Talk:Regar

Sources

Please do not add statements to this article unless you provide a reliable source that verifies them. Similarly, do not remove reliably sourced information that is already present. I am well aware that various people do not like the idea that their community has any sort of connection to the Chamar people but that is how it is - Wikipedia is not censored. - Sitush (talk) 07:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

They are seeker of truth from thousands of years, there're enough evidence of it. So they never worried about any propaganda. Who ever was a true saint, they became associated with him. Swikilib (talk) 08:08, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

1. According to Census of India 1891, Rehgar caste was categorised (which is now known as Regar/Raigar) under Class V ARTISANS( page 196) in Group 11 (Salt and Lime workers, page 197) as Rehgar.

Whereas, Chamar Caste is separately mentioned under Class VII ( page 199).

https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/

2. According to Census of India 1901, even here Regar/ Rehgar/ Raigar Caste and Chamar /Jatav are seperately mentioned in 1901 Census of India.

For Regar/ Rehgar/ Raigar Caste refer to page 343-344 and for Chamar caste refer to page 320.

http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/ideologie/data/CensusIndia/CensusIndia1901/CensusIndia1901IndiaTables.pdf

3. Similarly, According to Census of India 1911 (page ) and Census of India 1921 (page 158), Raigar/ Regar belongs to Rajputana.

Even here Regar/ Rehgar/ Raigar Caste and Chamar /Jatav are seperately mentioned.

http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/ideologie/data/CensusIndia/CensusIndia1921/CensusIndia1921IndiaTables.pdf

4. In Census of India, 1931, a combined caste list of selected caste was presented.

5. In 1936, The official Scheduled caste (lower caste) list was presented by the Government of India in which there is no mention of Raigar/Regar caste.

Therefore Raigar caste was not a scheduled caste.

https://socialjustice.gov.in/public/ckeditor/upload/82951673327147.PDF Naveen3992 (talk) 09:37, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Added new citations for Rehgars as saltpetre workers.

I've added some citations of books published around the end of the 19th century that state "Rehgars" as saltpetre works in Rajasthan. The books seem reliable(Google books). It also includes the census report of 1901. Please review. Hopefully the new changes can be kept.

This page is being edited by people too many times. My changes get overridden in a few hours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sub5459 (talk • contribs) 05:34, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

You've gathered wrong information. They are not responsible for lake of resources in North India. They are seeker of truth from thousands of years. Swikilib (talk) 08:02, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Raigar

They are untouchables? 2402:8100:238C:6FC9:478:5634:1232:5476 (talk) 17:54, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

No, They are seeker of truth from thousands of years, since origin of yoga. So they didn't worried about any social propaganda. Swikilib (talk) 07:55, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Wrong information

Plss sir dlt your wrong information Regar cast is not chamar Regar cast is rangad rajput,sagarvanshi xatriy Yogesh regar shivraj bhai (talk) 17:20, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Yogesh regar shivraj bhai You need to cite reliable, independent sources, to support your assertion, before it can be considered. - Arjayay (talk) 17:29, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

They are seeker of truth from thousands of years, there're enough evidence of it. So they never worried about any propaganda. Who ever was a true saint, they became associated with him. Swikilib (talk) 08:08, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

1. According to Census of India 1891, Rehgar caste was categorised (which is now known as Regar/Raigar) under Class V ARTISANS( page 196) in Group 11 (Salt and Lime workers, page 197) as Rehgar.

Whereas, Chamar Caste is separately mentioned under Class VII ( page 199).

https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/

2. According to Census of India 1901, even here Regar/ Rehgar/ Raigar Caste and Chamar /Jatav are seperately mentioned in 1901 Census of India.

For Regar/ Rehgar/ Raigar Caste refer to page 343-344 and for Chamar caste refer to page 320.

http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/ideologie/data/CensusIndia/CensusIndia1901/CensusIndia1901IndiaTables.pdf

3. Similarly, According to Census of India 1911 (page ) and Census of India 1921 (page 158), Raigar/ Regar belongs to Rajputana.

Even here Regar/ Rehgar/ Raigar Caste and Chamar /Jatav are seperately mentioned.

http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/ideologie/data/CensusIndia/CensusIndia1921/CensusIndia1921IndiaTables.pdf

4. In Census of India, 1931, a combined caste list of selected caste was presented.

5. In 1936, The official Scheduled caste (lower caste) list was presented by the Government of India in which there is no mention of Raigar/Regar caste.

