Talk:Ahir/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Abhiras-Ahirs

1.Martial races of undivided India By Vidya Prakash Tyagi URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=vRwS6FmS2g0C&pg=PA188&dq=abhiras-ahirs+relations&hl=en&ei=qyEkTpTBNcjprAeZ8b3fBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ve))

2.The tribes and castes of Bombay, Volume 1 By Reginald Edward Enthoven from Page 17 URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=FoT6gPrbTp8C&pg=PA25&dq=abhiras-ahirs+relations&hl=en&ei=qyEkTpTBNcjprAeZ8b3fBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAw#v=onep))

3.Gonds of the Central Indian Highlands Vol IIFROM page 568 URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=gu_cN0MhteMC&pg=PA568&dq=abhiras-ahirs+relations&hl=en&ei=qyEkTpTBNcjprAeZ8b3fBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&v))Bill clinton history (talk) 13:48, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

1) Tyagi is a completely discredited resource, being largely an uncredited rip-off of Wikipedia circa 2007. 2) Are you referring to "It is, therefore, not unlikely that, according to popular belief..." Does that not sound pretty contested to you, and not at all a sure thing? Again, we're more than happy to teach the controversy, but we can't just make definitive "X is Y" statements when event the specific authorities you want to use say "maybe, possibly, people believe that...". 3) Yet a-dang-gain, the source says "is said to have been derived." It positively does not say "Ahirs are Abhira". You need to actually read these resources and not just pick things where two words happen to appear on the same page. Also, don't just post links and assume we can guess what changes you want made. You need to suggest a change, provide links, actually read your links and be prepared to discuss them. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:53, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes I agree with you these are not full proof sources.these have limitations.I am stduying this topic.so i did not make my comment on these topicBill clinton history (talk) 15:14, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

If you're just studying, I suggest that you put them on your Userpage, vice Talk, until you have completely read them and are ready to discuss them. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:40, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

4.Mathura-Brindaban-The Mystical Land Of Lord Krishna By F. S. Growse ON PAGE 392 ,URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=md2nxLByaQ4C&pg=PA392&dq=abhira-ahir+relations&hl=en&ei=UIgkTuP5C4fjrAeR6bjMDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum ))

This link tells about origin of word Ahir from Sanskrit word Abhira

5.Ancient India: a history of its culture and civilization by Damodar Dharmanand Kosambi - 1966 - 243 pages - Snippet view

It reflects the relationship between a highly composite society with a relatively primitive level of production and its ... to the Abhiras, an historical and pastoral people early in the Christian era, progenitors of the modern Ahir ...

6.Census of India, 1911: Volume 7, Part 1,India. Census Commissioner - 1987 - Snippet view

An Agri may not marry a cousin within five degrees of relationship. Marriage with a deceased wife's sister is allowed. ... The term Ahir is a corruption of the Sanskrit Abhir. The Ahirs • Trans. Bom. Geo. Soc. I, 194. ...

7.Northern Indian music,Alain Daniélou - 1969 - 403 pages - Snippet view

The case is particularly striking for the Ahir-s (ancient Abhira-s) of Northern India. In many regions, particularly in a few valleys of the Himalayas, there remain archaic forms of music with an upper tonic and a descending scale, ...

8.Sruti: Issues 112-113,P.N. Sundaresan, 1994 - Body, Mind & Spirit

great DD Kosambi in the Times of India Annual 40 years ago), he said that originally Krishna was associated with the Ahir (or Abhir) tribe, a non-Aryan group. ... The relationship with the ultimate godhead that is Krishna, ...

More editions

9.Gazetteer, Volume 16,Govt. Central Press, 1883

... family in the north Deccan seems to have been of the Abhir or Ahir tribe, whose independence, according to the Pur£ns, ... (178) states that though he twice conquered Shatakarni, from their near relationship he did not destroy him. ...

10.Journal of the Indian Anthropological Society: Volume 2, Issue 2,Indian Anthropological Society - 1967 - Snippet view

With this end in view, I took up work among the Ahir (Skr. Abhira) and the Jat. For comparison I use the Kafir data of ... The latter included some teachers of the local schools, mostly relations of local Ahirs, but hailing from Delhi, ...

11.All India Anthropometric Survey, North Zone: Bihar,D. C. Bhowmik, Anthropological Survey of India - 1988 - Snippet view

The name Ahir is derived from Abhira, a tribe mentioned several times in inscriptions and the Hindu sacred books. They are numerically large and dominant group in Bihar. The Ahirs have a special relation to the Hindu religion and enjoys ...

12.Haryana District Gazetteers: Mahendragarh,Haryana (India), Kiran Prem - Snippet view

The term Ahir may be variously explained. The Ahir, according to HA Rose, is derived from the Sanskrit Abhira, ... Today they are more liberal in social relations than certain other communities. Though generally agriculturists, they now ...

13.Shivaji, the last great fort architect,Rameśa Desāī, Maharashtra Information Centre - 1987 - 172 pages - Snippet view

... region north of Nasik, was then ruled for a brief period by Veersen Abhir or Ahir, presumably of Gawali ie cowheards community. According to the inscription, the fort of Anjaneri near Trimbak, South West of Nasik was his capital. ...

14.Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency ...: Volume 16,Bombay (India : State) - 1883 - Snippet view

... family in the north Deccan seems to have been of the Abhir or Ahir tribe, whose independence, according to the Purans, ... (178) states that though he twice conquered Shatakarni, from their near relationship he did not destroy him. ...

15.The tribes and castes of Bengal: Ethnographic glossary,Sir Herbert Hope Risley - 1892 - Snippet view

Goal, cow, a totemistic sept of Pans in Chota Nagpur. i, Godr, Ahir (Sanskr. Abhira), the great pastoral caste ... descent from the god Krishna, whose relations with the milkmaids of Brindaban play a prominent part in Hindu mythology...

The above sources of various historian,Census definition of Government of India and Some Indian states used Abhira and AHIR word for same tribe.some one also tells about the origin of word ahir from sanskrit word abhira.

16.Followers of Krishna: Yadavas of India By S. D. S. YadavaURL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=p69GMA226bgC&pg=PA20&dq=ahir-abhir&hl=en&ei=KZQkTvKkKoTwrQeakZSeCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CEsQ6AEw))

17.Indian Encyclopaedia, Volume 1 By Subodh KapoorURL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=jj_JpunW_8YC&pg=PA109&dq=ahir-abhir&hl=en&ei=FJYkTqjaAYjMrQfKwuSrCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDgQ6AEwBDgK#v=onepage&q&f))

18.Encyclopaedia of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh By Om GuptaURL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=ZsswQ9oTa0wC&pg=PA46&dq=ahir-abhir&hl=en&ei=1ZYkTomjEIKHrAegmsStCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwADgU#v=onepage&q&f=false)) 19.Encyclopaedia Of Scheduled Tribes In India (5 Vols.) By P.K. MohantyURL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=DfZBc1Gy9g4C&pg=PA4&dq=ahir-abhir&hl=en&ei=d5ckTr2JNsnTrQfPqbSoAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CEMQ6AEw))

20.Authority and meaning in Indian religions: Hinduism and the case of Vālmīki By Julia Leslie,URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=466QEN_Av4MC&pg=PA197&dq=ahir-abhir&hl=en&ei=KZQkTvKkKoTwrQeakZSeCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false))

This 20th link on page 197 in his glossary mentioned Abhira and ahir same as herders.this i think it is most direct and clear mention.

I provide some links which clearly mention Abhira-Ahir as same people.i invite others for providing more stuff on this matter which may have different point of view on same topic.on many topics full pages not available on google books so i used snippet view.

