Talk:Pashtuns/Archive 19

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15 ← Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21

Hindu Pashtuns

The Journal of Asian History source that is used to argue against this is here

I also found:

"A Concise History of Afghanistan-Central Asia and India in 25 Volumes https://books.google.com/books?isbn=1490735941 HAMID ALIKUZAI - 2015 Found inside - Page 44 The Pashtuns speak Pashto, an IndoEuropean language. ... irreligious groups and minorities, especially since many of the Hindu and Sikh Pashtuns migrated from Pakhtunkhwa after the partition of India and later, after the rise of the Taliban."

Then there's this and this. Doug Weller talk 17:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello :@Doug Weller: and fellow editors,

I am new but I have a lot of information about this topic with reliable sourcesCasperti (talk) 20:47, 3 February 2019 (UTC):

The Aljazeera Page you gave says "Ramnath, 25, explains that "this is because the culture among Afghan Hindus is predominantly Pashtun". their culture is Pashtun which I said I agree with but their ethnicity is not Pashtun. It even contradicts your support by seeing Afghan Hindus and Pashtuns separate. Correct me if I am wrong. And that second news article you use is again about that "blue-skinned" article but this time from a different INDIAN newspaper. Without any proof of anything, so not reliable as good source claiming the ethnicity. Yes, the people are now close to Pashtuns in culture but are not ethnic members of the community. They came from British India and their native language/ethnicity is Sindhi and Hindko (Punjabi dialect).

And I did not use the article of Rahman to support the claim. although he says it on page 170. The Alikuzai article in the Journal of Asian history has just 1 sentence with saying "Sikhs and Hindu Pashtuns" But he does not talk about them, I will give references and books about the Hindus/Hindki of Afghanistan specifically. I will give my sources right now: Number one: [1] Which says: ″HINDKI, the name given to the Hindus who inhabit Afghanistan. They are of the Khatri class and are found all over the country even amongst the wildest tribes. Bellew in his Races of Afghanistan estimates their number at about 300,000. The name Hindki is also loosely used on the upper Indus, in Dir, Bajour, &c., to denote the speakers of Punjabi or any of its dialects. It is sometimes applied in a historical sense to the Buddhist inhabitants of the Peshawar Valley north of the Kabul river, who were driven thence about the 5th or 6th century and settled in the neighbourhood of Kandahar.″

Number two: Sikhs struggle in Afghanistan[2] Where it says: ″The Sikhs were first brought to Afghanistan by the British in the 19th century and once dominated the Afghan economy″

Number three: [3] Here you can read that their native language is Punjabi, still nowadays.

Number four: [4] here it says: that the migration of Hindu community to Afghanistan was mainly from the neighbouring kingdom of Punjab, later a province of British India" Like I said before they are called Hindki in Afghanistan (or Hindokwans) and they are Afghans originating from Punjab. in the article it says they are Khatri Hindus who came from Punjab to Afghanistan (Khatris are part of the Hinduism of the Punjab area most of them converted to Sikhism but some stayed Hindu and some of them moved to other areas like Afghanistan and btw they are very merchant people) [5] Again they are Afghans but not ethnic Afghans.

Number five: Shah Mahmoud Hanifi (11 February 2011). "Financing the Kabul Produce". Connecting Histories in Afghanistan: Market Relations and State Formation on a Colonial Frontier. Stanford University Press. pp. 95–102. ISBN 978-0-8047-7411-6. [6] read pages 44-48, in this book the British diplomat Alexander Burnes in Afghanistan in the 19th century writes about the Khatri (Punjabi Hindu) Hindus of Afghanistan and where they came from etc. Again they are Hindki people which is noted by Burnes.

Number six: McLane, J. (2002). Land and local kingship in eighteenth-century Bengal (Cambridge South Asian studies, no. 53). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (2002). Retrieved February, 2019 page 131-133. [7] Once again the explanation of the Hindu community in Afghanistan. Khatris were prominent merchants that dominated in the Afghanistan-Punjab region. This book even says there is a possibility that they were active in the Afghanistan region in pre-mughal times.

Number seven:Castes, Tribes, and Leading Families Excerpts from the Gazetteer of the Kohat District Contents In Pashtun and Afghan areas, they call Hindus and Sikhs Hindki/Hindkowans because of their Punjabi language (including the Hindko dialect)[8]. Some of them want to be called Pathans (maybe because of the change in culture also called Pashtunization) according to a population census in the Kohat District in Western Pakistan.[9] Again, The Sikh and Hindu community among Pashtuns are Hindki people. Who are in culture close to Pashtuns/Afghans, therefore differ from their Indian Hindus in India.

This can go on with many studies and books...

Conclusion: The Afghan/Pashtun Hindu community are not ethnic Pashtuns. They are Hindkowan people who are also called Hindki[10]. They are Punjabi people from the Punjab region (including the Hazara region) where they have moved towards Pashtun areas centuries ago. Their Population still speak their own native languages a Punjabi language variant. They lived and some still live throughout Afghanistan and Pashtun areas of Pakistan. Therefore, getting close to the native people. The Hindu community still speak their own language but are familiar with the local languages as well as Dari and Pashto. Which depends on which city they live in. They are not part of the Pashtun ethnic group but only to the Hindki and Hindkowan ethnic groups (which is the same group). They are close to Afghans/Pathans in culture. And are considered Afghan. But claiming they are part of the ethnic group Pashtuns (ethnic Afghans/Pathans) is not correct. I have given many sources and references and have more than this. The Hindus and Sikhs are from a separate ethnic group, therefore, it shouldnt be included in the Pashtun section. ( Visit Afghan hindus-sikhs at their homes you will hear their own native language among them, thats why they are treated as seperate ethnic group Hindki) So Sikhs are brought to Afghanistan in the 19th century while the Hindus have been 1 century before them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Casperti (talk • contribs) 14:20, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Btw the "Hinduism" in the religion section was recently added. I saw 23rd march 2018. Because it was never there before that. That "blue skin" article is not reliable.

Let me know If you want want to discuss this further or anything else.

Casperti (talk) 20:47, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

For more information: Hindus and Sikhs of Afghanistan have adopted the Pashto language and culture as stated in Doughwellers Aljazeera article. But only that, they are treated as a seperate ethnic group. Here is another source of the many more: "Language Policy and Language Conflict in Afghanistan and Its Neighbors: The Changing Politics of Language Choice" [11] see page 79. It emphasizes the fact that the Hindu and Sikh minorities in Pashtun areas have adopted the Pashto local language beside their own native language. If more explanation/sources/discussions are needed just Message me or react on this page.Casperti (talk) 16:56, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

And why you are edit warring? Your argument has been so incoherent so far that even I would not prefer responding any longer. The Hindki refer to Hindus and Buddhists of Punjabi origin who are settled in Afghanistan. This is a different group of people than the Pashtun Hindus, who are ethnically Pashtun, speak Pashto, and practice Hinduism, as well as Pashtunwali. There are other ethnic groups in Afghanistan, such as the Pashayi and Nuristani, who also once practiced Hinduism and Buddhism; before the Islamic conquest of South-Central Asia, these were the dominant religions in the region. The fact that a minority of Pashtuns continue to adhere to Hinduism should in no way be censored, especially when we have multiple references to attest to their existence, such as those provided by Doug Weller. Shashank5988 (talk) 19:50, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello@Shashank5988:, Thanks for replying I am not edit warring (I have visited your page, you had many warnings I see, just saying). I tried to solve this through this talk page. And your knowledge about this is far from "Expert", The Pashayi and Nuristani people followed Buddhism and Hinduism?? I know the Kabulshahis and the Gandhara people were 100% Hindu in religion in the past but the Pashai, Nuristanis, Chitrali and Kalash were following their own Traditional religion. Where is your source of Hinduism??, try to solve it out here and give me the sources. I know Afghanistan was Hindu and Buddhist in the past. But there are no ethnic Pashtuns who follow Hinduism! Like all sources say. They are different but they are now speaking Pashto and have Pashtun culture. Like I say here above. For example the Khatri and Sikhs settled in Balochistan (Pakistan) speak Balochi. The Sikhs/hindus settled in Kabul speak Dari. (this is not a source I know but my parents were from Kabul and the Sikhs and Hindus were very kind merchant people. They were a minority with a lot of respect especially before the Mujahideen and Taliban, they are the ones who cause the 300.000 Hindus and Sikhs to fled. But you have Sikhs and Hindus in Kabul. They speak Dari and at home Punjabi. Like every source I give says!! The ones in Herat and Mazar e Sharif spoke Dari as well). The majority of them lived in Pashtun dominated areas so therefore those ones living there speak Pashto and ofcourse have their culture! A Turkish person who adapts the Dutch language and culture does not change to an ethnic Dutch person. Does it? I know some Sikhs and Hindus consider themselves as Pashtuns but that doesn't make them part of the ethnic group. They dont even intermarriage between the local population because of religion. So even in blood, they are not close to them. My point is again: Pashtun/Afghan in culture = Yes Ethnically Pashtun/Afghan= No National Afghans= Yes The 19th century British envoy Alexander Burnes gives a figure of 300.000 Hindus/Sikhs in Afghanistan called Hindki by the local population. Another source I gave to this page says they speak Pashto and have Pashtun culture. Even the Aljazeera page of @Doug Weller: says this. I give you 17th-century 18th-century 19th century sources 20th century and even 21th-century sources, from British envoys who visited Afghanistan (including Pashtunkhwa/Afghania region) to German, British, Afghan, Indian and American professors/researchers who visited Afghanistan for research. I gave you FATA's population census. But what do you give me? No sources at all! The only "proper" source is the one from theHindu.com.... "The friends from Peshawar would speak of Hindu and Sikh Pashtuns who had migrated to India. In the tribal areas – the no man's land between Afghanistan and Pakistan – quite a few Hindus stayed on and were protected by the tribal codes. The same was true in Afghanistan itself (till the mujahidin and the Taliban arrived)" This is the 2nd source (Dough used this as well see above). This does not go in the topic, therefore, [unreliable source?] Verify the credibility.