Therefore Raigar caste was not a scheduled caste.

https://socialjustice.gov.in/public/ckeditor/upload/82951673327147.PDF Naveen3992 (talk) 09:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Wrong information

Hello i would to make a concern and raised up suggestion. regarding this fault wrong information which is keep on updating. regar/raigars doesn't belong to any chamar community neither a sub-caste nor anything part of it. Raigar caste follow hindusim and language is from marwar region of rajasthan. it's me request stop misleading people by giving wrong information. regar ancestors were warriors and known as Raghuvanshi Kshatriya. it's my kind request please work on it. Thanks 183.83.212.216 (talk) 04:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done - as stated above, you need to cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 08:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

They are seeker of truth from thousands of years, there're enough evidence of it. So they never worried about any propaganda. Who ever was a true saint, they became associated with him. Swikilib (talk) 08:09, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Swikilib, you need to stop copying that seeker of truth from thousands of years [etc.] thing to every talk page section. It's not helpful and is disruptive. El_C 18:03, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 October 2022

"https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=425167606456406&set=a.302500402056461" "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4v3ru4dp6Y" "Recently chief minister of Rajasthan addressed the annual meeting of the society." Swikilib (talk) 17:24, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: This needs independent secondary coverage to demonstrate that it is noteworthy. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:51, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)  Not done. I can't read that page or understand that video. But, generally, Facebook and YouTube are not considered reliable sources. See WP:RS, WP:FACEBOOK, WP:YOUTUBE. Please remember that this is the English Wikipedia, so again, the WP:BURDEN is on you to prove both the factual veracity and appropriateness of whatever additions you're proposing — to the English-speaking editorial pool. El_C 17:57, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 October 2023

This is a false information. regar/raigars doesn't belong to any chamar community neither a sub-caste nor anything part of it. Raigar caste follow hindusim and language is from marwar region of rajasthan. it's me request stop misleading people by giving wrong information. regar ancestors were warriors and known as Raghuvanshi Kshatriya. it's my kind request please work on it. 121.46.85.79 (talk) 13:01, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: This exact request, word-for-word, was made 11 months ago, and it was declined. I am declining it again, for the exact same reason: you need to provide reliable sources. Tollens (talk) 23:26, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Raigar caste is not related to Chamar/Jatav

Raigar / Rehgars caste (Artisans) comes under Class V Artisans and belongs to group 11 mentioned on page 197.

Whereas Chamar is a separate caste belongs to Class VII. Leather Workers and the Lower

Village Menials ( page 199)

Reliable sources

1. Page 196, Class V Artisans, GROUP 11.

Salt and Lime Workers(Page 197) , Rehgars, General Report on the Census of India, 1891https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/

2. Page 199, Class VII, Leather workers and the Lower menials, General Report on the Census of India, 1891https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/ Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 11:36, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Please reply Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 08:02, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Raigar caste is not related to Chamar/Jatav

Raigar / Rehgars caste (Artisans) comes under Class V Artisans and belongs to group 11 mentioned on page 197.

Whereas Chamar is a separate caste belongs to Class VII. Leather Workers and the Lower

Village Menials ( page 199)

Reliable sources

1. Page 196, Class V Artisans, GROUP 11.

Salt and Lime Workers(Page 197) , Rehgars, General Report on the Census of India, 1891

https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/

2. Page 199, Class VII, Leather workers and the Lower menials, General Report on the Census of India, 1891

https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/ Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 11:37, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2023

Raigar caste is not related to Chamar/Jatav Raigar / Rehgars caste (Artisans) comes under Class V Artisans and belongs to group 11 mentioned on page 197. Whereas Chamar is a separate caste belongs to Class VII. Leather Workers and the Lower Village Menials ( page 199) Reliable sources Page 196, Class V Artisans, GROUP 11. Salt and Lime Workers(Page 197) , Rehgars, General Report on the Census of India, 1891https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/ 2. Page 199, Class VII, Leather workers and the Lower menials, General Report on the Census of India, 1891https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/ 121.46.85.79 (talk) 12:33, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 October 2023