But there are many full page view which i have mention. Bill clinton history (talk) 20:43, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

all of the ones above that are only available in snippet view simply have to be ignored. Snippet view provides little or no context for any statement being considered and therefore has to be treated as unreliable. Unless you can get hold of the surrounding content by another means, of course. - Sitush (talk) 20:58, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• Note: The Om Gupta Encyclopaedia and pretty much everything from ISHA books/Gyan Publishing House are not reliable sources as they are primarily Wikipedia content. We've had numerous RSN discussions on those. —SpacemanSpiff 21:11, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

There are other full links which mention Abhira-ahir same,moreover if any one have different opinion he or she should also provide copmlete links in support of there views.Bill clinton history (talk) 21:21, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

The full links will be examined by me, at least. We are in different time zones and have real lives etc but it will happen. As for your second point, well, it is difficult if not impossible to prove a negative. Provided that the content which currently exists is cited using reliable sources etc then, except in extreme cases, it has its place in the article. If you feel that something is not cited which needs to be then raise it here, by all means. You can also flag it in the article itself by inserting a {{cn}} immediately following what ever the point is that you are querying. - Sitush (talk) 23:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

OK thanks for cooperating.From above full links I am inserting some information and also restructuring some paragraph.Bill clinton history (talk) 14:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

You probably should not do that (insert/restructure based on these sources), since there is a discussion going on regarding them & it has been pointed out to you that there are clearly some issues related to your assessment of what constitutes a reliable source. This is not intended as a criticism, nor is it pre-judging those items which you have provided above & which I have not yet looked through. I have no idea if anyone else has or is also looking through them but I suspect that one or two people probably will do. - Sitush (talk) 14:50, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Sir,When i studied about Abhir-Ahir i found every writer using these words for same people in different period in different language.moreover there are other full link also which tells enough connection about them.If you have any full link describe them seprate i will welcome it. i have done some restructuring in article i hope you appreciate it. Bill clinton history (talk) 15:21, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I reverted your changes. You have no consensus, which is what you were asked to obtain by Boing! and regarding which people have subsequently been discussing. You cannot steamroller something, I am afraid. - Sitush (talk) 15:24, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

ok,but i did not delete any information.I arrange some section according their sequence.put some sentences under right section.Bill clinton history (talk) 15:32, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

It was not about deletion but rather addition. Eg: you added a citation for Growse that did not support the statement. Growse does not say that Abir/Abhira originate from Prakrit but rather proposes that they may be from Sanskrit. A minor point, perhaps, but we cannot impose on the source something which it does not say. He also appears probably to have been an amateur scholar in this field and certainly is an old source. - Sitush (talk) 15:48, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Subsection for Sitush review of sources from #4 onwards above

4. F. L. Growse - a civil servant of the late 19th century, Growse has been cited quite a lot but seemingly not much in connection with this particular book. (Memoirs of Mathura appears to be his major work). In the section intended for our source he is studying language development and I note that although he capitalises the proper noun Tirhut/Tirbhukti, he does not capitalise ahir/abhira. He is clearly not referring to the caste name(s) but to an alternative use of the word. There may be a connection, but then again there may not. I am unsure of what qualifications this chap has in the linguistic sphere, but it certainly was not his job. More reviews to follow. - Sitush (talk) 14:59, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

5 - 7: snippet view, and so am discarding for now.

8. I cannot find this book under that title. Is the title correct? Does it have an ISBN? - Sitush (talk) 15:02, 19 July 2011 (UTC) I see that it is an article in a journal. The only Sruti I can find is a campaigning group - www.sruti.org.in. - Sitush (talk) 15:22, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

9. I have not checked the Gazetteer itself because the excerpted quote is clearly ambiguous anyway: "Abhir or Ahir tribe" could reflect the same confusion that we have here regarding whether the two are the same, rather than reflect that the tribe has two possible names. - Sitush (talk) 15:22, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

10 - 15: snippet view, and so am discarding for now. - Sitush (talk) 15:26, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

16. Cannot work out this one at all. The source is quoting either an article or a letter from The Times of India in 1994 but the credentials of the writer of that are uncertain (the acknowledgements say that he is a journalist/correspondent for the newspaper & had personally helped the source author). The author of the source - Maj.-Gen. S D S Yadava - has been discarded in a few articles (I am going from memory) because of doubts about his own reliability and impartiality. PAge xvii indicates that Yadava himself considers the two terms to be interchangeable and it makes for an interesting introduction that might be more generally used in our article if he is deemed to be authoritative. - Sitush (talk) 16:09, 19 July 2011 (UTc)

17. I cannot see this, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 16:12, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

18 & 19. Gyan etc are simply not reliable sources. Far too many problems across a wide range of books, as SpacemanSpiff has said earlier. - Sitush (talk) 16:12, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

20. It is a glossary but appears specific and to be a reliable source. I'll dig into the book itself later. - Sitush (talk) 17:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Sir, Source 17 and 20 very much clear.i dont think you should have problem in stduying them.they are very straight clear in their content.for source 4 i think we should not question the capability of writer without any bases.moreover there are many examples of civil servants valuable contribution in indian history during British period.

I am again requesting you please check the sources very carefully.some may have limitations but many have very clear mention of our topic.Bill clinton history (talk) 17:07, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Please study source 2 and 3 also.earlier reader did not find any objection on them.Bill clinton history (talk) 17:10, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I cannot see 17, so I cannot read it. Someone else may be able to. You are wrong about 2 & 3: they were (rightly) contested. I have said my piece on 4, which includes some basis. I have only just got round to 20 & have added an initial comment above. - Sitush (talk) 17:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

source 17 very clear and authentic like 20. it is very detailed and straight on abhira-ahir topic.if you are studying topic than you should also provide sources.that will make dicussion transparent.right now i am not aware on what bases you are making judgement on the So many writers which have written on this topic.

I am again saying in sujects like history ,sociology different point of views about a topic not a strange thing.all these have their importance in the topic.so very specific conclusion based om comletely proven facts always not necessary in history or sociology or any other humanities subject.

the arguments in favour of Abhira-Ahir as same people are very strong.and till than not a single source provided or arguement mentioned against them .Bill clinton history (talk) 18:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

ABHIRA-AHIR

I am providing some more sources which directly talked about Abhir-Ahir relation.

1.Encyclopaedia of Indian tribes edited by Padma Shri S.S. Shashi ,URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=mcDMGwprQ4oC&pg=PA76&dq=abhira-ahir&hl=en&ei=68UmTpnUD8HQrQfiuoClCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=))

2.People of India: Maharashtra, Volume 1 By Kumar Suresh Singh, B. V. Bhanu, Anthropological Survey of India,URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=OmBjoAFMfjoC&pg=PA58&dq=abhira-ahir&hl=en&ei=YMgmTtSWM4zNrQffyqXJAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CE8Q6AEwCDgK#v=onep))

3.Bengali and other related dialects of south Assam By Sudhāṃśu Śekhara Tuṅga,URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=lRRYBHQvXdsC&pg=PA153&dq=abhira-ahir&hl=en&ei=CcomTpa6L8_NrQft45m5CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAj))

4.Krishna-cult in Indian art By Sunil Kumar Bhattacharya,URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=SyyNIL7Ug2kC&pg=PA126&dq=abhira-ahir&hl=en&ei=CcomTpa6L8_NrQft45m5CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBjg))

5.Exploring India's Sacred Art: Selected Writings By Stella Kramrisch,URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=bxPeWwFz9MkC&pg=PT371&dq=abhira-ahir&hl=en&ei=CssmTt6CHpDirAfHstGJCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CC4Q))

6.Hindu Gods and Heroes edited by L.cranmer-byng and S A Kapadia,1922 URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=_r1buuxthXoC&pg=PA97&dq=abhira-ahir&hl=en&ei=oMsmTu64MobIrQfqrN2aCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDoQ)) 7.Vaisnavism, Saivism and Minor Religious Systems By Sir Ramkrishna Gopal Bhandarkar,URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=C5zKrCIBmBwC&pg=PA53&dq=abhira-ahir&hl=en&ei=O80mTtXoE4TSrQestIDDCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDkQ6AEwBDgy#v=onepage&q&f=false))

8.The History of Sacred Places in India as Reflected in Traditional Literature By International Association of Sanskrit Studies,URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=wPgBdyxD5MkC&pg=PA200&dq=abhira-ahir&hl=en&ei=Fs4mTvCfMYfrrQecwrSNCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CD))