.... I saw the other sources and those don't even say Pashtuns have Hindus/Sikhs. They only say the Sikhs and Hindus consider themselves Afghan/Pashtun as well. Which I totally agree with! That's my whole point. And Take your time and read my texts and sources above, you didn't even read them. Please read them..

There are even Sikhs and Hindus in Iran brought by the british.. So what ethnicity are they?


@Doug Weller: Please Dough or another Admin please step in. This is the only Wiki page that is of importance right now for me. I don't want to edit other pages. Know I know why people say don't read everything on wikipedia. There are too many bad doers on wikipedia, believe me this is really of importance. I am even prepared to get an official document of the Afghan government to show that they don't consider the Hindu and Sikhs to Tajiks and Pashtuns. Because if Pashtuns have Sikhs and Hindus than the Sikhs and Hindus of Kabul are Tajiks??! This doesn't make sense, They speak their native language at their homes and in Kabul and Jalalabad there are even schools for them because they wanted to be teached in Punjabi. I am even willing to try contact the officials in the Afghan minority community and other institutes if necessary. To get this over with.., I showed the FATA and KPK consesus here above. That isnt necessary anymore. But if needed I will contact them as well. Let me know admin@Doug Weller: Casperti (talk) 00:22, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

This source talks about about Hindu Pashtuns from Kakar tribe. It may be suitable to add as a ref. Khestwol (talk) 07:51, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

@Khestwol: Hello, Well thats our whole discussion here. I don't see that source as reliable. The Hindustantimes and Hindu.com sources are talking about these "Blue Skinned Pashtuns" and they consider themselves Kakar in Balochistan. But there are enough sources where it states where they came from and that they adopted Pashto besides there Hindko/Punjabi.Casperti (talk) 10:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

see-the-blue-skinned-pashtun-hindus-brought-to-life-in-a-new-film/story-06d4flhpwXozoh9baYA0uJ.html 

This ref also says they spoke Balochi? Have you read that? More proof that they are people who adopted the language and culture of the region they were in.Casperti (talk) 10:35, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Main argument Yes they are Pashtun in language and Culture but they are ethnic Hindkowans. They came centuries ago > Settled in Pre-dominant Pashtun areas> Got Pashtunized by the tribes> Not part of the ethnic group.Casperti (talk) 12:31, 20 February 2019 (UTC) I have put many sources about the origin of the nowadays Hindus of Afghanistan. Afghanistan-Pakistan experts please read this page, Thank you.Casperti (talk) 12:31, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Casperti, dismissing the sources that both Doug Weller and I provided doesn't help your case. The Hindu Pashtuns are not Hindu Punjabis. article makes that clear and also states that Hindu Pashtuns dressed differently than Punjabi Hindus, and were thus discriminated against by their neighbours for this reason:

Following Partition, around 400-500 Pashtun Hindus were resettled in Uniara (130 km from Jaipur), Chittorgarh and Punjab. ... After settling in India my grandmother’s clothing also became a point of contention amongst the people here. As a result, they started wearing clothes similar to that of their neighbours. They gave up a very important part of their culture to blend into the cultural fabric of their new land and sold their old Kakria Kameez for money to make ends meet.

Keep in mind that the population of Hindu Punjabis that migrated after the partition of India is much higher than Hindu Pashtuns, which is mentioned in this additional source. Shashank5988 (talk) 16:05, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

@Shashank5988: Hey man, yeah that's the whole point. They are indeed 1000% different from their Punjabi hindus. They have Pashtun culture. They speak Pashto, Dari or Balochi. They wear Afghan/Pashtun/Balochi dresses. They are very proud to be part of that culture and proud to be Afghan. btw that source doesn't say it has higher or lower number I can't find that.. Casperti (talk) 18:08, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Read WP:OR and . There is no reason to remove The Hindu source. Shashank5988 (talk) 19:19, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Read WP:TPG and stay on topic, again please give me an another reference besides given why it is wrong, with explanation? @Shashank5988:Casperti (talk) 22:15, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Here is the documentary I was talking about, with interviews of Hindu and Sikh members of Afghanistan: [12] This Afghan Sikh journalist is visiting both Hindu and Sikhs of Afghanistan. You will hear Punjabi and Hindko both. They will talk about their history as well. The ones in Kabul and Ghazni speak Dari and the ones he is visiting in Jalalabad cannot speak Farsi because they are fluent in Pashto and among themselves, they speak their own language as you can see. But they are in culture, dances, clothing and food the same as any other Afghans. The documentary is online available on multiple platforms. Here is the link of one of the institute who funded the documentary and the video itself is there: Mission Afghanistan- Documentary on Hindus and Sikhs of Afghanistan I hope this documentary made by an Afghan Sikh himself, helps the confusionCasperti (talk) 00:37, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Here is the number I found of the Pre-war 20th-century estimate of the Hindus and Sikhs. The Hindki had a population of 300.000 individuals including Muslims, according to 19th and 20th century sources[13] and in the book "Races of Afghanistan" written by H. W. Bellew. Among these people, 220.000 were Hindu and Sikh individuals as you can read here Nearly 99% Of Hindus, Sikhs Left Afghanistan in Last Three decades. I had already debunked this short quote "especially since many of the Hindu and Sikh Pashtuns migrated from Pakhtunkhwa after the partition of India and later, after the rise of the Taliban." This news article and news video of Tolo News explains the same thing. The Hindus and Sikhs of Pashtun dominated areas fled those areas. All Hindu and Sikhs of Pashtun dominated areas in Afghanistan have fled the country. There were 220.000 of them and most were settled in Pashtun dominated areas as Doughs Aljazeera source said. The news article explains this, Only the Kabul (Farsi), Ghazni (Farsi) and Jalalabad (Pashto) communities have remained.[14]Casperti (talk) 12:40, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi, i listened to the source posted above in Dari (Persian dialect spoken in Afghanistan). This source makes it quite clear that the Sikhs and Hindus living in Afghanistan are not ethnic Pashtuns. According to this source, 99% of the 220000 Hindus/Sikhs left Afghanistan because of the successive wars in this country, they are only 1350 of them still living in Afghanistan. cheers.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 21:44, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello Wikipedians, it is quite clear there is a conflict in this matter because of the "blue-skinned Pashtun women" article. This 1 article with the old women has been debunked by 15+ reliable sources but is still not enough, according to a few editors. There is a link between those accounts and their interest, just by looking at their edits and Wiki names. To avoid edit warring. I will try to find more sources on these so-called "Kakar" see talk page: Talk:Kakar I will try to contact some institutes in Afghanistan and KPK whether they have more books on these Kakars (which I am sure about that they are Kakkar not Kakar, see Talk:Kakar). Because besides this 1 article there are no records to be found. I will update it later. Till then the 23-03-2018 edit can stand/or stand as disputed.Casperti (talk) 18:21, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

While none of your sources debunk that "1 article" or say anything opposite. Shashank5988 (talk) 20:34, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
I know reading can be difficult. I will summarize it for you what was explained here above

1. How the "Pashtun" "Tajik" "Afghan" Hindu community is actually called. (Hindki) 2. They are Bilingual. They speak their native Punjabi dialect and the language of the region they live/lived in, depending on the city. 3. Where they came from and their history. 4. That there is no census that includes them in "Pashtun". Not even in old British records. KPK, BSTAN and Afghanistan call them Hindki/Hindkwans. 5. Showed you a documentary link where an Afghan Sikh visits them in Afghanistan and once again explains their history etc. 6. Showed the census where there were 300.000 Hindu and Sikh in the 19th century before the Durrand Line and 220.000 of them in the 1970s. 7. Showed their actual language. 8. Showed you there are still Hindus in the Loralai Balochistan area, just look it up by yourself. They do not claim ethnic Pashtun or Baloch ethnicity. Despite their ability in speaking those languages and culture.