Raigar caste is not related to Chamar/Jatav Raigar / Rehgars caste (Artisans) comes under Class V Artisans and belongs to group 11 mentioned on page 197. Whereas Chamar is a separate caste belongs to Class VII. Leather Workers and the Lower Village Menials ( page 199) Reliable sources Page 196, Class V Artisans, GROUP 11. Salt and Lime Workers(Page 197) , Rehgars, General Report on the Census of India, 1891https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/ 2. Page 199, Class VII, Leather workers and the Lower menials, General Report on the Census of India, 1891https://ruralindiaonline.org/en/library/resource/general-report-on-the-census-of-india-1891/ 121.46.85.79 (talk) 06:50, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done I can't see that the sources support that? Theroadislong (talk) 15:04, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello Theroadislong @Theroadislong

Thankyou for replying. This source [1] clearly mention Rehgar(which is now known as Regar) on page 197 under Class V Artisans in Group 11(Salt and Lime workers) as Rehgar.

Whereas , Chamar and Jatav is mentioned in Class VII on page 199. which means both are different group of people and different community and doesn’t belong to each other. Regar (Rehgar) is not related to chamar.

This wrong information is mentioned on article Regar. Rehgar is not an ethnic group of Chamar/Jatav. I am unable to edit article Regar.

please kindly check the above details.

Rehgars are now known as Regar/ Rehgar/Raigar.

Please let me know what more reliable source, I need to present

It would be really helpful Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 17:07, 14

Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 17:15, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

That sounds like original research/synthesis. Theroadislong (talk) 17:37, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@Theroadislong

It is clearly mentioned in the historical original document. It is clearly stating the facts.

how it can be synthesis?

can’t i edit the article ? Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 17:41, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@Theroadislong Please, It’s a request

Can you please help me edit this 121.46.85.79 (talk) 18:59, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

The 1891 census fails WP:RAJ, it is not a reliable source, as explained here - Arjayay (talk) 19:55, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Arjayay@Theroadislong

Thankyou for giving your precious time in reviewing my edit.

So according to WP:RAJ fails and is not a reliable resource according to it but

As explained here , Census of India,

In the 1901 Census of India, the category of varna, the four-fold ritual ranking system of Vedic Hinduism, was included in the official classification of caste.

Even here Regar/ Rehgar/ Raigar Caste and Chamar /Jatav are seperately mentioned in 1901 Census of India [2] .

For Regar/ Rehgar/ Raigar Caste refer to page 343-344, 1901 Census of India

For Chamar/Jatav caste refer to page 320 , 1901 Census of India

According to Census of India 1901, Rehgar/Regar/Raigar caste is not a sub group of Chamar/Jatav caste but is itself a separate caste

Even After Independence of India 1947, According to The Census of India 1951,

Regar/Rehgar/Raigar is a separate caste and is not a subgroup of Chamar/Jatav, page 3-4, Estimated Population by Castes, 24, 1951 - Census 1951

Chamar is mentioned separately and Regar/Rehgar/Raigar has been mentioned separately which a evidence to prove they both are different and are not related to each other

Are these a reliable source now to make the changes on the article Regar?

please help me how to edit the article Regar as the information is wrong about a caste on this article. Wating for the reply. Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 08:10, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Honeysingh1234321 We need modern sources, not old ones whose foundation was the discredited theory of scientific racism. I am adding suitable material. - Sitush (talk) 12:12, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Thankyou for taking my point into consideration!

but How come after independence government census sources become old? Instead they are the real evidence to proof that Regar caste is not related to chamar caste.

All caste in India are based upon ancient times.

Regar caste is strictly not associated nor related to chamar caste.

Few people of regar caste due to poverty started working as leather worker due to which they got highlighted as leather worker but it is Wrong information you have added that regars were untouchable dalit.

Basically Regars were Artisans clearly mentioned in the census of India. They are clearly not connected to Chamar caste.

Nor they were Dalits. Dalits are those who were given lower status in the ancient times. Raigars are Artisans.

You can’t call a caste directly untouchable / Dalit.

Please remove these two statements untouchable/ Dalit and chamar from the article as these are not the truth.

please reply 121.46.85.79 (talk) 14:04, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Sitush

waiting for the reply Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 14:05, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Honeysingh1234321 See WP:RS. You are not going to "win" this one. Numerous people from numerous caste groups have tried and failed over the years but the consensus of the Wikipedia community remains constant: we consider modern academic sources to be the most reliable for our purposes. There is, of course, nothing to stop you writing differently on some other website ... but not here. - Sitush (talk) 14:19, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Please it’s a request. My career depends on these two statements.