9.Some aspects of ancient Indian culture By Devadatta Ramakrishna Bhandarkar,URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=gUAvuYu-otEC&pg=PA63&dq=abhira-ahir&hl=en&ei=8M4mTof1GoqIrAfk5ZS-CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBjhQ#v=on))

10.The gazetteer of the Central Provinces of India edited by Sir Charles Grant,URL((http://books.google.co.in/books?id=KLo4AQAAIAAJ&pg=PR63&dq=abhira-ahir&hl=en&ei=MdAmTuqpKYbsrAfYwJSfCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBjhu#v=onepa))

These contains some topmost historian of their time and Gazzetteer and other publications of government of the region.Bill clinton history (talk) 13:11, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I am again inviting everyone if he or she have different point of view welcome in this debate with full sources.Bill clinton history (talk) 13:31, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Varna Status

I am creating this new section and putting all references related to Abhira or Ahir in this section as Brahman,Kshtriya,Vaisya and Shudra.I am not deleting any point from Article just putting all under their origional category.I think i have provided enough evidences of relation between Abhira and Ahir.As no one coming against my point of view with sources,i think i should contribute in article.Bill clinton history (talk) 16:17, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to regular editors for appreciating me for my contribution in article.now article seems very balance and neutral in their approach and tone.Thanks to Sitush ,Mathews for healthy discussion.Bill clinton history (talk) 17:35, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

You are rushing things. We all have real lives and we all have other issues to deal with on Wikipedia. This place is timeless & there is no need to rush. - Sitush (talk) 17:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

One thing I would strongly urge: in your search for Ahir-Abhira connexions, ensure that you remain open to, and include, reputable contradictory material too. Note that when I basically re-wrote this article, I checked both "Kurmi Shudra" and "Kurmi Kshatriya" on gBook to ensure I could get both sides of the story. If you ensure that your additions balance "may be a connexion, XYZ states it's a dubious etymological coincidence while ABC wrote a thesis exploring the direct connexion based on.... [footnote]" it will make your section all the stronger and more unassailable. Nothing sends up red flags like leaving out part of the story; that is exactly how I ended up covering Shudra issues; almost not a single article contained the term despite hundreds of mentions of specific Shudra castes by academics. The two sides don't need to be weighted equally, just proportionate to their coverage/support, and arguments with little support don't necessarily need to be included if they're discredited (see WP:FRINGE), but telling "the whole story" based on RSs is the way to go. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

The connection appears probably to have been made by Russell and by Bhandarkar. I cannot see all of this but there is a tantalising possibility of an alternate thesis there - it seems to be distinguishing between the ancient Abhira kingdom and the Ahir tribe. - Sitush (talk) 18:54, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

And this may be useful also, if anyone can see the entire footnote. Honestly, there are not that many people saying outright that Ahir = Abhira. There are a lot of people saying "it is said", "it has been suggested" etc, and then moving on. I've just come across one source that seems to imply that the Abhira formed many castes, not one. It is the old snippet view problem, I am afraid. - Sitush (talk) 19:02, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I have already maintain different opinions in Varna Status.As far as Abhira-Ahir relation concerned,most historian refered them as same tribe.apart from history ,many evidences in the nature of geography,demography,sociology,cultural support them as same trbe.

As I have earlier said in a subject like history different views for a same topic is common.But in this topic you will found very rarely opposite views which also lacks in content because they did not tell us on what bases they found Abhira-Ahir seperate.on the other hand evidences in favour of Abhira-Ahir as same people very strong and accepted by almost all historian of different period.And most important all Census Reports of Government of India and various states reports where these people live mention them as same people.You will hardly found any book which tells History of Abhira-Ahir seperate.and if it is there it is definately a miniority view.

I am always welcome and open to any debate on this topic.and if I found any material which contradict my point,i will also put the link on discussion page.I am supporting this because i found it dominent view. infact i have found more sources of Abhira-Ahir as same people if required i will put them also on discussion page .Bill clinton history (talk) 19:48, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

There is definitely material to contradict you, as I have already shown. This is precisely why the issue has been in abeyance for so long. Seeing the sources is a major problem but I can guarantee you that most of the ones you have selected (excluding Leslie) do not in fact unequivocally say that Ahir = Abhira. This guarantee is based on those that I can see (like the first three you named) and on a general understanding of how difficult it can be for enthusiastic new-ish contributors to "spot the flaw" in a sentence. This is not a criticism of you, far from it. When things get sorted out you will hopefully have picked up some useful tips. For now, what is certain is that the statement that Ahirs are Abhira will not last: there will be two opinions presented, if only because the Prakrit/Sanskrit derivation is guesswork and a lot of authors refuse to commit to it. - Sitush (talk) 20:06, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

The sources provided by you sir,not saying directly that they are different.moreover they did not mention on what bases or evidences they have in support of their view.while in support of Abhir-Ahir as same people,there are long list of historical,cultural,geographical,anthrpological evidences.and origin of word Abhir from abhira is not only guesswork.it is based on linguistic studies of Sanskrit and hindi also with example of many other words.i will provide you more sources on it.Bill clinton history (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Moreover one sources provided by you which question their link based on references of manu and puranas which you himself discarded earlier.and second did not tell about any relation at all.infact it mention Ahir(sanskrit as abhira)kingdom and ahir tribe.which give indication of different political status of same people.Bill clinton history (talk) 20:59, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

We cannot use primary sources. That does not mean we cannot use commentaries on those sources, provided all the other usual criteria apply. Honestly, there is sufficient doubt out there and there is no way that this can be left as a simply "the two groups are the same". Like I said, this is not the first time that the issue has been looked at & it is doubts from previous investigations that caused it to be omitted. However, it may take some time for me to collate the information in sufficient detail to warrant inclusion. It would be great if you could assist with that, as I assisted in verifying at least a couple of your sources. - Sitush (talk) 23:31, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

You are right sir,Issues has been raised earlier also.but due to lack of evidences or Sources on Both side no sepecific conclusion reached.

when I read the whole dicussion page I found no one other than me, who based their views on so many specific and authentic sources.As I have said you earlier , I will cooperate full with you to take this healthy debate on higher level.Bill clinton history (talk) 09:33, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

It isn't a problem. I appreciate that you have gone to a lot of trouble to dig out sources - that can only be a good thing. - Sitush (talk) 09:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I have added direct sentence of maxmuller on abhira-ahirBill clinton history (talk) 12:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Krishna Cult

AHIR OR ABHIRA mainly contribute in poupularising The Lord Krishna Cult from ancient period.so think there should be a section on this topic because it very important attribute of cultural life and identitiy of Abhira.Bill clinton history (talk) 12:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

As noted several times above: there is an article Abhira tribe. For the moment assuming an Abhira-Ahir connexion, there is still no need to put extensive pre-modern info into Ahir, which is about a modern caste. Not everything the Celts did gets copied into Irish people, though the latter are largely indisputable descendants of the former. Until we can dig up some sources to show the controversy, fine, mention an Abhira-Ahir link, but please keep the bulk of ancient facts in the article covering the ancient era, which is Abhira tribe. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:29, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

OK sir,i agree with you.i will not mention any ancient information on this article till you study the abhira-ahir topic deeply.moreover i have reached at conclusion on this topic on bases of my sources recent one of maxmuller which is very directly mentioned abhira as modern ahir.Bill clinton history (talk) 15:07, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I think it is enough time to study the ahir-abhira issue.so some cultural aspects should be metioned in article which ic missing now.Bill clinton history (talk) 02:23, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

It is irrelevant to this article. - Sitush (talk) 19:25, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

More Shudra concerns

THE LINK MENTIONED AS AHIRS BEING SHUDRA ARE BASELESS,AND IF U GUYS THINK THOSE ARE TRUE THAN THEY HAVE MENTIONED OTHER CASTE ALSO LIKE GUJARS,KURMI ...SO WHY JUST LABEL AHIRS WITH THEM... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.189.117.173 (talk) 18:20, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Far from being baseless, the statement has cited sources. Wikipedia articles usually stand alone with regard to the information and sources presented in them. The fact that other articles may or may not agree with this one is of no great significance - see other stuff exists. Sure, in the ideal world all articles are of an equivalent high quality and there are no contradictions between them. Alas, there are too few experienced, neutral contributors working in the field of caste/community articles & the number of such articles is vast: the chances of meeting the ideal are pretty much zero. We just do our best & hope that others come along with a similar capability to sift the wheat from the chaff etc.