Should be clear right now. But like I said I need to find 1 clear source that directly debunks those "blue-skinned" ladies, so it can be 120% clear for you instead of 100%. I will find out give me 1-2 weeks. I will ask for some books. I will update it. Till then nothing will be changed/or it will stand as disputed, btw You changed in the religion section "religion in india" The native habitat of Pashtuns is not in India so I am editing that.Thanks.Casperti (talk) 11:30, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

After 2 weeks of Looking and reading for the Quetta Hindu kakars I have found it. The NWFP and Balochistan census before the partition: [15]. It is noted that in Quetta and Loralai (Zhob) were living Hindus. You can see they are noted as "Hindu, Kakkar (Khatri)" showing thousands of individuals. There no other indications. There are no indications of them being Pathan/Afghan "Kakar", They clearly state that. (What a surprise). I have accessed and found this source from my University's intl online library of Journals, books, and reports. You can also see it on google books. Census of India, 1901, Volume 17. Baluchistan. Here are the other sources: [16] [17] And this book: From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story[18]. All of these sources are directly about the Quetta, Loralai (Zhob) Hindus. So this time it is directly. Casperti (talk) 23:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

I looked up for the Sheen khalai film ladies and I found that they are the only ones claiming to be 100% ethnic Pashtun of all "Pashtun/Afghan" Hindus. the filmmaker is this called lady Shilpi Batra Adwani, she is on several Indian online articles claiming her things for her Film. It is rather a claim than a Historical or scientific fact. So it is better to state it as a claim because she is really the only one (with her grandmother and relatives). But I looked up if it is possible to put such things also on the wiki page WP:CON. So we can add that as well. Besides, Wikipedia should not take a claim of a Filmmaker in account as real real scientific evidenceCasperti (talk) 23:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Hindki" . Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  2. ^ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3138282.stm Sikhs struggle in Afghanistan
  3. ^ "Awtar Singh Khalsa: ‘They Gave the Hindus and Sikhs a place for rubbish disposal as a Place to Live’"
  4. ^ Report of the High Level Committee on Indian Diaspora, ‘Afghanistan, Central Asia and Iran’, Chapter 2, 2001, p. 7.
  5. ^ Levi, Scott Cameron (2002). The Indian Diaspora in Central Asia and Its Trade, 1550–1900. Leiden: BRILL. ISBN 978-90-04-12320-5.
  6. ^ Shah Mahmoud Hanifi (11 February 2011). "Financing the Kabul Produce". Connecting Histories in Afghanistan: Market Relations and State Formation on a Colonial Frontier. Stanford University Press. pp. 95–102. ISBN 978-0-8047-7411-6.
  7. ^ McLane, J. (2002). Land and local kingship in eighteenth-century Bengal (Cambridge South Asian studies, no. 53). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (2002) Page 131-133. Retrieved February, 2019
  8. ^ Castes, Tribes, and Leading Families Excerpts from the Gazetteer of the Kohat District Contents
  9. ^ Castes, Tribes, and Leading Families Excerpts from the Gazetteer of the Kohat District Contents
  10. ^ Hindko ---https://www.ethnologue.com/language/hno
  11. ^ Language Policy and Language Conflict in Afghanistan and Its Neighbors: The Changing Politics of Language Choice
  12. ^ Singh, Pritpal (Director) (January 20, 2013). MISSION AFGHANISTAN [Documentary on Hindus and Sikhs of Afghanistan] (Motion picture). Afghanistan: Sangat Television (UK).
  13. ^ Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Hindki" . Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press
  14. ^ Nearly 99% Of Hindus, Sikhs Left Afghanistan in Last Three decades
  15. ^ Census Commissioner, India (1901). Census of India, 1901. NWFP, Balochistan and the Punjab: Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing.
  16. ^ Archer, B. (1999). Social identity in the complex urban setting of Quetta, Balochistan. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 20(2), 89-106.
  17. ^ Topa, I. N. (1944). Facts about India. Allahabad: Kitabistan.
  18. ^ From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story
I did look at the sources and the arguments here and we are clear that we have reliable sources that verify the existence of a Pashtun Hindu minority in the region, such as this BBC documentary. As Anupam pointed out, Suhasini Haidar reported on this here:

The women are part of a community of Pushtun Hindus that lived in the Baloch areas of Quetta, Loralai, Bori and Maikhter, and belong to the Kakari tribes still living there. 1947 was a second partition for their villages, as the British-imposed Durand Line in 1893 had already given their villages to Pakistan, despite the people’s Pushtun lineage.

This source does verify that Hindu Pashtuns exist. Yet another source speaks to their presence and migration after the partition of India, even differentiating themselves from other Indians on the basis of their Pashtun identity:

Following Partition, around 400-500 Pashtun Hindus were resettled in Uniara (130 km from Jaipur), Chittorgarh and Punjab. By 1965, they started shifting to Jaipur (Shilpi was herself born and raised in Jaipur) and other parts of the country, where they had a hard time finding rented accommodation, while others weren’t entirely welcomed even though they were Hindu. Consequently, many of them found comfort in hiding their Pashtun identity, carrying themselves as Pakistani-Hindu women dressed in saris and salwar suits, while shunning their traditional Kakrai Kameez. They even spoke the local language but would teach Pashto to their children.

This is supported by another reliable citation, which states:

The friends from Peshawar would speak of Hindu and Sikh Pashtuns who had migrated to India. In the tribal areas – the no man's land between Afghanistan and Pakistan – quite a few Hindus stayed on and were protected by the tribal codes. The same was true in Afghanistan itself (till the mujahidin and the Taliban arrived).

The quotation clearly says that other Pashtuns recognized the Hindus who left as fellow Pashtuns. The sources that you are giving in no way contradict these ones that verify the existence of Hindu Pashtuns. Rather, they simply discuss another ethnic group from a different part of South Asia, Afghanistan, who are Hindu and Sikh--they have no connection to this group of Hindu Pashtuns. In conclusion, what you're trying to do is to conflate two different ethnic groups to make a WP:POINT that isn't supported by evidence. Wikipedia on the other hand, stands by reliable sources which confirm the existence of Hindu Pashtuns. Don't improperly claim that you have consensus. ML talk 18:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


@My Lord:

That BBC link is again about the same ladies making the same claim. But let's stay on topic. I have explained it all if you read, the thing here above.

Wikiaviani a third party, also verified the sources of mine. You are just keep pointing to those ladies.look at this: Mission Afghanistan- Documentary on Hindus and Sikhs of Afghanistan This explains it all What are the Kabul and Ghazni Sikhs then? Tajik Sikhs and Hindus? This does not make sense. Prior to 1947, there were no records of Ethnic Pashtun Hindus. Only Hindu Kakkar. Just look at the documentary and take your time. You will see the people and it explains it all. This Talk page really needs an Admin and more third parties who are familiar with Afghan-related topics.Casperti (talk) 00:02, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Consider refuting the multiple sources I provided. So far Doug Weller, Khestwol, Anupam, Shashank5988, and myself have made convincing arguments to retain the information about the Hindu Pashtun minority in the article. We have consensus to keep it. ML talk 04:48, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@My Lord:, Dough weller was not choosing sides. Look at my Talk Page or talk to him and ask him. Don't throw lies. Khestwhol was providing the same link again and did not choose sides, ask him. Only you, Anupam and Shashank5988 are against this for no reason. Just look at the documentary. It gives every information needed. You don't even take the time to do it, while every information is there. and this book as well:From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story it even explains what they actually are and that they identify themselves as Pathan: "My mother had defined herself as a Hindu Pathan from Quetta" but that they are not ethnic Pashtuns. Why are you not trying to accept this? I as an Afghan feel really stupid explaining this with 100000 sources and common knowledge about my countrymen (Afghan Hindus and Sikhs). Just look at the documentary, censuses, the Quetta Hindu Book where I got the quote from. ( I directly linked it to the quote in the book). This is more than enough. Only the film ladies of Sheen Khalai are claiming the ethnicity, so I took them as serious. Just look at the documentary and take your time. We editors should do that. Just read that book Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story (the page with the quote) to get your answer or the documentary. Just watch it, or skip it bit by bit. Casperti (talk) 11:19, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

And please stop using VPN and letting it get accepted by Anupam. (Yes I can see that)Casperti (talk) 13:17, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

So far you are the only user engaging in this meaningless edit war. Don't expect me to reply to your answer your ridiculous  accusations which you are making in bad faith solely for the sake of your POV pushing. ML talk 16:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

POV? Can you please stay on topic. These sources are not a point of view just fact that are in front of your nose. Again watch the documentary or see the book of the Quetta Pashtuns. Can you debunk them? Can you debunk the other sources? The book Quetta to Delhi is the best one. It explains everything. It is just a fact. or just travel to Afghanistan. If you don't believe British Raj censuses, KPK censuses, Afghan censuses, the Hindus themselves, History books, Documentaries of themselves. Just take your time and look at it (the documentary or book quote that page I linked). Casperti (talk) 18:49, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

For the people who ask why Pashtuns got locked down: Because of this Dispute. So please take your time and read all above. ( if you are a third party, so non-Indian and non-Afghan sided editor, and have some little knowlegde about this please join in and give your third opnion) The main argument we have is mainly because of this source (They are also on several other Indian news outlets like theHindu.com and BBC Punjab): see-the-blue-skinned-pashtun-hindus-brought-to-life-in-a-new-film/story-06d4flhpwXozoh9baYA0uJ.html

The Ladies in the article are filmed for a film called "Sheen Khalai". They are trilingual and are Pashto-Speaking because they are from the Hindu community of Quetta, prior the 1947 Pakistan/India partition. But the thing here is they claim to be from the Pashtun ethnicity as well, according to their film and articles. The ladies say that they remember that they are from the Kakar Pashtun tribe and therefore are ethnic Pashtuns. But the problem is that the prior to 1947 there are no records to be found in censuses, and other British Raj sources, of Hindu members of the Kakar tribe. The only thing that was recorded in Quetta and Loralai are the Khatri Hindu Kakkars (see references above for the 1921 1901 censuses in British india, Balochistan). So that is the problem. They say that they are ethnic Pashtun instead of Pashtun, after 70 years. But no records are to be found. So if anyone has any about them, please add them. (not again the same Sheenkhalai film ladies but from a different Indian news outlet, Please). I agree they are indeed Pashtun and should be called Pashtun but making them ethnic Pashtun is not correct. because how should they call themselves to outsiders? They speak Hindko (Punjabi) but are also native in Pashto and are different from their Punjabi Hindus. We Afghans call them Hindki and they are registered as Hindki (Hindu/Sikh Hindokowans in KPK).

They should call and identify themselves Pashtun. Like it is said in this book: From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story, This book is about the Quetta Hindus (written by one) and it includes all information of who they are etc. "My Mother defined herself as a Hindu Pathan from Quetta, affirming cultural and regional identity over religious differences" So, again they should indeed Identify themselves as Afghan or Pashtun to outsiders because they are indeed different from their fellow Khatri Hindus. But they are not ethnic Pashtuns as it says in the book. And yes we are talking about the same people: the Hindus of Quetta But I will stop here so you can read the arguments above. Please take your time and read of both sides the arguments (the documentary I gave is recommended because it explains all). (btw all refernces in the refbox are mine.)

