 11:46, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 May 2022
2405:204:1281:C6B7:0:0:1FAD:AD (talk) 05:12, 30 May 2022 (UTC) महोदय अपने जो तस्वीर अपने पेज पर डाली है वह लोगो को गलत जानकरी दे रहा है यादव जाती श्रत्रिय जाती है यह हम साबित कर सकते है आप किसी भारतीय लेखक से हमारी बात करवाई और जल्द से जल्द इस तस्वीर को हटाए
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template.
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg अभी के लिए नहीं किया गया: कृपया टेम्पलेट का उपयोग करने से पहले इस परिवर्तन के लिए आम सहमति स्थापित करें (Google अनुवाद का उपयोग करके अनुवादित) &#128156;  melecie   talk  - 05:20, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
You have many Complaints too remove photos from that page soo remove photos from that page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:3107:d3c9:eca7:fcc1:8217:7c42 (talk) 16:41, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 June 2022
Remove all photos from yadav page and don't added any pictures on this page
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: This is actually a controversial edit, so you'll need to discuss first with other editors. Please open a new section here and start a discussion. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 17:53, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 June 2022
2409:4050:E8A:C39B:0:0:6909:DF12 (talk) 17:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC) Remove pictures from this page
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: This is actually a controversial edit, so you'll need to discuss first with other editors. Please open a new section here and start a discussion. MadGuy7023 (talk) 17:50, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

YADAV
The Yadav caste generally follows Vaishnav traditions, and share Vaishnav Dharmic religious beliefs. They are the worshippers of Lord Krishna or Lord Vishnu. Yadavs are classified under the Kshatriya varna in Hinduism and remained in power in India and Nepal until 1200-1300AD, before the arrival of Muslim invaders. 106.67.88.90 (talk) 20:20, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 July 2022
~ Yadav are elite group of people who are Chandravanshi in origin. Yadavs are mentioned as descendant of Yadu in different Puranas, Upanishads. Lord Krishna, claimed himself as a Yaduvanshi
 * 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. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

War
It should be added the war 2409:4051:2E86:FA8E:39D4:81ED:9E73:ECF2 (talk) 03:41, 1 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I have raised an edit request already for the same. Harman Paul (talk) 07:28, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Yadav
Yadav are not non elite they are elite source:yadavhistory.com,mahabharat 2405:204:A683:3C62:0:0:1043:80A5 (talk) 19:31, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Yadav are traditionally elite group

 * What I think should be changed: non elite group to elite group
 * Why it should be changed:Due to evidence in Mahabharat longest epic and many other website like yadavhistory.com
 * References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):"yadavhistory.com"

2405:204:A683:3C62:0:0:1043:80A5 (talk) 19:44, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. EggRoll97 (talk) 05:32, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Identify the yadavs gotta
Please identify the gotra of yadavs ....how many types of yadav is there ...please tell me in a description 103.70.144.146 (talk) 09:47, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This article is about the modern scholarly description of a caste, i.e. a form of social stratification, endogamy, and a traditional lifestyle in India's Hindu society. It is not bout Hinduism's mythological description or classification.  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  10:14, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Ahir is royal since Yadu to till now but and they are biggest kshatriya of India and of words like sahastrabahu Arjun but some caste of rajputs and bhraman want to erase history of yadav
In India yadav has large number of dynasty so how yadav is not royal yadav is biggest royal family in world And Bap bap Howe hai yadav bap hai aur rahega 2401:4900:8123:30CD:0:0:1025:3EEC (talk) 02:13, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Update the article new section as modern reference Tirupati temple hereditary right : Yadavas hail restoration of ‘Golla Mirasi’
As this article is semi-protected, request the admins to update the page for modern and relevant info appropriately.

Yadavas hail restoration of ‘Golla Mirasi’ : The hereditary right was reinstated by the State Government recently

The Yadava community hailed the State Government’s decision regarding restoration of ‘Golla Mirasi’, the hereditary rights of the community pertaining to certain rituals at Venkateshvara_Temple.

‘Sannidhi Golla’ is a person/family hailing from the community that has the privilege to open and close the door at the main threshold of Sri Venkateswara temple at Tirumala every day at dawn. According to temple scriptures, Sannidhi Sarabhaiah was the person bestowed with the right to have first and final darshan of the Lord every day, and the practice was inherited by members of his lineage. Though the system is followed even today, the abolition of the hereditary right some years ago reduced what was once a privilege to a mere job. It was only when the last incumbent Sannidhi Venkataramana ‘retired’ from the position on superannuation that the community understood the real implications of the abolition and then launched a legal battle for restoration of the right.