Please can you refrain from using ALL CAPITALS in your messages as this is generally considered to be the written equivalent of SHOUTING. - Sitush (talk) 19:24, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Request for source

Can anyone see more than a GBooks snippet view of Haripriya Rangarajan; G. Kamalakar; A. K. V. S. Reddy (1 January 2001). Jainism: art, architecture, literature & philosophy. Sharada Pub. House. ISBN 9788185616773. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) ? - Sitush (talk) 08:02, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Input on renaming [Aheer]] article?

Discussion on its page here: Talk:Aheer#Proper_name_for_this_article.3F MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

very less info in introduction

abhiras or ahirs are present in 10 states of india, around 10 percent of india's whole population. please mention their population state wise. it looks incomplete.Dr JN Yadav (talk) 10:02, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

You would need to provide some reliable sources. - Sitush (talk) 10:15, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Ahir as Martial Race

Ahirs form part of Rajput Regiment also.The Rajput Regimental center is in Fatehgarh, Uttar Pradesh. The regiment nowadays recruits Rajputs, Gujjars, Hindu Bengalis, Ahirs, Muslims, Jats, Mazhabi & Ramdasia Sikhs and Dogras..Likewise, The Kumaon Regiment of Indian Army, which has fought in every major campaign of the British Indian Army and the Indian Army, including the two world wars. Kumaon gets its recruits from Kumaonis of Kumaon division and Ahir from the plains. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahensingha (talk • contribs) 19:26, 4 July 2012 (UTC) mahensingha 19:29, 4 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahensingha (talk • contribs)

James Tod demonstrated that Ahirs were included into the list of 36 royal races of Rajasthan (Tod,1829,Vol1,p69 ii,p358).

James Tod demonstrated that Ahirs were included into the list of 36 royal races of Rajasthan (Tod,1829,Vol1,p69 ii,p358). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.119.104.226 (talk) 05:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

James Tod is not a reliable source.Qwyrxian (talk) 05:57, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Ahirs of bihar

The ahirs of bihar are a virile caste though by profession cowherders and cultivators there is no doubt that at one time they belonged to martial race. Source=Inside bihar by Pranab Chandra Roy chodhury — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shanu006 (talk • contribs) 09:04, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I can't find hardly any info about that book, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was a vanity press publication--every snippet I can find has multiple grammar errors. Without knowing more about both the authors and the publisher, I'm not confident to use that as a source. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

The author of book belongs to the brahminn community of bengal and if he is writing something about ahir caste of bihar then I doubt there is any kind of vanity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shanu006 (talk • contribs) 09:32, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

The author's caste is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether the author is a credible source--whether he has knowledge and expertise of the subject matter--and whether or not the publishers are known to have a history of high quality editorial fact-checking. That's how we determine whether or not something is a WP:RS. Since high quality editors rarely allow such poor quality prose as I can see in that book, I doubt that it meets WP:RS, however, if you know more about them, then we could look further. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:42, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Firstly I would like to mention the amount of work he has produced about bihar 1.Inside Bihar 2.Folklore of Bihar 3.Bihar 4.Bihar District Gazetteers 5.Jainism in Bihar 6.Folk Tales of Bihar 7.Gaya old Records 8.Bihar district Gazetteers:Patna 9.Bihar district Gazetteers:Hazaribagh In these books he has covered so many aspects of bihari society.Some of the aspects I can mention would be how a village economy runs in rural bihar etc.Details he has produced in some of the books I have gone through reflects that he has spent remarkable amount of time in bihari society and has definitely resided in different parts of bihar. If he is remarking something about a particular community of bihar then his work should be given due respect.And the thing I am trying to introduce in this article is nothing to do with history.It is just a mere observation from a person who has undoubtedly spend his time residing in bihar and interacting with bihari people. One more thing i would like to add Iisthat there is around 13% or more strong population of ahir in bihar but they are not duely represented in the article.So I would request u to do some work for highlighting the bihari ahir community in the article.I personaly feel that the article is incomplete without mentioning of ahir of bihar.Thank you.Shanu006 (talk) 10:50, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Just because he's written lots of books, that doesn't make him at all reliable. And you're basically saying that we should believe he's reliable because you've read his books and think he is. And I don't know why you're trying to say that this "is nothing to do with history"--you specifically said you want to add information about the historical status of the Ahirs of Bihar. So, again, we need more information about both the author and the publisher--who is he? Does he have some sort of degree or academic appointment? Is he a recognized expert in the field? Have other writers used him as a source in their books? Is the publisher known for fact-checking? etc. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:02, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Now i m mentioning the name of some of the books where his works are regarded as source 1.A comprehensive bibliography of mahatma gandhi by Ananda M Pindari:In this book his work "Gandhi The man" is mentioned and Pranab chandra mohan roy is described as "eminent and prolific writer".2.The "pala-sena" schools of scriptures by Susan L Huntington:this book has cited his work"Bihar district gazetteers:patna" as source.3.Bihar by Pranav chandra roy choudury is published under govt. of India.So i think there should be no doubt about his reliability and qualifications.Thank you.Shanu006 (talk) 19:42, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm confused here. The article already refers to their martial race status and it notes that some people think they may have been among groups who conquered areas in the distant past. What does your source - reliable or otherwise - add to this? - Sitush (talk) 20:04, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Shanu, can you give us a full citation of the book(s) you're talking about? We need to see author/title/publisher/location/date/ISBN (if available). Not saying it'll be a clinching decision, but it'll help us identify exactly what book you're referring to by this author. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:24, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

In india ahirs are popularly known to reside in the indian state of Bihar and UP where they are numerically and politically most strong(compared to all ahirs residing in other states) but there is little to no mention about this community in the wiki article which is certainly not reflecting the true picture of this community.So I want to add a section heading 'ahirs of bihar' providing necessary information about them through reliable and qualified sources. Now I m going to provide details about some of the books1.Bihar by pranab chandra roy choudhury.Publisher-Publication division, ministry of information and broadcasting, govt. of india.(first edition 1975).2.INSIDE BIHAR by pranab chandra roy chodhury pub-Bookland Private.First edition (1962) 3.A comprehensive , annotated bibliography on mahatma gandhi by Ananda M Pandiri.Pub-Greenwood Publishing Group 1995. 4.The "Paala-Sena" schools of scriptures by Susan L Huntington. Pub-Bill Archieve (1984). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shanu006 (talk • contribs) 12:42, 14 July 2013 (UTC) Shanu006 (talk) 13:29, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=mRlAAAAAMAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=ahirs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.119.104.226 (talk) 02:39, 17 October 2013 (UTC) 115.119.104.226 (talk) 02:41, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Ragas

An IP keeps reinstating this. There is no certainty that these ragas are or ever have been performed by the Ahirs, nor even that the language from which they sprung is related to the Ahirs. The stuff is irrelevant unless some sort of connection can be made and it is not neutral even if a connection is made (ie: we'd need to rephrase it due to the uncertainty). To add to the mess, it looks like any connection would involve linking through the Abhira community and, of course, our article already notes that connection is uncertain. - Sitush (talk) 02:16, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

The People of India

I think we've been here before but I'll try to explain again. The People of India was produced in two series. The first is often called the "national" series and was published by Oxford University Press. The second was the "states" series, published by various outfits and in many instances completed only after the death of the general editor, Kumar Suresh Singh.