Please we need a solution or consensus because we are indeed talking about the same people and both have sources. So non-sided Third parties are more than welcome. Casperti (talk) 00:39, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Sorry User:Casperti, but given the multiple voices who have chimed in the discussion, we already have consensus to retain the information. Continuing to state that WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT isn't helpful, but rather, disregards others who all feel that the information should be retained. Your personal interpretation of YouTube videos that amounts to synthesis and original research will not alter this consensus. You've been asked not to change the article until a new consensus is reached and you should respect that. As you were nearly blocked for edit warring (I requested that the article be protected so that it would not come down to this), my personal recommendation is that you WP:DROPTHESTICK and edit other articles. Remember that the threshold for including items on Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. We have multiple references that support the information in the article and will thus keep it. I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 02:07, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Anupam, the admins knew that it was just threatening of you guys. Again, we need third party opinion (You guys are Indian-editors (fact, seeing the names) and there is maybe a case of WP:NATIONALIST and the ungoing conflict between Pakistan and India is not helping the editors having a neutral point of view, therefore the admins locked down the page in order to get more attention for this and more third opinions.) . Otherwise, the admins would say to me to accept it. You guys are just showing again again the old ladies of Quetta. If you can send me verification of their story. Be my guest. I will work with the consensus.

My sources are not coming from the air (more than 20 sources). You cannot ignore them. Instead of saying we are right. Just say what are my sources and commonknowlegde then? The books about the Quetta Hindus? the documentary you refuse to watch? You can't ignore them. I don't care if you have verification, be my guest. I will accept it. No problem at all. Casperti (talk) 16:40, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Your "sources" are based off of your interpretation of a YouTube video that is about some Punjabi Hindus in Afghanistan who are speaking Multani—the video interviewed people from Kabul and Jalalabad. It has nothing to do with Pashtun Hindus from Quetta, Loralai, Bori and Maikhter—all of which are in Balochistan (once in British India, now in Pakistan). These cities are thousands of miles apart from Afghanistan and you are treating them as if they are the same group when we have reliable sources that name the latter group as Pashtuns. This original research will not be tolerated here and you will be reverted accordingly. Your desire to censor information about the Hindu minority of Pashtuns reeks of agenda-driven editing. Shashank5988 (talk) 19:46, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Shashank5988:, They are not Punjabi Hindus, you cannot call them "Punjabi" and don't call them Punjabi. I showed you censuses of British India and Afghanistan. I showed you the history of Quetta and Kandahar, reliable sources of the British, historians, Afghans, Scholars etc. They show you the Hindus of Quetta and the Pashtunistan area but still, you are not willing to accept it. They are for centuries in Afghanistan (so before the Durand line). After the Durand line, they are just referred to as "Pashtun" and "Baloch" Hindus in the areas of Pakistan. In Afghanistan, they are just called Afghan Hindus. You cannot call them Punjabi because they are different. Do you mean the documentary of the Sikh tv channel? My sources were even before I showed the Documentary and the documentary was just to show you their Languages and their history (centuries old). You are just not willing to accept it, that's all.Casperti (talk) 21:45, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Shashank5988:, Here is the book of the Quetta area Pathan Hindus themselves. "From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story By Reena Nanda". This books says it all. I hope this helps. It is directly about the Quetta centuries old Pathan Hindu community. It explains their origin, ethnicity, why they call themselves "Pashtun", their cast and their history. (again they cannot be called Punjabi but they cannot be settled into the Pashtun ethnicity, we call them Hindki, they have their own ethnicity and it has already a page on Wikipedia).
Here is literally stated: "My mother had defined herself as a Hindu Pathan from Quetta, Affirming Cultural and regional identity over religious differences"

I hope this helps. Casperti (talk) 01:33, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

The source you provided further proves that the information about the Hindu Pashtun minority should be retained. It mentions that a Hindu Pashtun woman called herself as such; she did not call herself a Punjabi, Hindki, or anything else. It does not matter if you do not recognize her as Pashtun/Pathan, but that reliable sources do. The Hindu Pashtun minority discussed in the article are of the Kakar Pashtun tribe, are recognized by other tribal memebers as such, and also by the former president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai. Sources do not refer to them as Punjabi, Hindki, or anything else. Case closed. Shashank5988 (talk) 18:11, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
@Shashank5988:, Did you even read? The Quetta Hindus say it by themselves?! they state that they are Khatri Hindus so who are you to tell otherwise? It is better to not talk further with you. We should just wait for third-parties who are not sided. You did not even read the book, She states she is Khatri Hindu, who migrated to the Pashtun areas centuries ago, and that she is connected to "Punjabiyat" and she still speaks both languages. First read then talk. Reliable sources, you mean the same ladies for the same film again and again? I showed you more than enough reliable sources. Not just a few Indian-based newspapers that are promoting 1 article about the same ladies again and again.(btw Hindki/Hindkwan is used by their Muslim neighbors in general for Hindus-Sikhs in the Pashtunistan region. Not by themselves. It used to denote Pashto/Dari speaking Hindus of Afghanistan and former Afghan areas)

This citation here is of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (Kohat) census, Hindki is used by Muhmmadan Pashto-speakers to denote the Hindus and Sikhs who speak Pashto:

Hindus and Sikhs at the Census numbered 12,068. Of these 4,201 belonged to the cantonments at Kohat and Thal. The proportion of Hindus to Muhammadans for the whole district excluding cantonments is less than one to twenty. The proportions for the different tahsils are: Kohat, 1 to 18; Hangu, 1 to 12; Teri, 1 to 25.

Awans and the Punjabi speaking portion of the rural population are classed together by the Pathans under the general name of Hindki. As a rule the village artisans, the carpenter, the smith and the potter are Hindki, but in the remoter portions of Teri and Miranzai the artisans more usually claim to be Pathans and have been classified as such.
No Country For Kafirs? Balochi Hindus This link is about the "Balochi" Hindus. Should we now change the religion section of the Baloch now? based on this article, with its 1 line: Balochi Hindus? But I will stop and wait. I am tired of citing source to source. Even when the Quetta Hindus say it, you won't change. It does not matter this is Wikipedia, everyone can make mistakes.Casperti (talk) 21:39, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
From Quetta to Delhi, A Partition Story is a novel and you are trying to use that as a reference? In addition, where does it say that she is from the same Kakar tribe of Hindu Pashtuns that the sources everyone here provided mention? Besides, Quetta is a very large city so the Hindus that lived there are of many castes and ethnicities. Now, you are trying to use another source from the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa census of modern Pakistan to prove your false WP:POINT. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is miles and miles away from Balochistan so what does that have to do with this? Additionally, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was formed well after the partition of India--the land in that area use to be called the Northwest Frontier Province before 1947. None of the sources you've provided are convincing but your desperation to remove information about the Hindu Pashtun minority only highlights your prejudice. Shashank5988 (talk) 12:55, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
Its okay shashank, I know your agenda, "Quetta is a very large city, so the Hindus that lived there are of many castes and ethnicities" according to who? You? The census of Balochistan, Quetta (1920,1940) did not show Kakar Hindus either. Only Kakkar Khatri Hindus and Jatt Hindus (Pashto-speaking) are mentioned in the prior to partition British Raj censuses.(besides that book is not novel but a Biography of Quetta Hindus) But we will wait, I do not want to make this any longer with more sources, let it stand like this. We will wait for non-sided third parties.Casperti (talk) 19:21, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring and unreliable source being forced into this article

It would appear that Anupam is using an unreliable source for the Indian Pashtun figure and it also appears that this user has been warned about India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan discretionary sanctions.
This user also appears to be making similar edits in other Afghanistan related articles. Anupam , please review your source. A dnaindia.com article is not a reliable source. The figure you are quoting is not seen anywhere else. I would strongly encourage you to revert your edit unless you find a more credible figure. WikavianiDlohcierekim --KamranHassanUK (talk) 04:15, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