Hailing the State Government’s recent decision to restore the hereditary right, members of the Akhila Bharata Yadava Mahasabha (ABYM) led by the national youth wing president Y.S. Yadav gathered at Alipiri, the foot of Tirumala hills, and broke coconuts as a thanksgiving to Lord Venkateswara. “It was the previous TDP government that abolished the system that was in vogue since ages, while the present Chief Minister Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy revived the same,” he said. Local Yadav leaders Anna Ramachandra Yadav, Ethamakula Hemanth Kumar Yadav and Katta Jayaram Yadav said the community’s fight for the last fifteen years yielded fruit.

Building Tirupati The community leaders also met the local legislator Bhumana Karunakar Reddy and thanked him for taking up their issue. Recalling the role of Yadavas in developing Tirupati and the Tirumala temple, Mr. Reddy cited historical accounts and said it was in the year 1130 that Ghati Deva Yadavaraya built Tirupati town under instructions from his spiritual guru Sri Ramanuja.

It was taken forward by Veera Narasingadeva Yadavaraya, Veera Rakshasa Yadavaraya and Ranganatha Yadavaraya who developed Tirumala temple and built its outer precincts. The members appealed to the State Government for establishment of Yadava Finance Corporation to uplift the poorer sections in the community. Clrsitusinsall (talk) 06:12, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Stating Yadavs as traditionally non elite is way too stigmata.
Instead of citing traditionally non elite, the header should be that Yadavs refers to a grouping of communities or castes in India. Quoting the British Raj data to identify today’s conditions is unfair. Almost every other caste Wikipedia page just mentions its current stand. Even if one has to mention the roots they may do so in the history section. I see, the word “non elite” and “peasant pastoral” words are thoroughly, repeatedly used in the article at several places. Discriminatory efforts are vested to show the entire race in bad light. The header needs refinement, and would earnestly request senior editors to make unbiased, accurate changes to make this page more worthy of neutral appearance as this platform aims to provide. Thank you. 110.226.71.237 (talk) 09:48, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually yes, i also share the same view. Old editors who were not aware with the present situation have used pre Mandal era sources and defined most of the agricultural communities as non elite. There is need to make some changes at some pages, as these communities have taken many other professions nowadays.Admantine123 (talk) 17:11, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 * My honest opinion based on observing this page for more than 22 years :), few wikipedia admins (anyone can become admin over time) have strong control over this page and do not want to update to modern day reality, even though, this page is about modern day yadav. Clrsitusinsall (talk) 06:17, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Until admins are removed by Indian court ruling, replaced by super-admin to democratize the content writing, admins gone with time, as nothing lasts forever, this page expect to be like this. Clrsitusinsall (talk) 06:17, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * so probably another 50 years before, someone will take cognizance of all the content of talk page and start updating the main-page. I watched this page for more than 20 years and how biased the admins are here. one can write to Wikipedia founder James, who seeks donation every years to keep wikipedia running, so some bunch of admins can hijack the content and page for personal propaganda to distort mordern and historical realities. Clrsitusinsall (talk) 06:17, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * How to detect the admins, who are biased. very simple, those who keep deleting content but does not add any new content in the article. look at the history, same bunch of people, acting like, they own wikipedia, sitting in EU countries, teaching or preaching some boring subjects in 3rd grade universities and pretending to keep few Indian caste and communities in check :) Clrsitusinsall (talk) 06:25, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * some of the progenies belong to similar backgrounds, who believe tulsidas was naively referring to social realities of time, when he was writing the RamCharitaManas and declaring any community to anything. after 50 years, sons of these people will not be apologetic about the misdeed of the fathers, who are alive and corrupting the reality as much as they can. Clrsitusinsall (talk) 06:29, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 December 2023
Requesting Administrators to improve the infobox

106.210.99.23 (talk) 08:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ By the way, all extended confirmed users can edit this article, not just administrators.  Delta  space 42 (talk • contribs) 10:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Wrong facts on Arya Samaj
the article says

"Although this movement, founded by Swami Dayananda Saraswati, favoured a caste hierarchy and also endogamy, its supporters believed that caste should be determined on merit rather than on heritage".

This is wrong since Arya Samaj categorically rejects both caste and endogamy. Factpineapple (talk) 11:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 January 2024
chang traditionally non-elite to elite and non-elite Gouravwikie (talk) 22:43, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Please provide a reliable source RegentsPark (comment) 22:57, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * What is the logic behind calling a caste as “non-elite” AkkuDreamz (talk) 17:33, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @AkkuDreamz It is described as such in independent sources. Since castes traditionally have a hierarchy, it makes sense to mention its position in the hierarchy. —C.Fred (talk) 17:35, 16 April 2024 (UTC)