I've never seen anyone criticise the national series. However, it is well-known that the states series is a poor production, based primarily on political needs rather than anthropology and reliant mostly upon poor British Raj sources, which it only occasionally and vaguely acknowledges. Whole chunks of those Raj sources appear in the states series with no attribution whatsoever, and often without even a change in tense that would acknowledge that things might have changed in the intervening century or so. We really, really cannot rely on that series for anything that is either undated or is not explicitly marked as being post-Raj. This article relies quite heavily on that series and it simply will not do. - Sitush (talk) 01:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Repeated reinstatement of puffery

This is being repeatedly reinstated. The People of India is not a reliable source, we try to avoid citations in the lead section (see WP:LEAD) and we should also try to avoid puffery there. - Sitush (talk) 01:43, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

---You dont provide any evidence which negates its credibility.Its a very credible source.The argument above is completely subjective.No evidence provided to support your premise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indiansociology (talk • contribs) 03:47, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

PoI was produced in two series. The first, so-called "national" series was published by Oxford University Press and is generally considered to be reliable. The second, so-called "states" series was published by various companies, many volumes appeared after the death of the project leader (Kumar Suresh Singh), was politically-motivated and relied extensively on century-old Raj ethnographies, often using them without attribution or with a very poor style of attribution. Huge chunks were actually plagiarsed from those old works. Some of these issues are discussed in the linked article above. - Sitush (talk) 12:07, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Raj sources

Sources written by administrators of the British Raj and the earlier East India Company administrators are not considered to be reliable. This is not some autocratic decision but rather a consensus that has formed across a multitude of articles relating to Indian castes, history etc and it covers such things as the census and the gazetteers, not just the ethnographic studies. - Sitush (talk) 16:22, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Removal of Kajri & Birha from Folk-lore

Kajri and Birha have nothing to do with Ahir caste. here Lorik is mentioned only due to his being from Ahir caste. Lorik, was an AHir hero who is immortalized in folk songs sung from generations. So its only Lorki that has anything to do with ahir. Birha and Kajri are nothing but bhojpuri folk song and nothing specific pertaining to Ahirs. Please don't insert unnecessary items. Kajari is a type of song sung in the Bhojpuri region that is associated with the monsoon season. Birha is Just bhojpuri folk song Please don't reinstate these unnecessary things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lalji8331 (talk • contribs) 13:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Kajri and Birha had been reinstated without giving any proper reason. The source gives no information about these form of music with ahir caste. Hence, i an deleting it. Please provide proper explanation before adding useless things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lalji8331 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

The folklore section is a recent addition and is, in my opinion, both misplaced and poorly written. That said, this source (which is cited, although with the wrong page number) does mention the Ahir. Perhaps there is something that we can do to improve the section, which should really part of a "Culture" section and definitely should not have "Ahir" in the heading. - Sitush (talk) 16:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

The section folklore is meant to depict the folk lore based on AHir. Lorik is one such. But Kajri and birha are folk song and it is not particular to Ahir. Kajri is sung during monsoon and birha has a variety of topics. They can be placed in Culture. The folk lore of Lorik ahir is the only thing that has direct relation to Ahir caste. It is sung by every person in the north in praise of an Ahir hero Lorik. So Lorik is a folk lore relating to Ahir in Particular and Kajri and birha should go in culture section. If Raj sources are not reliable I will find some other sources. But, personally i feel Raj sources are unbiased and later writers are biased and with caste prejudice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lalji8331 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 23 April 2014 (UTC) Lalji8331 (talk) 17:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea what purpose the section was intended to serve: it is both unusual to see in caste articles and poorly written. I'm not sure how you can limit its purpose, though. Folklore that relates to the Ahirs in any form - as subjects or as consumers/tellers - seems possibly to be valid material in this article. So, why do you wish to limit it? - Sitush (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Sitush, i am sure, you may be unaware of "Lorki". Lorki is a form of folk song which is sung in the praise of an Ahir hero Lorik. So Lorki has relevance with Ahir in Folklores. It simply means folklore pertaining to Ahir. Lorki is not general but exclusive for the Ahir community. Lorki singers can be of varied castes. Many brahmin signers are known to be expert in this folk song, but the story revolves only around the central figure Lorik, a member of AHir community. In mirzapur there is an ancient stone "Veer Lorik Pather" which has been converted as tourist attraction by the state govt. So, I hope it is clear with you what is the significance and importance of lorik to the ahir community. Mulla Daud's CHANDAYAN: is the First Work of Hindi Literature. It even predates composition of Ramayan. On internet you will find copies of ancient Chandayan and i hope you wont need a link for that. Your knowledge about Ahir community is weak. Now, lets come to Kajri and Birha. Both, are general form of folk music having no attachment to any caste in particular. Kajri is a song which is sung to welcome the monsoon season. It's true that most birha singers are Ahir. And its the end of all and any relation of ahir's with birha and Kajri. If you are so keen on retaining these stuff change its location. It is confusing to have lorki and other form of bhojpuri folk song at single place. Please answer me will you place Lorki under the brahmin community, when many Lorki singers are brahmin? So, be clear with your intentions of placing these items just under Lorki.--Lalji8331 (talk) 11:15, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Your argument that this section is poorly written is valid. I am working on adding more information to this section. Even you can contribute with good intent. But, the hitch is, whenever i make any addition to that section you reinstate to older version. Even stuff with latest reference from renowned and unbiased writers are reverted. So, what is the use of any edit from my side. I am just fed up and was planning to give-up, but now i will fight for my case and make this page more informative with relevant stuff. I have my grievances with you that you have time and again either deleted my edits or reverted to older version.--Lalji8331 (talk) 11:26, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I'd prefer just to delete the section entirely because it is obviously confusing and has only just been added to an article that otherwise has been pretty stable for ages. That said, if it is to remain then we have to say what reliable sources say and, as my link above seems to indicate, reliable sources mention this stuff in connection with the Ahir. Unless, of course, the source is using "ahir" in the more generic sense for any one of any number of herding communities. - Sitush (talk) 11:28, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

This was my last revert. You had added something based on an unreliable source (Ibbetson), removed some content that we are presently discussing (Birha etc), added a smidgeon of unsourced material and a narrative of the story that would be better placed in our article about Lorki. What's to like? - Sitush (talk) 11:35, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Stability of article is not what we are looking for. We want this article to be free from biases and more informative. So, it should expand with more information. I am not asking you to delete, just shift Kajri and Birha to Culture section and let this section be only for Lorik. If you read the book Chandyan you may get a glimpse about Ahir's. Even in the 13th century Ahir's were been looked upon as to being brave and courageous. And you are stuck to a particular belief that all castes other than the Savarna are useless. In this drama Mrchchhakatika (The Toy Cart), King Sudraka has mentioned AHirs in a very positive light and as King. What is your prejudice with Ahir caste is unfathomable. Its authors of recent ages who take pride in demeaning some caste groups. Don't be so rigid, come out of your biases.--Lalji8331 (talk) 17:08, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

You are skating on thin ice, Lalji8331. I'm not biassed, I'm referring to reliable sources and I do not claim to represent the Ahir community (you will see no "we" from me, unless referring to the Wikipedia community). You have said a lot above but, aside from your misrepresentation that I corrected in the link to the cited source, you haven't actually provided anything other than original research and your use of phrases such as "brave and courageous" absolutely smacks of someone who is not here to improve the Wikipedia project but rather to promote a particular image.

I did not add the section that we are discussing and I have some grave doubts about it existing at all. However, I'm willing to see the information somewhere in the article if we can improve upon it, both in terms of sourcing and also phrasing: it needs to be "tighter", giving the reader more of a sense of purpose. If the thing must be retained then it should all be a part of a culture section. There is no need to split Lorik from the rest because all such matters are folklore and should be dealt with in one place. To make a special place for Lorik is to create an imbalance, to assign a particular weight to the one tale that seems not to be justified. Unless, of course, you can provide evidence to the contrary.

I think that part of the issue here is actually one of inexperience: we were all new to Wikipedia once and it often helps to scoot around a bit in order to gain experience rather than limit oneself to a very narrow set of articles. Alas, I'm not particularly good at dealing with these situations because I've had my fingers burned so often by sockpuppets etc. I admit my faults but I do my best. - Sitush (talk) 23:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

See, Sitush i have many grudges with you. There is lot of conflicts in our view. When you write history of Suryavansh, you will make special reference to Lord Rama. When speaking about rajputs you will mention PrithviRaj Chauhan. So, what is the harm in mentioning Lorik. Ahirs believe and also 13th century writer Mulla Daud had written about his bravery and there are many memorials in UP for Lorik Veer. Its only that he is not famous like other heroes. And the reason being that high caste authors of modern and ancient period took a rigid stand towards others and tried to suppress history and facts. Read Chandayan, its a masterpiece of hindi Literature. I don't wish to fight with you, but you rigidity annoys me. What is the harm, if Lorik is given some weightage, he is a hero for Ahirs. And original book is the best source from interpretation of authors, who is most cases are from high castes, with intention to demean others. --Lalji8331 (talk) 08:15, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Removal of the section:- Distribution: Bundelkhand (Uttar Pradesh)

I think, we cant ignore presence of Ahirs in Bundelkhand (Uttar Pradesh)where second largest population of the caste reside. I put forward the following links, Kindly suggest if they are reliable then allow me to add something....