user:My Lord Please review the Official Census of India source that was previously referenced in this article: http://www.censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/Census_Data_Online/Language/Statement1.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by KamranHassanUK (talk • contribs) 17:07, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
The statistic was provided directly from the All India Pakhtoon Jirga-e-Hind and is thus reliable for the number of Pathans in that country. ML talk 04:39, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
user:My Lord, I disagree with this. There is virtually no information about this organisation anywhere. A google search shows a facebook page with minimal content and a Wikipedia entry created by Anupam (same person) just a month ago. I fail to see how this is considered more reliable than the official census of India --KamranHassanUK (talk) 10:58, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Anupam , User:My Lord, could you please spend some time to engage in discussion here. It's almost mandatory seeing as both of you have engaged in edits where you keep guiding and referring people on using the talk page, but then seem very absent yourselves. Thank you --KamranHassanUK (talk) 10:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
KamranHassanUK, the Census of India documents citizens in the country who can speak Pashto. On the other hand, the advocacy organization for Pashtuns in India, the All India Jirga-e-Hind, says that there are 3,200,000 Pashtuns living in India who are not yet citizens. Do you see the difference? Additionally, the All India Jirga-e-Hind seems to be well covered, with their chair being a granddaughter of Bacha Khan and documentaries covering the organization. [3] The statistic will be kept in the article. ML talk 04:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
I am aware of the difference but I am asking for a credible source seeing as you are removing an official Indian government source. An online article that quotes an organisation limited to a facebook page is far from credible. If there are 3.2 million Pashtuns in India, you should have no problem producing an official source. --KamranHassanUK (talk) 15:30, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
I agree with KamranHassanUK. You cannot change demographic statistics by using a source: a lady that says there are 3.2 million Pashtuns in India. Whether she is a famous person or a normal person. It is not a reliable source. A person in an interview can say anything. Use demographic statistics like censuses of official bureaus or reliable institutes who do the counting. Everyone can agree on this. Since when are we using sentences of living persons as DEMOGRAPHIC sources? But Anupam can be right because there are many descendants of Pashtuns in India (Rohillas, Afridis, etc etc) but he has to use a different Source. A perfect example is the wiki page of Germans. Germans in America have (descendants) after it. So you can use that in the combination of a good source. Not a sentence of a (famous) person/group. A Person can claim many things, especially in the Indian Subcontinent this phenomenon is very familiar, Using such claims as a source in a demographic statistic is not right. Everyone can agree on this. Casperti (talk) 15:52, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for sharing USER:Casperti. The same can be said for Pakistani Punjab and Balochistan, which neighbors the Pashtun regions. There is no doubt a very significant number of people who can claim Pashtun ancestry but these people are not included in the official Pak census as Pashtuns. A popular example is the Pakistani prime minister Imran Khan who would be considered Punjabi as he does not speak the Pashto language and was born and raised in Punjab. Its disappointing to see the above users are now engaging in edit warring over the use of said sources. Since the removal of the official Indian census source, it has now enabled people to cite any random news article making unwarranted claims about population figures. KamranHassanUK (talk) 10:41, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Subject–verb separation was 29 words

Between the subject and verb of the first sentence (Pashtuns... are) in this version, there were 29 words occupying the dot-dot-dot. I've moved two explanations of word origin into Notes, reducing this to a 17-word separation. Still too long, in my opinion, but better than it was before. Mathglot (talk) 02:11, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

GHURIDS AND KHALJIS

The ghurids ( debated) and khaljis (turk o afghan) should be mentioned before lodhi dynasty in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.211.22.22 (talk) 07:48, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 January 2020

Kindly change South Asia to Afghanistan and west-Pakistan in the intro, as South Asia refers to a wide geographic area. Also, in the same paragraph, it is stated that Pashtuns primarily live Afghanistan and Pakistan, so why not mention these countries before, instead of writing South Asia. 101.50.91.66 (talk) 10:19, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: Current wording is sufficiently clear and appropriately qualified. Melmann 14:52, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
Having looked at sources given in the article, including where the Pashtuns are now, and their probable history and origins, including various differing and disputed versions, I find the IP’s request eminently reasonable. While saying that they are from “South Asia” is not a false assertion, neither is it false to say that they are from the “Eurasian supercontinent”, but both lack precision and are unnecessarily vague. The fact is, that even with ongoing disputes about their precise origin, it is true and verifiable to say they primarily live in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and since this is already sourced in the body, per WP:LEAD and WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY it would be both accurate and helpful to the general reader to give their general location in the WP:LEADPARAGRAPH. I will implement this change when the page is unprotected. Mathglot (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 Not done for now: I would like to see agreement from other editors before making changes on this controversial subject — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:01, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
I agree that it's best to avoid talking about South Asia and just mention the two countries: that's both more specific and clearer to readers. At the very least, the Pashtuns are found in the extreme corner of South Asia, so the use of this broad term is nor very helpful. Additionally, it was recently decided that Afghanistan shouldn't be described as a South Asian country as it can just easily be seen as belonging to Central Asia, and even though the Pashtun-inhabited parts of the country can more easily been seen as part of South Asia than the rest of the country, the use of this term is still not completely without pitfalls. – Uanfala (talk) 19:32, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
I agree with Mathglot, the IP-address and Uanfala. For two reasons. The first one is that Afghanistan's location is stranded between two regions: South and Central Asia. As you can see here it was disputed for a long time Talk:Afghanistan#Location_in_South_Asia. Second thing is that South Asia is also too broad for mentioning it as a native region. As per sources given the native area is Afghanistan and West Pakistan. Other ethnicities in the region do not have such mentionings at all e.g Kashmiris, Hazaras and Tajiks. So I think it is a good thing Mathglot is going to change it. Casperti (talk) 22:02, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Sikh Pashtuns

As Dough Weller requested.

the Sikhs in Afghanistan they are called just Afghan Sikhs in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa these people are called Pashtun Sikhs. Because how would you otherwise call them. They are different than their Punjabi counterparts. In Afghanistan and KPK they are called Hindki or Hindkowans aka Pashtun/Afghan Sikhs.

So the sources that are mentioned have a sentence saying "many Sikh Pashtuns migrated to India after 1947". This Sentence is 100% correct that how they identify and are called so.

So here are the sources: The source below explains all.

How the Sikhs settled in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa

Those in Afghanistan came in the 18th and 19th century predominantly per BBC

Sikhs struggle in Afghanistan

Quote from Kohat census KPK: Castes, Tribes, and Leading Families Excerpts from the Gazetteer of the Kohat District Contents Hindus and Sikhs at the Census numbered 12,068. the Punjabi speaking portion of the rural population are classed together by the Pathans under the general name of Hindki. As a rule the village artisans, the carpenter, the smith and the potter are Hindki, but in the remoter portions of Teri and Miranzai the artisans more usually claim to be Pathans and have been classified as such.

If you want to see it: Singh, Pritpal (Director) (January 20, 2013). MISSION AFGHANISTAN [Documentary on Sikhs of Afghanistan] (Motion picture). Afghanistan: Sangat Television (UK)-mission-afghanistan-plight-sikhs-afghanistan Afghan Sikh that travels to Afghanistan.

I think the first source is enough to just look at. But Dough your sources are not wrong either as I explained. They are indeed called "Pashtun" Sikhs or "Afghan" Sikhs like my sources also say. Because How would you otherwise call them. But they are not ethnic Pashtuns. Hope this helps.

Casperti (talk) 18:46, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

And yet a source, one of which you deleted twice, states;
  • "The friends from Peshawar would speak of Hindu and Sikh Pashtuns who had migrated to India."
Wikipedia editors are not allowed to use their personal knowledge as a source to write Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia is written using reliable published sources. The fact you have sources showing something else, is not a license to remove something that is currently sourced or edit war over it. FYI, Awtar Singh Khalsa "source" appears to be a blog, per Wikipedia blogs are not reliable sources. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:19, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear:Personal knowledge? Why are you ignoring those other sources? They are descendants of Punjabi migrants called Hindki aka Pashtun Sikhs. btw I deleted the blog source for you. But they themselves say they are not ethnic Pashtuns so what's the deal? They are called "Pashtun" Sikhs. Because how would you otherwise call them. So we are talking about the Sikhs of Peshawar then just click on the source I give below. These source explain everything: This one is about the Sikhs of Peshawar, just click on it:

How the Sikhs settled in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa

Casperti (talk) 13:37, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

I am having a hard time not to think if you are just an SPA dedicated to remove reliably sourced content from the article. Read WP:OR and find a new hobby. Shivkarandholiya12 (talk) 11:39, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
I also reverted this edit which contradicts mainstream assertion that Pashtun are Indo-Iranian. Shivkarandholiya12 (talk) 11:39, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

: @Shivkarandholiya12: Your revert is WRONG. Didn't you take the trouble to read the attached sources that I added? Pashtuns are a bunch of East-Iranic tribes is an established fact; because this very fact has been discussed in much detail later in the article/page, I believe that you haven't even bothered to read this whole article/page. How hard is that to understand? Also, let me educate you a little on this subject, since I do not have much time to give history lessons, I will keep it short: Iranic people are also Indo-Iranic people [4], because Iranians/Iranic people are a branch of Indo-Iranic people, so how does that edit contradict mainstream assertion? Perhaps you should read up on Indo-Iranians, hopefully that wont trouble you much? Kindly, in future, refrain from making nonconstructive edits to this page.Alephza (talk) 16:03, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

See WP:OR. Your source fails to support the information you are supporting. It makes no mention of Pashtun and should not be used here for supporting your all of the claims. Shivkarandholiya12 (talk) 12:45, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

:@Shivkarandholiya12: Did you even bother to read the sources I added or this whole article at all? In this very article Pashtuns have been described as East-Iranian tribes. You don't even know the difference between Indo-Iranians and Iranic people. As I stated earlier, I am not here to give out history lessons to anyone, but this issue requires just the basic knowledge of history. Iranic people are also Indo-Iranian people, because they are a branch of Indo-Iranians, check these pages out: [5] [6]. The other branch is Indo-Aryans [7]. Pashtuns are Iranic people who belong to Indo-Iranian group. This is not hard to understand and there is no discussionn here. I have added multiple sources to backup my claim. You are only making this an issue of your ego. However, if you still disagree, kindly bring your sources that proves me wrong. My sources explicitly mention Pashtuns and mention the Iranic origin and Iranic language that Pashtuns speak today. I won't allow you to vandalize a page/article that is about 50 million people. Kindly find another hobby and people to fight with.Alephza (talk) 15:02, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@Shivkarandholiya12: This is just WP:PUSH and WP:CRUSH. Firstly, The disputed source is already solved and accepted by everyone + the ladies in source themselves confirmed this see the talk page above. Secondly, Why are you adding those many languages back without adding a source with it. The two main minor languages they speak is enough and the major minor languages. Thirdly, "Sikh Pashtuns little information about them" that can stay so that's okay. Lastly, Indo-Iranians is the head branch it includes the two groups Indo-Aryans and Iranians. Because Indo-Iranians is too broad, mentioning the specific "Iranians" is much better and done in other Iranic pages too. So it goes like this Indo-european->Indo-Iranian->Iranian->Eastern Iranian. But You are indeed right Pashtuns are Indo-Iranians but that is too broad as it includes Indo-Aryans, Iranians (Western and Eastern Groups) and Nuristani groups. Casperti (talk) 15:01, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
  • @El C: Now that the abusive sock (Alephza) is blocked can you restore the version the pre-sock version? Thanks. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 17:14, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Unprotected. El_C 17:23, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Friends no Sikhs are known to be Afghans, Pashtuns or Hindkowans. Most of these sikhs belong to trader classes and normally Meghwars and Bheels who got converted to Balmiki Sikhism when Sikhs were able to establish rule over these areas. Finding it more favorable these Bheels and Meghwars escaped their menial professions to become better Baniyas. Regards Azmarai76 (talk) 10:41, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Preliminary Y chromosomal DNA Analysis

