 | The use of the contentious topics procedure has been authorised by the community for pages related to South Asian social groups, including this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Copyvio edit
There have been repeated re-additions of copyright material from nathjogisanghmumbai.com/history and/or wordpress.com/2014/10/16/jogis-of-mangalore/ which are not reliable sources in any case - Arjayay (talk) 15:12, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- The history of who copied who appears complex - the phrase "The Jogis established the permanent "rule" of the Kadri Mutt" was added to the WP article in edit 342165928 at 21:16, 5 February 2010. This phrase appears in both the sources above, although the wordpress version does not have quote marks around "rule".
- The wordpress version was posted on October 16, 2014, and appears to be a verbatim copy of the "Jogis of Mangaloreour" section of our article at that time, as seen here.
- The page on the Nath Jogi Sangh website is undated, but the website is for the promotion of the Jogi community, so is not a reliable independent source, whenever it was posted.
- As that section of our article was unsourced in 2014, anything copied from it is also unsourced, and a copy of WP is not a reliable source - (not that wordpress is in any case). - Arjayay (talk) 15:59, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- I have asked for some semi-protection. Given the murky history, I think we should assume the worse, ie: it is copyrighted and the three revert rule does not apply to removing copyright violations. I don't want to keep going back and forth for forever, though - think of the poor electrons being bashed around, they'll be getting dizzy. - Sitush (talk) 16:36, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
All Brahmins? edit
Copied from my talk page - Sitush (talk) 13:34, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the cleanup help too, but re the cats are you sure Jogi should be filed as a Brahmin caste? It takes a little sussing out on gBooks to separate mention of the Jogi as a community as opposed to simply "one who practices yoga", but these two sources look pretty interesting:
- They Sing the Wedding of God: An Ethnomusicological Study of the Mahadevji
- Rank and Rivalry: The Politics of Inequality in Rural West Bengal By Marvin Davis
MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:33, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- I didn't check that, sorry. I've heard of them as a caste but will dig deeper. We do have Yogi, of course, and if they are not a caste-type community then a merge and redirect would probably apply. - Sitush (talk) 14:04, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Oh no, I agree there is a caste/community called Jogi (distinct from yogis), but I was curious about your changing all the categories to be specifically Brahmin, since that doesn't appear to be supported by the current article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
My recent removals edit
I have removed all unsourced statements from the body of this article due to repeated changes made by anonymous contributors that were not compliant with our policies etc. Feel free to reinstate if you can satisfy the requirements of WP:V while doing so.
Furthermore, I have removed the section concerning their alleged OBC status. There is some comment about this in the section immediately above but I would note in addition that the governmental OBC lists are very tough to use as sources - they're politicised, ambiguous primary sources and we do not usually allow them because to do so involves original research. Given ambiguities and similar names been used by different communities in different regions etc, how do we know that the various names given actually refer to the same community across any or all of the states that were mentioned? One obvious example is the alleged Rajput community bearing the name and which is referred to at Jogi language.
I think we really do need also to sort out the issue of caste/sect/class because I think it is leading to contradictions within the article. - Sitush (talk) 08:18, 12 September 2018 (UTC)