Page-30-32

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=fghQhiowlycC&pg=PA32&dq=Ahir+bundelkhand&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NPboU_zwN9i58gXG4YGIDQ&ved=0CB0QuwUwAA#v=onepage&q=Ahir%20bundelkhand&f=false

Page-141

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=PPXMdM0FShUC&pg=PA141&dq=Ahir+bundelkhand&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NPboU_zwN9i58gXG4YGIDQ&ved=0CDQQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Ahir%20bundelkhand&f=false

Page-91-94

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=DLQeSBLpUwsC&pg=PA91&dq=Ahir+bundelkhand&hl=en&sa=X&ei=jvboU7zEBNHc8AWvvYLoBQ&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=Ahir%20bundelkhand&f=false  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahensingha (talk • contribs) 18:32, 11 August 2014 (UTC)  Mahensingha 17:15, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I removed it because not a word was in the source that was provided. It was effectively a fake reference. I'll go through your sources above now. - Sitush (talk) 17:16, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, all of those sources are known to me and all of them are reliable as far as I am concerned. Thanks and, well, edit away! - Sitush (talk) 17:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Again you removed the contents added by me.See I asked you to verify the sources before editing the page. I specifically mentioned the page numbers for availability of contents and edited when you permitted me. Never mind, certainly you thought something better as i trust on your name and efforts made by you on wiki. So, Thanx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahensingha (talk • contribs) 19:47, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Removal of Categories

It is really surprising to any one and far beyond the reality that Ahir is not a caste category of Uttar Pradesh. Please refer the links-

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=54gyRnhIugkC&pg=PA368&dq=ahir+uttar+pradesh&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tRxhVJihHITluQSN8ILYBA&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=ahir%20uttar%20pradesh&f=false

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=npFaVIPMvzMC&pg=PA70&dq=ahir+uttar+pradesh&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tRxhVJihHITluQSN8ILYBA&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=ahir%20uttar%20pradesh&f=false

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=pviHAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA62&dq=ahir+uttar+pradesh&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tRxhVJihHITluQSN8ILYBA&ved=0CDEQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=ahir%20uttar%20pradesh&f=false

and many more...if needed. The largest population of the caste live in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar and this is the only fact. I request the respcted editor to please restore the category pertaining to Uttar Pradesh. Thanks. --Mahensingha 20:30, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

I think you need to look at Category:Ahir and the information at WP:Overcategorisation. No-one is saying that the community is not found in Uttar Pradesh but, to put it in very simplistic terms, we just don't mention it twice. - Sitush (talk) 01:17, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 September 2015

change

{{cite book|author1=Haripriya Rangarajan|author2=G. Kamalakar|author3=A. K. V. S. Reddy|author2=K. Venkatachalam|title=Jainism: art, architecture, literature & philosophy|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=voLXAAAAMAAJ|accessdate=2011-06-14|date=1 January 2001|publisher=Sharada Pub. House|isbn=978-81-85616-77-3}}

to

{{cite book|author1=Haripriya Rangarajan|author2=G. Kamalakar|author3=A. K. V. S. Reddy|author4=K. Venkatachalam|title=Jainism: art, architecture, literature & philosophy|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=voLXAAAAMAAJ|accessdate=2011-06-14|date=1 January 2001|publisher=Sharada Pub. House|isbn=978-81-85616-77-3}}

this will fix the duplicate |author2= error 98.230.192.179 (talk) 23:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Done Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 00:23, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Ahir related stuff

I think I have said before that it comes across that you really are pushing a POV on Ahir-related articles, which appear to be a major interest of yours. You need to familiarise yourself with past discussions and - yet again - it really would be useful if you avoided using the ProveIt tool and/or amended its output to match the format of existing citations as per WP:CITEVAR. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 19:12, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

@Sitush See, there is nothing like pushing a POV, because what ever I edit, it is straight what the sources suggest. As far as my interest is concerned, yes, I daily edit wikipedia and many articles on it, certainly it is my interest and I really enjoy editing but please don't look on my interest so narrowly limited to a single article. As far as the particular Ahir article is concerned I rarely added anything new in recent past. I know well it is a burning article so I take due care for it and even I avoid it. Yes, today I edited it because I saw that you removed a well sourced information. I requested you to consider it for the reason I admitted in my edit summary. Further regarding removal of subdivisions of Ahirs, please have a look even the main series "People of India" by K.S. Singh too have the same contents(People of India, Volume 38, Part 1, page-44). All other sources too give the similar classification. Yet, now I leave it upon your decision. Lastly, abiding by your suggestions, I disabled Proveit much before. I don't use it. I really don't know what did you observe because, I think I have not sourced anything here on this said article. Yes, I use the citation tool given in the editor itself and if this also creates the problem then please let me know. I also request you to suggest the better citation tool/technique. Thanks.--MahenSingha (Talk) 19:35, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I know that you mean well and that you contribute a lot - no problem there. As far as citation tools go, well, they're handy but the output of pretty much all of them needs to be tweaked to suit which ever citation style the article actually uses. For example, if the article is using last name then first name for the author (as all decent articles should) then that is how new citations should be presented also.

The specific removal I made at the Ahir article is because the thing already has the overview of various opinions and adding more of what is - essentially - the same is just bloating the article for no particular gain. More, we tend to prefer newer sources to older ones because of the assumption that newer sources should themselves be aware of what the older ones said and will have accepted or rejected those sources accordingly. The exception regarding use of old sources would be if we were discussing the sources themselves as, for example, has happened in articles about the various Raj ethnographical books.

The People of India "states" series edited by Kumar Suresh Singh has been discussed several times, including at WP:RSN. It is not generally considered to be reliable, and certainly not for matters of caste histories etc. The "national" series, edited by Singh and published by the Oxford University Press, is ok. - Sitush (talk) 19:53, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I have no idea why you moved the above material to this talk page from your own. The issues I raised were primarily related to behavioural matters, not the content of this article. However, I got an edit conflict with your removal at your talk page and so have replied above. - Sitush (talk) 19:53, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions and help. Regarding The People of India, "National" or main series, I too gave reference of the same i.e. (People of India, Volume 38, Part 1, page-44). Regards.--MahenSingha (Talk) 20:03, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Volume 38 is a part of the "states" series. All of the volumes not published by Oxford are - and they're also the ones that each mention a state in the title. Quite often, we let them through but not when they're referring to history, linguistics etc because those elements have been shown time and again to have been plagiarised from Raj sources. - Sitush (talk) 03:45, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ahir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071024172609/http://maharashtra.gov.in:80/english/gazetteer/JALGAON/his_early.html to http://www.maharashtra.gov.in/english/gazetteer/JALGAON/his_early.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:11, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2016

Just because some people protested the whole community doesn't become a militant group. Mr. Sitush should stop doing vandalism. And just citing one book written by a person with a clearly ideological bias doesn't make accusations as truth! My edit on this line was a proper one. TheTissot11 (talk) 12:57, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

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. Cannolis (talk) 13:16, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

There is whole lot of information one could put about the various Yadav politicians in this category. But this would require some efforts from volunteers. This book is about the politics of the urban poor and Yadavs live mostly in villages. No one has read this book and it is cited as a reference to describe whole community as a militant group. If you want to retain the current information then I would request that you remove the words "the Hindu militant group" and instead write that Yadavs have been involved in politics in the last century and occasionally have been accused to incite the communal tension. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheTissot11 (talk • contribs) 09:44, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

TheTissot11 (talk) 09:16, 5 June 2016 (UTC) Despite my request nothing has been done till now to edit the entry. Some of the people including Sitush and Cannolish have political agenda and are adamant on destroying the quality of Wikipedia articles. No one has read this book and yet they are claiming that Ahir is a militant group. They took part a procession and they became militants. Shame on these lofty standards these people here are resorting to.