The link will take those who want a preliminary picture on ancestry of Pashtuns :

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224284185_Afghanistan_from_a_Y-chromosome_perspective

This isn't very much inline with what Naematullah Haravi has stated of division on the lines Suraban, Ghilzai, Bettan and Karlanri etc. Regards Azmarai76 (talk) 01:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

It is not really a surprise that a 17th-century elite-sponsored genealogy and modern genetics will arrive at different conclusions. –Austronesier (talk) 11:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
I agree with Austronesier ofcourse a 17th century book will not be line with modern genetics as Austronesier said. Casperti (talk) 18:56, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
I would say avoid these researches unless they catch are subjected to scholarly conclusions. Shashank5988 (talk) 20:34, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Disputed source Solved

After placing 50.000 bytes of information that "Afghan/Pashtun/Baloch" Hindus are of Punjabi descendant. This Information is now well placed (not by me) on the Hindki and Hindkowans.

But the source we now have/had as disputed was this news article about the Hindus of Quetta: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tattooed-blue-skinned-hindu-pushtuns-look-back-at-their-roots/article22645932.ece

Shashank and Anupam were in favor of the source while I and Wikiaviani (and some people who deleted that source) explained that they are not Ethnic Pashtuns/Balochs but are called "Pashtun",'Baloch' or "Farsiwan' Hindus which is how they identify.

So these sources are from the same people that are from Quetta:

"My Mother had defined herself as a Hindu Pathan from Quetta, Affirming Cultural and regional identity over religious differences."

— Reena Nanda, From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story – [1]


And the important source that is directly quoted from the person that was in the article:

" I was unaware of my identity as a Hindu Pashtun for the longest time. In Indian society, people are categorised on the basis of their caste and religion very early. To somehow adhere to the mainstream brackets of caste and religion my ancestors identified themselves as Punjabis. I grew up thinking that I was a Punjabi,”

— Shilpi Batra, "Hindu Pashtuns: How One Granddaughter Uncovered India’s Forgotten Links to Afghanistan", Batra, Shilpi (8 August 2018). "Hindu Pashtuns: How One Granddaughter Uncovered India's Forgotten Links to Afghanistan". Retrieved 13 December 2019.



This is the Person and the old ladies themselves that the disputed source was about. I found the article today. This clarifies everything. As I explained they are indeed "Pashtun" Hindu but not on the basis of ethnicity. So here you go they themselves say it. They are like all Hindus of Afghanistan (And Pashtun/Baloch areas of Pakistan) of Punjabi Khatri descendants. Like she confirmed here ancestors were Punjabi. Hope this helps for all. Casperti (talk) 20:59, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

You are doing WP:SYNTH. If someone else agrees with your revert which you have made probably 100 times now, then let them revert and explain their edits here. So far I am seeing nobody and you are apparently alone with your original research. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 03:10, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
This is a traditional form of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and WP:NPOVD, Other have accepted that I reverted the Sheen Khalai source. Otherwise that would be reverted by Kansas bear or Dough Weller(see page history when this was done). Why is this WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and WP:CRUSH : The Sheen khalai themselves say they are of Punjabi Ancestry. So who are you to judge? https://www.thebetterindia.com/155394/hindu-pashtun-shilpi-batra-sheenkhalai-afghanistan/ And Why are you changing the ethnic group region to South Asia? Is Afghanistan and West Pakistan as native land incorrect or something? Because if it is let me know. This seems more Political then Informative, Hopefully this is not the case.Casperti (talk) 22:42, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Also the source you Citate here is Ethnic Groups of South Asia and the Pacific: An Encyclopedia: An Encyclopedia citing there are only Sunni Muslim and a Small Shia minority (also Christian converts) Casperti (talk) 00:23, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
  1. ^ Reena Nanda (2018). From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story. Bloomsbury Publishing India. pp. 97–98. ISBN 978-93-8664-344-5.; Columbia University [1]
The source provided in the article clearly states that those Sikh Pashtuns identify themselves as being members of the ethnic group, with Pashto being their mother tongue, not Punjabi. [8] Additionally the material removed by Casperti has been replaced since the references clearly speak of Hindu Pashtuns who practise Pashtunwali, thus meeting the cultural definition of being Pashtun. [9] Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 03:59, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
@Aman.kumar.goel: This is what exactly what the problem is. The Afghan / Pashtun Sikh and Hindus are identified as Pashtuns. https://www.samaa.tv/culture/2018/07/how-the-sikhs-settled-in-khyber-pakhtunkhwa/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3138282.stm All of them say that. This is true but this page is about ethnic Pashtuns and the definition of Pashtuns is that their Father need to be Pashtun according to this page.

They themselves identify as Pashtuns as you also mentioned. But are of Punjabi ancestry. Which is also called Hindki. @Uanfala: knows that the Hindus and Sikhs of Afghanistan and KPK Pakistan are called Hindkowans by the locals despite their fluency in Pashto and Pashto culture (Or Tajik culture in Kabul and Ghazni). They are called Afghan Hindus or Pashtun Hindus. but by locals Hindki or Hindkowans because of their Punjabi ancestry. (Mostly Khatri). The only source that was not saying they were of Punjabi ancestry was the hindu.com Sheen khalai source but now we have found they also saying that they are of Punjabi ancestry. Whether they should be placed in Hindki or Hindkowans or in this page Pashtuns is up to the consensus. @Wikaviani: was also part of that discussion last year. Casperti (talk) 16:18, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

I will be back with a more detailed reply soon, but you need to read WP:SYNTH and stop WP:CANVASSING. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 16:24, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
You must read the source you cited again [10]. It states that the Pashtun Hindus identified themselves as Punjabis when they came to India to fit in because they weren't accepted by their neighbours. The individuals mentioned in the article are Pashtuns, not Punjabis. The source mentions that their appearance, dress, and language is Pashtun/Pashto. Even Hamid Karzai identified them this way. I don't think there is any issue which needs to be addressed now. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 16:46, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

You should read it maybe again. Reading can be hard. but I will explain it carefully for you. These Hindu ladies as they state are from the Quetta Loralai region, nowadays Pakistan. They have moved from Quetta to India in 1947. Shilpi Batra the Young girl/lady in the Articles did not know her Hindu Pashtun identity. She always thought she was fully Punjabi as her ancestors had to be Punjabi due to their Caste, surname, religion, etc. But she is not a "Punjabi" as she found out through her Grandmother but an Afghan/Pashtun Hindu from Quetta. As all Afghan (Or Pashtun) Hindus, they are of Punjabi ancestry. Even Dough Weller accepted that this source is solved by the Hindu ladies themselves. Hamid Karzai only met them, he met that day all Hindus and Sikhs of Afghanistan/KPK. If He said "They are Non-Hindki Pashtun Hindus" let me know. All Quetta Hindus are called "Pathan Hindu" as how would you otherwise call them? They cannot be called normally Punjabi. That's why you have a term for them that's called 'Pashtuns/Afghans Hindus and Sikhs'" aka Hindki Hindkowans! Here are more sources that all of the Pashtun Hindus/Sikhs are of Punjabi ancestry multi-tongued-peshawars-happy-hindus-and-sikhs/Tribune But most importantly the Sheen Khalai source. It is more than clear they are of Punjabi ancestry. Also the book "From Quetta to Delhi" explains this. Just try to understand , and we will in Meantime wait for more opinions on this. Casperti (talk) 17:45, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Hindkowans are not Pashtuns and do not identify themselves as Pashtuns. Rather, Hindkowans speak a dialect of Panjabi. They are from two different areas that are very very far from one another. Hindkowans are from the Peshawar area and these Hindu Pashtuns are from Loralai. Your dependence over your personal research is clearly not enough. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 14:19, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
There we go again, you are not reading the source are you (Hindkowans is the term Pashtuns use for anyone who speak the Western Punjabi dialects called Hindko in general by Pashtuns, it is like Farsiwan but for Western Punjabis)? They are identifying as Pashtuns like all non-muslim Hindki / Hindkowans as I showed you their in source above, it was just an example so you could understand it. They all (the non-muslim Hindki Pashto speakers) identify as Pashtuns. Also, I do not know why I am trying to explain it you. Per the source given by betterindia.com, the Ladies have Punjabi Ancestors. That's it, done. All reliable scientific sources about Pashtuns do not show Hinduism as their minority religion. All of the sources that are about the specific Pashtun ethnic group show only this: Sunni Muslim with a Shia minority (sometimes Christian converts too) that's it. Here is the list of sources that are talking about the ethnic group:

Reliable scientific sources are here above. This is what we use in Wikipedia. There is no source that is about the ethnicity Pashtun specifically and not saying Sunni Islam with Shia minority. There is no source mentioning any other thing.