Please remove these two statements untouchable/ Dalit and chamar from the article as these are not the truth. 121.46.85.79 (talk) 14:29, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Sitush 121.46.85.79 (talk) 14:30, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Wikipeda is not concerned with your "truth" we base articles on what reliable independent sources say. Theroadislong (talk) 14:33, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Theroadislong@Sitush

here I am citing the modern reliable sources about the Regar caste from a recent book published in 2011.

Regar belonged to Kshatriya mentioned in the book by the Indian Author CHANDANMAL NAVAL

Book publisher, RAJASTHANI GRANTHAGAR, JODHPUR

Book title “रैगर जाति - Regar Caste (History and Culture)”

Please read page 57-59, Regars were kshatriya. They are not untouchables.

Please ready page number 35-38, Regars are not related to Chamar Regars were not Dalit.

The editor of the article Regar mentioned the caste as untouchables according to an anthropologist book writer.

please check the above facts

and do reply

waiting for the reply Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 14:51, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Honeysingh1234321 What qualifications does that author have? And what is their connection to the caste, if any? I've never heard of the publisher, which isn't a good start. - Sitush (talk) 14:57, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Actually, Rajasthani Granthagar Jodhpur sounds like a vanity publisher, judging by the info for authors at their website. See WP:SPS. - Sitush (talk) 15:00, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Sitush the author is an old Indian author. Is qualification of the author necessary? If yes then,

here I am citing another modern book published in 2018 on Regar history and origin whose author, P.N. Rachoya is well qualified and has taken a degree in BALLB, LLM, Phd and is highly qualified author.

Book titlte, “रैगर जाति की उत्पत्ति व सम्पूर्ण इतिहास- Origin and Complete History of Regar Caste”

Publisher KIRTI PUBLICATIONS, JAIPUR

it is clearly mentioned even in this book that Regar are kshatriya

Please read page number 43- 48 , here

and also Regar doesn’t relate to any other caste, on page 51-59 , here

I believe these are modern sources according to you to prove the above facts. Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 15:29, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Theroadislong@Sitush Please reply Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 15:30, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Honeysingh1234321 Kirti Jaipur doesn't even seem to have a website.

I'm sorry but it is obvious from your messages that you are not reading the information given in links - most notably, WP:RS - and that you are here with the sole purpose of wanting to sanskritise a community which is widely accepted actually to be Dalit. I am going to leave a note on your talk page and you really, really should pay attention to it because I will not be responding further to you here. - Sitush (talk) 15:44, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Sitush I am sorry but I already have the books with me. I have read both the books thoroughly and the kirti publications is in no more active. The author is highly educated.

I am not trying to sanskitise a community. But as you said you wanted modern sources . You changed the facts according to a book . I gave you the correct facts according to books.

In a country like India wvey author doesn’t go to big publishers.

I gave you the books which are sold all over india.

but I didn’t knew you have some personal grudges against changing the facts which I proved Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 16:08, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Theroadislong@Honeysingh1234321@Sitush 121.46.85.79 (talk) 16:45, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Honeysingh1234321 No grudges - see WP:NPA. The publisher seems not to be an academic press. I can find no reviews for the book. I can find no academic citing it. I can find nothing that suggests Rach(h)oya is a faculty member anywhere. In fact, the only P N Rachoya I have found is or was In the IPS. I have tried my best to do Hindi searches also.

Even if he was reliable, we wouldn't remove the mentions of Chamar or Dalit from the article because there are a bunch of definitely reliable sources to support them. At best, we would just add that Rachoya disagrees with those numerous people - we have to be neutral but also assign due weight. But this is moot because he seems not in fact to be reliable and I feel like my time is being wasted now. - Sitush (talk) 16:47, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Sitush thankyou for considering . Then please just add “ At best, we would just add that Rachoya disagrees with those numerous people

thankyou for Your precious time . Honeysingh1234321 (talk) 17:03, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

@Honeysingh1234321 No, because he isn't reliable! We can't state the opinions of every Tom, Dick or Harriet just because they are in print or on some website, only the different opinions of reliable sources. It doesn't look like even now you have read WP:RS. Any more of this and the provisos at WP:TE and WP:CIR might cause you to be blocked or topic banned under the sanctions I posted on your talk page. - Sitush (talk) 17:11, 15 October 2023 (UTC)