I didn't write that section but I have just expanded it. Most Ahirs were a part of the "urban poor" back in the 1920s. I suspect they still are because the "urban poor" still form the vast majority of the population of India - it is still very much a peasant economy, although expanding rapidly from its low socio-economic base. - Sitush (talk) 05:15, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Bharwads are part of ahir

Bharwad community were once ahirs only...but due to diversity they sepreated into two groups resembling in all aspects including culture, rituals, traditions, wardrobe, etc. They are part of ahirs and are nandvanshi ahirs Keval mer (talk) 09:14, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

How many more time must I ask people here to consider WP:V? - Sitush (talk) 12:30, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Ahirs as Yadavas, Abhiras etc

The history of the Ahirs and their potential relationship to ancient tribes such as the Yadava and Abhira is contentious. Consensus has long been to treat them as separate entities on Wikipedia but to mention the potential connections within the separate articles. It is extremely difficult to portray such intricate arguments in the lead section of articles and for that reason, as with mentioning varna, we prefer generally to deal with them in the body instead. This article's lead does mention the potential synonymity in the lead and, probably, that is as far as we should go there. Certainly, it needs discussion before inclusion there, per WP:BRD. - Sitush (talk) 05:11, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and I have just remembered another old problem with this issue. It was people who found something linking Ahir with Yadava and something linking Yadava with Abhira, then saying Ahir = Abhira. We cannot do that on Wikipedia. - Sitush (talk) 05:17, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

On this occasion, the edit I am referring to is here. - Sitush (talk) 05:35, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

And the inserter has claimed that the first citation in that change "clearly" says that the Ahirs and Gavils are the Abhiras/Yadavas. It actually says no such thing: it is a passing mention about the modern communities, who are otherwise undiscussed, and simply passes on a claim without comment, ie: P. M. Chandorkar, using both literary and epigraphic sources has argued that the modern Ahirs and Gavlis - until recently cattle-keepers - should be identified with the Yadavas and Abhiras of the classical Sanskrit texts. That is Chandorkar's opinion. It may be a valid one to mention in the article but it does not necessarily trump all other opinions. - Sitush (talk) 06:11, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

I see that you have [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ahir&type=revision&diff=792766636&oldid=792713321 reinstated the edit outside of the lead section, which is good. However, it should not be in the Etymology section but rather in the section that follows, where we cite people such as S. D. S. Yadava and try to explain how difficult it is to make a definite pronouncement on the matter. That Chadorkar does makes a definite pronouncement is a little worrying, and I have no idea why the other two sources are in that edit.

We can mention Chandorkar's opinion but it has to be tempered with the uncertainty expressed more generally about these ancient origins. That is due weight. - Sitush (talk) 15:31, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Sitush, made changes as per your suggestions.

Sitush I have made edits per your suggestions. But University of Cambridge book as well as Book by MSA Rao mention that historical evidence exists for ahirs being the ancient yadavas and Padmaja a research scholar as well state the same thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chanakaur (talk • contribs) 05:20, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Ahir is only belong to HINDU kindly make that change that this cast is not belong to islam or any else

Thank you Dev Ahir25 (talk) 11:30, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

@Dev Ahir25:, Anybody can make changes to the wikipedia content and you can do it so, provided the sources are reliable.. --Adamstraw99 (talk) 11:37, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

The advice is correct. However, I would dispute the reliability of any source that says Ahirs are 100% Hindu. At least nowadays, with our rather more liberalised and interconnected society, it would be extremely difficult for anyone to state with certainty that every single member of a community followed one belief system. Short of a census, I don't see how it could be done. - Sitush (talk) 12:32, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Dubious source

This is an odd source, written by someone I've never heard of, published by someone I've never heard of and seemingly taken from a snippet view on Google Books, given the poor citation. Is it reliable? Is it commonly held that the Chudasama dynasty was an Ahir dynasty? Can anyone see more of the source, bearing in mind that snippet views are deprecated because they provide little context? - Sitush (talk) 09:16, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

I note that the most definitely reliable sources mentioned at Chudasama_dynasty#Titles cast some doubt on the claim. We cannot state as a certainty something which is uncertain and/or something which is not entirely accurate (ie: at best, it was an alliance with Rajputs, not solely Ahir). - Sitush (talk) 09:18, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Not sure how you call S. Swayam has a dubious. The publisher JOHN AND ERICA HEDGES LIMITED is based out of Oxford

I am providing the publication by Journal of the Indian Anthropological Society, Volume 35 which states the same thing about the Ahir Ranas of Junagarh I am sure you are ok with the Indian Anthropological Society - https://books.google.com/books?id=i02BAAAAMAAJ&dq=ahir+rana+kings&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=ahir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiliwun (talk • contribs) 16:51, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Recent additions

• HinduKshatrana, with this edit, you added that the Yaduvanshi Ahir also spelled Jadubansis, Jadubans, Yadavanshi, Yadavamshi) claim descent from the ancient Yadava tribe of Krishna. And you cited page no. 52 of this source for it. But that page doesn't support the content added by you. BTW, generally speaking, you should keep WP:SYN in mind while editing, i.e. you should not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. - NitinMlk (talk) 22:13, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

• Ahir#Subdivisions mentions that traditionally Ahirs are divided into subdivisions such as Yaduvanshi, Nandvanshi and Gwal (Gwalvanshi). But the cited source mentions this regarding Yadavs, not Ahirs. So I guess this detail belongs to Yadav page rather than here. BTW, here is the relevant quote:

At the core of the Yadav community lies a specific folk theory of descent, according to which all Indian pastoral castes are said to descend from the Yadu dynasty (hence the label Yadav) to which Krishna (a cowherder, and supposedly a Kshatriya) belonged. Thus, although the Yadavs are divided into different subdivisions (Yaduvanshi, Goallavanshi, Nandavanshi, etc.), there is nonetheless a strong belief amongst them that all Yadavs belong to Krishna's line of descent, the Yadav subdivisions of today being the outcome of the fission of an original and undifferentiated group.

- NitinMlk (talk) 22:13, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Grammatical error

Can somebody edit 'a' to 'an' ethnic group in introduction of the article. Anjali125 (talk) 11:11, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done --Ashok Talk 16:10, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Title decription

Can somebody please change title description which says Ahirs are of dravidian decent because there is no proof backing this claim, it would be really helpful if some one just keep title description to indian ethnic group until their is some concession on their ancestry because I don't think there is a single Ahir who even speaks a dravidian language. Anjali125 (talk) 11:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Agree with you. There are other resources that claims their Aryan(Indo-Aryan) descent.— Preceding unsigned comment added by HinduKshatrana (talk • contribs)

Yeah so can you tell me who will change the title description because no one is doing it right now. Anjali125 (talk) 15:52, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

I think Mr.Ashok Chakra might help with that... -HinduKshatrana (talk) 16:19, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@HinduKshatrana and Anjali125: I found something related to this topic, hope it will help you. here. --Ashok Talk 15:49, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Here is the quote:

Some authorities are, however, of the view that the Abhiras were a dynamic nomads from Central or Eastern Central Asia who swarmed into India through Punjab around the same time as the Sakas, the Parthians and the Kushans, in the first or second century B.C. There others who believe that the Ahirs are of Dravidian origin and were well established in the country before the Aryan invasion. This view coincides with the belief of some, that Lord Krishna himself was from the Dravidian race because of his darker complexion. Some authorities have expressed a view that the "Mahabharata was composed around the sixth century B.C.