This is no rocket science and No Personal research. Your answer is here above, loud and clear. Also These sources are reliable and the Sheen khalai has been debunked. It is accepted by Kansas Bear and Dough weller, I will change it after the protection is off the page back to the version of Dough Weller https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pashtuns&diff=933538762&oldid=933538449. Only in the relgion section on paragraph 6, it can stay that: "Lasty there is little information left about the Sikh Pashtuns". As Dough requested to let stay. Although I do not agree with it, it will stay. About the Hindu Quettan's they themselves identify as Pashtun but are of Punjabi ancestry. "Quetta to Delhi" is about the Quetta ladies so you have now 2 evidences that they themselves say it. "My Mother had defined herself as a Hindu Pathan from Quetta, Affirming Cultural and regional identity over religious differences". From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story, ".....Of course she Knew Mother was Punjabi"From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story + Themselves in the article https://www.thebetterindia.com/155394/hindu-pashtun-shilpi-batra-sheenkhalai-afghanistan/ admitting they have Punjabi ancestry but should actually identify as Pathan Hindu and not as fully Punjabi. They are indeed called Pashtun Hindu or Afghan Hindu but are not ethnically so. The term that is used for the Afghan/Pashtun Hindu/Sikh is Hindki but are also just called Afghan hindu or Pashtun hindu but are not ethnic part of it. Thats the whole point. I will stop with talking, as it was already accepted. Accepted by everyone except you (And Shashank if you are not 1 person). I will change it back to Dough Wellers version: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pashtuns&diff=933538762&oldid=933538449 when the Protection is gone. Also just read, that your South Asia mentioning will be deleted by the user Mathglot. Read the last talk page here below. Casperti (talk) 01:02, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

  • I'd support omitting mention of Hindus and Sikhs in the infobox. Of course, they can be described at length in the relevant section, but the infobox ought to be only a summary: it can't be an exhaustive catalogue of all minor marginal groups. At the very least, these are unlikely to be the only minorities: it's quite probable that there will be at least some Pashtuns in Pakistan and the diaspora who are Christian, atheist or agnostic. – Uanfala (talk) 19:38, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
    At the very least, most of the the current version's refs for the infobox can't stay: #13 only mentions Hindu Pasthuns within the context of hearsay, #15 and #17 are the same ref to the CIA World Factbook, which talks about Afghanistan but says nothing that I can see specifically about the Pashtuns, #16 is alright (but it only supports the statement about the Sunni and Twelver Shia), and only #14 talks of Hindu Pashtuns. That last source looks good, and it's definitely worth using with some caution, but I'm weary of having a strong statement about Hindu Pasthuns being supported by an article in a newspaper. Can't we find an ethnographic source for that? The fact that the group self-identifies as Pashtun is a strong indicator that it should be considered as such, but there are still lingering doubts given the well-documented overall importance of Islam for Pasthun identity. And the fact that they speak Pashto doesn't mean much: language ≠ ethnicity, even for the case of Pasthuns; for example, there are Hindko-speakers of Kohat and Peshawar districts who are shifting to Pashto without presumably losing their previous ethnic identities, and there are Pasthuns in Hazara, who are abandoning Pashto in favour of Hindko apparently without their ethnic identity as Pasthuns getting affected. – Uanfala (talk) 20:12, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
Uanfala, just to be clear, you only advocate removing the mention of Hindu Pashtuns in the inbofox, right? If that's the case, do you also support removing mention of another minority community, Twelver Shia Pashtuns, from the infobox too? Take into consideration that the font size in the box is different for the majority religious community and the minority religious community. I agree with your statement that "the group self-identifies as Pashtun is a strong indicator that it should be considered as such". There are other sources available regarding Hindu Pashtuns, a reason why the material in the article should be retained. [11] [12] [13] [yourstory.com/2018/01/filmmaker-goes-back-roots-traces-history-hindu-pashtuns/] [14] Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 06:40, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
You are showing the same ladies again, the sheen khalai movie ladies who identify as such. Identifying as Pashtun does not make you ethnic part of it. As, long there is no Ethnographic source showing that there is a existence of a blood ethnic group of Hindus, there is no point to put Hindu into the infobox as Uanfala also explained. But as Uanfala, Dough Weller and Kansas Bear agreed on is that it should be mentioned and can be described at length in the relevant section as it is worthy to mention. Like it was done in Dough Weller's Version [15] Casperti (talk) 16:33, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Doug Weller and Kansas Bear both reverted you, actually and supported the inclusion of the material you censored. [16] [17] Allow them to speak for themselves instead of misquoting them. You appear to be cherry picking on all sides here. Shivkarandholiya12 (talk) 08:32, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

You guys know nothing of Hindkis or Pashtuns ... only the one recorded in Makhzan e Afghan is a Pashtun so we don't have any Pashtun Hindu or Sikh but only some would speak this language out pf necessity. Hindkis aren't always of Punjabi ancestry or Hindu ancestry like Karlughs, Awans, Maliyaars, Marjans, Ghakkars and many others aren't Khatris or Punjabis per se but reckoned as Hindkis. Anyone who's not part of the majority tribe is classified as a Hindki also at times especially if he had no ownership of land. No Kakars are Hindus please do update yourself before qouting a news item as this one Regards Azmarai76 (talk) 17:00, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @Azmarai76: for the explanation. Casperti (talk) 19:33, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Shivakarand before making claims. Just check what was reverted and open your eyes. The infobox religion info was not reverted. They (Kansas bear and Dough) did not want me to revert the relevant section (Like Uanfala). Everyone can see that [18] [19]. So they wanted that information to stay in the relevant section. They did not revert me on the infobox section like you do. I now agree with them, it is worth it to be mentioned in the relevant section like Uanfala also wants here above. The sentence that starts with "Lastly there is little information.....". But like Uanfala said here above Identifying as Pashtun (like they admit) does not mean they are ethnic part of it. Therefore it should be not mentioned as it would be a dubious claim. Pure ethnically based like here above explained by Azmarai. As long as you cannot show a reliable ethnographic source. Do not change it back. There is not even a single ETHNOGRAPHIC source that is mentioning that Pashtuns have Hindus. Even the christian converts are mentioned in some ethnographic sources but not even a single one mentions Hinduism. What you want to achieve is an excepetional claim: WP:EXTRAORDINARY read this WP. Again, identifying as such based on language and culture does not make you one + they (the Quetta ladies) admit being of Punjabi ancestry .So I do not see why you keep reverting. Yes, they are indeed mentioned and identified sometimes as Pashtun / Afghan hindus based on their language and customs because they live/lived there. Also what Uanfala mentioned show an Ethnographic source then I will accept it. But for now the suggested solution ,that it should be solely mentioned in the relevant section (like it is now), is a good idea. So try to find an ethnographic source about Pashtuns that says Pashtuns have a hindu minority. Every source citing religion for ethnic groups is based on ethnographic (including statstic and Census based sources) sources. Like on other wikipedia's ethnical pages (Randomly chosen): Visayans, Punjabis, Norwegians, Berbers, Lebanese people, Oromo people Balochis, Kazakhs etc. So show an ethnographic source and be our guest and change the infobox's religion. Till now none of them do neither do the ethnographic acadamic reliable sources above. They only mention Sunni Islam and Shia minority (1-2 sources mentions Christian converts too) Casperti (talk) 19:33, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Maybe @El C: has an opinion too. Hello EL_C, because I can understand you do not like to constantely change the protection level of this page. You can maybe give an opinion on this if you like. What do you think of @Uanfala:'s suggestion? Casperti (talk) 19:33, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, this is not a dispute with which I am familiar. Maybe launch an RfC to better determine the consensus...(?) El_C 19:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Well that not a problem @El C:. In that case we will wait if Shivakarand has an pure reliable Ethnographic source supporting his WP:EXTRAORDINARY claim. If he cannnot find/prove his claim then we will call an official third opinion to decide. Thank you for the advice. Casperti (talk) 00:25, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Fer sure. Certainly, extraordinary claims require extraordinarily-strong sources. Failure to live up to this may be viewed as tendentious editing. El_C 00:33, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Given you have already tried enough for more than 1 year now, I would recommend WP:RFC to get rid of the parameter. There is no consensus until now to remove it. Shashank5988 (talk) 20:36, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
This source was disputed for 1 year and stood as such. That you dont accept it because of your own POV is another case. Maybe you should read what other people write about this too?! Uanfala, El_C, Azmarai and the edit of Dough weller say enough. Just supply an ethnographic source that supports this extraordinary claim of these ladies. If you are so certain of this case it should be in ethnographic sources?? As you can read here above faillure for this is just tendentious editing. So just prove an ethnographic source and nobody will hold you down and be our guest and change it :)Casperti (talk) 12:58, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
El_C has offered no view and Azmarai76, just like you, is relying on his personal view. I don't have to bother finding sources because you don't need anymore reliable sources here than what we already have. Shashank5988 (talk) 12:51, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Everyone has eyes and can read what others write. If you are so aggresive and certain provide an ethnographic source proving the claim. Simple as that. until then Uanfala's solution will stay.Casperti (talk) 10:45, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Disputed source Solved

After placing 50.000 bytes of information that "Afghan/Pashtun/Baloch" Hindus are of Punjabi descendant. This Information is now well placed (not by me) on the Hindki and Hindkowans.

But the source we now have/had as disputed was this news article about the Hindus of Quetta: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tattooed-blue-skinned-hindu-pushtuns-look-back-at-their-roots/article22645932.ece

Shashank and Anupam were in favor of the source while I and Wikiaviani (and some people who deleted that source) explained that they are not Ethnic Pashtuns/Balochs but are called "Pashtun",'Baloch' or "Farsiwan' Hindus which is how they identify.