--Ashok Talk 16:12, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi AshokChakraji, I do know Wikipedia works on references(written by someone with their own mindset of observation) and not on what's happening in reality (most of the times). But Indian subcontinent consisted of all the races:Aryan, Dravidian, Mongolians"The North-East People", Jatt, Huns, Scythians, etc. And before Kalyuga, everyone used to intermarry because 95% of the Castes didn't existed in that time. And the few ones were not castes but Titles. And us Aryans are usually found in the range of very fair colour(Haryanvi, Rajasthani, Gujarati,etc) to very dark in colour(Maharashtrian, Jharkhandi, Bihari, etc). And North Aryan Yadavas did married with Southern Dravidians to establish kingdoms.(Eg:- Yaduveera Krishnadatta Chhamraja) Which means that Yadavas or Abhiras or Ahirs are present in both Aryan and Dravidian races. Aryan Ahirs ruled Ahirwal part of Haryana, Abhisar, Ahirwada and few kingdoms in North and Dravidian Yadavas ruled Mysore, Devgiri, etc in middle/southern part. So they actually does not contain or be a part of one race but two. The Aryans and The Dravidians. This is just what's happening with our Indians right now. Most of people are interested in degrading others instead of supporting them. But yeah, Wikipedia is not a place for that. But at least I would request to include them in both categories:- Aryans and Dravidians. And yes if you need help with references then I do have their Aryan descent resources with me. Don't know about others but yes the Northern Ahir tribe does belong to Aryan race. I think we can try to do something about this ahead. Here's a source which does states them as Arya(Sanskrit) or Aryan(English) :- https://books.google.co.in/books?id=N2K7AAAAIAAJ&dq=%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%B9%E0%A5%80%E0%A4%B0+%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%A7%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF+%E0%A4%AA%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%A6%E0%A5%87%E0%A4%B6&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%B9%E0%A5%80%E0%A4%B0++%E0%A4%86%E0%A4%B0%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AF

-HinduKshatrana (talk) 16:28, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Sir, that's what I was saying that there is no consensus on whether they are Indo-Aryan or Dravidian so description should be only kept to An Indian community until there is further consensus, and saying that Krishna was Dravidian because he was dark is totally absurd because he was manifestation of supreme being himself and his other avatar Rama was also having dark complexion so by that logic he was also a dravidian God, and people around Krishna were always described fair, his all relatives and family members are always described fair,and if you want to see source of there Indo-Aryan descent than i can provide you that also https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_R1a_frequency_by_population You can see Ahirs have one of highest concentration of R1A1 Gene in them at around 63% in world, and you can't go by the view of a single person when other sources are totally contradicting it. Anjali125 (talk) 05:18, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Ashok Chakra please do take a look at above resources. Thanks. -HinduKshatrana (talk) 10:09, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Still I am saying that describe them as an Indian community, until people reach on some consensus. Anjali125 (talk) 09:43, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

@Anjali125 and HinduKshatrana: I have no expertise in the history of Ahirs. Please ask other users, they may help you. --Ashok Talk 14:34, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Merge proposal

For some reason, there are a number of articles that duplicate content in this article. I propose that Yaduvanshi Ahir, Yaduvanshi Ahirs, and Ahir clans be merged into this article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:25, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

I have just redirected Yaduvanshi Ahir to this article. If you look at Talk:Yaduvanshi Ahirs it will be seen that this mess has been discussed since at least 2011. - Sitush (talk) 16:18, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Myth of origin

I have just removed a statement about an alleged myth of origin relating to Krishna. I am not saying that the myth does not exist but rather that, based on limited reading of the issue, it may have given undue weight to one myth by ignoring others. I will ensure that something is put back after doing a little digging around the subject. Please note, though, that the Krishna theory & any similar ones relating to deities are indeed myths - there is zero chance of us describing them in the same tone as scholarly theories. - Sitush (talk) 06:18, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Danielou

A section on cuture/tradition has just been added. It includes a bit copy/pasted from the cited Danielou source that in any case seems completely meaningless to me. I am also curious as to why the contributor chose to add that gibberish about dark-skinned heroes but omit what Danielou says later on the same page, ie: "although these peoples are not warriors ...". Cherry-picking or what? - Sitush (talk) 09:11, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

ok i will make changes to address your questions ? Vedanti sen (talk) 00:44, 30 May 2020 (UTC)Vedanti sen

Article picture

This pic is so ridiculous , seems personal hatred to ahir , a single man's pic can't define whole aheer community. Please remove that pic. Thanks इतिहास विश्लेषण (talk) 12:58, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

File:AhirDancersDiwaliCostume.jpg

File:AhirDecoratedWithCowriesDiwali.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.62.152.252 (talk) 06:35, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 September 2020

Please ad this to military section. the current pics does not justify the group in a proper manner. This is a pic of Ahir warriars dressed for diwali in cowries. please add dear sir. File:AhirDecoratedWithCowriesDiwali.jpg Falafalrotla (talk) 16:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done, added under "Culture" section instead, as the image doesn't specify if they're warriors or not. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:34, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Ahir of Gujarat.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:56, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Removal of sourced content

Warned the editor and restored the section [1] which was removed. Heba Aisha (talk) 19:28, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 February 2021

Infomaniac456 (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC) 1) Also add Image of Rao Tula Ram an Ahir lord of Rewari state of Haryana India here is the reference link:-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rao_Tula_Ram

 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. Chariotrider555 (talk) 20:21, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

This Change will result in to a more accurate information about subject of this article rather than manipulated and propaganda based ideologies.... Infomaniac456 (talk) 20:25, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

"Add Image of Tula Ram Rao" Here is the link which supports this addition... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rao_Tula_Ram Infomaniac456 (talk) 20:30, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Need more sources for Yadu , lets discuss where this could be included

For now I have removed these. Need concensus from other editors

Ahirs are said to be descendants of Yadu's second son Satjit and are believed to be descendants of the moon, belonging to the Yadu family. The Yaduvanshi Kshatriyas were originally Ahirs.

References

Yes According to Bhagwat puran's 9th part and 18th chapters Yadavs and Abhiras or Ahirs are descendents of king Yadu. Infomaniac456 (talk) 21:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

change the picture

the picture depicting ahirs is not right. please remove this pic and use the pic of ahir rulers and king like lorik dev, rao balbir singh yadav etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by History1nerd (talk • contribs) 15:38, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

It's not real image Brahma our narayan ki Santan Yaduvanshi bharat yadav (talk) 19:31, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Change the image Brahma our narayan ki Santan Yaduvanshi bharat yadav (talk) 19:32, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

The picture depicting ahirs is incorrect in relation to the article.Change it with the picture of rulers of Ahir community like Rao Tula Ram(an Ahir king, who ruled the ahirwal region of present day Haryana Yuvisexi (talk) 03:29, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 June 2021

image depicting the Ahir community is incorrect totally ,this single picture cannot depict the Ahir community. Picture depicting Ahir community should necessarily removed or edited . Yuvisexi (talk) 03:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Image depicting Ahir community is totally incorrect and mis guiding .it should necessarily be removed or changed Yuvisexi (talk) 03:56, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

 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) 10:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Ahir and yadav is not a same ahir adopted yadav surname

Real yadav( yaduvanshi )is jadeja bhati chudasama sarvaya. Ahir not contented with yadav. Ahir is a sudra caste. Ahir not contented with the kshatriya. Jay mataji 74336 (talk) 16:30, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 July 2021

{{subst:trim|1=

The traditional occupations of Ahirs are cattle-herding and agriculture. They are found throughout India but are particularly concentrated in the northern area. Apart from India, Ahirs have significant population in Nepal, Mauritius, Fiji, South Africa and the Caribbean especially Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago, and Suriname. In Mauritius and Caribbean they are mostly the descendants of settlers who arrived between the 19th and 20th centuries from the former pre-partitioned sub-continent of India during the time of the British Raj. Current Prime Minister of Mauritius Pravind Kumar Jugnauth is an Ahir. His Father Aneerood Jugnauth was former Prime Minister of Mauritius. Ahirs in India are known by numerous other names, including Gauli and Ghosi or Gop in the north. Clrsitusinsall (talk) 17:17, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

References

The person in photo of Ahir page do not represent ahirs in any sense. It is a malicious intent to lock the page with this photo, it is a case of racial hate.

don't include any photo on this page 2405:204:32A4:9852:AB26:19E4:FDBA:44A3 (talk) 11:01, 25 March 2022 (UTC)