So these sources are from the same people that are from Quetta:

"My Mother had defined herself as a Hindu Pathan from Quetta, Affirming Cultural and regional identity over religious differences."

— Reena Nanda, From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story – [1]


And the important source that is directly quoted from the person that was in the article:

" I was unaware of my identity as a Hindu Pashtun for the longest time. In Indian society, people are categorised on the basis of their caste and religion very early. To somehow adhere to the mainstream brackets of caste and religion my ancestors identified themselves as Punjabis. I grew up thinking that I was a Punjabi,”

— Shilpi Batra, "Hindu Pashtuns: How One Granddaughter Uncovered India’s Forgotten Links to Afghanistan", Batra, Shilpi (8 August 2018). "Hindu Pashtuns: How One Granddaughter Uncovered India's Forgotten Links to Afghanistan". Retrieved 13 December 2019.



This is the Person and the old ladies themselves that the disputed source was about. I found the article today. This clarifies everything. As I explained they are indeed "Pashtun" Hindu but not on the basis of ethnicity. So here you go they themselves say it. They are like all Hindus of Afghanistan (And Pashtun/Baloch areas of Pakistan) of Punjabi Khatri descendants. Like she confirmed here ancestors were Punjabi. Hope this helps for all. Casperti (talk) 20:59, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

You are doing WP:SYNTH. If someone else agrees with your revert which you have made probably 100 times now, then let them revert and explain their edits here. So far I am seeing nobody and you are apparently alone with your original research. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 03:10, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
This is a traditional form of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and WP:NPOVD, Other have accepted that I reverted the Sheen Khalai source. Otherwise that would be reverted by Kansas bear or Dough Weller(see page history when this was done). Why is this WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and WP:CRUSH : The Sheen khalai themselves say they are of Punjabi Ancestry. So who are you to judge? https://www.thebetterindia.com/155394/hindu-pashtun-shilpi-batra-sheenkhalai-afghanistan/ And Why are you changing the ethnic group region to South Asia? Is Afghanistan and West Pakistan as native land incorrect or something? Because if it is let me know. This seems more Political then Informative, Hopefully this is not the case.Casperti (talk) 22:42, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Also the source you Citate here is Ethnic Groups of South Asia and the Pacific: An Encyclopedia: An Encyclopedia citing there are only Sunni Muslim and a Small Shia minority (also Christian converts) Casperti (talk) 00:23, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
  1. ^ Reena Nanda (2018). From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story. Bloomsbury Publishing India. pp. 97–98. ISBN 978-93-8664-344-5.; Columbia University [2]
The source provided in the article clearly states that those Sikh Pashtuns identify themselves as being members of the ethnic group, with Pashto being their mother tongue, not Punjabi. [20] Additionally the material removed by Casperti has been replaced since the references clearly speak of Hindu Pashtuns who practise Pashtunwali, thus meeting the cultural definition of being Pashtun. [21] Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 03:59, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
@Aman.kumar.goel: This is what exactly what the problem is. The Afghan / Pashtun Sikh and Hindus are identified as Pashtuns. https://www.samaa.tv/culture/2018/07/how-the-sikhs-settled-in-khyber-pakhtunkhwa/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3138282.stm All of them say that. This is true but this page is about ethnic Pashtuns and the definition of Pashtuns is that their Father need to be Pashtun according to this page.

They themselves identify as Pashtuns as you also mentioned. But are of Punjabi ancestry. Which is also called Hindki. @Uanfala: knows that the Hindus and Sikhs of Afghanistan and KPK Pakistan are called Hindkowans by the locals despite their fluency in Pashto and Pashto culture (Or Tajik culture in Kabul and Ghazni). They are called Afghan Hindus or Pashtun Hindus. but by locals Hindki or Hindkowans because of their Punjabi ancestry. (Mostly Khatri). The only source that was not saying they were of Punjabi ancestry was the hindu.com Sheen khalai source but now we have found they also saying that they are of Punjabi ancestry. Whether they should be placed in Hindki or Hindkowans or in this page Pashtuns is up to the consensus. @Wikaviani: was also part of that discussion last year. Casperti (talk) 16:18, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

I will be back with a more detailed reply soon, but you need to read WP:SYNTH and stop WP:CANVASSING. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 16:24, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
You must read the source you cited again [22]. It states that the Pashtun Hindus identified themselves as Punjabis when they came to India to fit in because they weren't accepted by their neighbours. The individuals mentioned in the article are Pashtuns, not Punjabis. The source mentions that their appearance, dress, and language is Pashtun/Pashto. Even Hamid Karzai identified them this way. I don't think there is any issue which needs to be addressed now. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 16:46, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

You should read it maybe again. Reading can be hard. but I will explain it carefully for you. These Hindu ladies as they state are from the Quetta Loralai region, nowadays Pakistan. They have moved from Quetta to India in 1947. Shilpi Batra the Young girl/lady in the Articles did not know her Hindu Pashtun identity. She always thought she was fully Punjabi as her ancestors had to be Punjabi due to their Caste, surname, religion, etc. But she is not a "Punjabi" as she found out through her Grandmother but an Afghan/Pashtun Hindu from Quetta. As all Afghan (Or Pashtun) Hindus, they are of Punjabi ancestry. Even Dough Weller accepted that this source is solved by the Hindu ladies themselves. Hamid Karzai only met them, he met that day all Hindus and Sikhs of Afghanistan/KPK. If He said "They are Non-Hindki Pashtun Hindus" let me know. All Quetta Hindus are called "Pathan Hindu" as how would you otherwise call them? They cannot be called normally Punjabi. That's why you have a term for them that's called 'Pashtuns/Afghans Hindus and Sikhs'" aka Hindki Hindkowans! Here are more sources that all of the Pashtun Hindus/Sikhs are of Punjabi ancestry multi-tongued-peshawars-happy-hindus-and-sikhs/Tribune But most importantly the Sheen Khalai source. It is more than clear they are of Punjabi ancestry. Also the book "From Quetta to Delhi" explains this. Just try to understand , and we will in Meantime wait for more opinions on this. Casperti (talk) 17:45, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Hindkowans are not Pashtuns and do not identify themselves as Pashtuns. Rather, Hindkowans speak a dialect of Panjabi. They are from two different areas that are very very far from one another. Hindkowans are from the Peshawar area and these Hindu Pashtuns are from Loralai. Your dependence over your personal research is clearly not enough. Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 14:19, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
There we go again, you are not reading the source are you (Hindkowans is the term Pashtuns use for anyone who speak the Western Punjabi dialects called Hindko in general by Pashtuns, it is like Farsiwan but for Western Punjabis)? They are identifying as Pashtuns like all non-muslim Hindki / Hindkowans as I showed you their in source above, it was just an example so you could understand it. They all (the non-muslim Hindki Pashto speakers) identify as Pashtuns. Also, I do not know why I am trying to explain it you. Per the source given by betterindia.com, the Ladies have Punjabi Ancestors. That's it, done. All reliable scientific sources about Pashtuns do not show Hinduism as their minority religion. All of the sources that are about the specific Pashtun ethnic group show only this: Sunni Muslim with a Shia minority (sometimes Christian converts too) that's it. Here is the list of sources that are talking about the ethnic group:

Reliable scientific sources are here above. This is what we use in Wikipedia. There is no source that is about the ethnicity Pashtun specifically and not saying Sunni Islam with Shia minority. There is no source mentioning any other thing.

This is no rocket science and No Personal research. Your answer is here above, loud and clear. Also These sources are reliable and the Sheen khalai has been debunked. It is accepted by Kansas Bear and Dough weller, I will change it after the protection is off the page back to the version of Dough Weller https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pashtuns&diff=933538762&oldid=933538449. Only in the relgion section on paragraph 6, it can stay that: "Lasty there is little information left about the Sikh Pashtuns". As Dough requested to let stay. Although I do not agree with it, it will stay. About the Hindu Quettan's they themselves identify as Pashtun but are of Punjabi ancestry. "Quetta to Delhi" is about the Quetta ladies so you have now 2 evidences that they themselves say it. "My Mother had defined herself as a Hindu Pathan from Quetta, Affirming Cultural and regional identity over religious differences". From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story, ".....Of course she Knew Mother was Punjabi"From Quetta to Delhi: A Partition Story + Themselves in the article https://www.thebetterindia.com/155394/hindu-pashtun-shilpi-batra-sheenkhalai-afghanistan/ admitting they have Punjabi ancestry but should actually identify as Pathan Hindu and not as fully Punjabi. They are indeed called Pashtun Hindu or Afghan Hindu but are not ethnically so. The term that is used for the Afghan/Pashtun Hindu/Sikh is Hindki but are also just called Afghan hindu or Pashtun hindu but are not ethnic part of it. Thats the whole point. I will stop with talking, as it was already accepted. Accepted by everyone except you (And Shashank if you are not 1 person). I will change it back to Dough Wellers version: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pashtuns&diff=933538762&oldid=933538449 when the Protection is gone. Also just read, that your South Asia mentioning will be deleted by the user Mathglot. Read the last talk page here below. Casperti (talk) 01:02, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

  • I'd support omitting mention of Hindus and Sikhs in the infobox. Of course, they can be described at length in the relevant section, but the infobox ought to be only a summary: it can't be an exhaustive catalogue of all minor marginal groups. At the very least, these are unlikely to be the only minorities: it's quite probable that there will be at least some Pashtuns in Pakistan and the diaspora who are Christian, atheist or agnostic. – Uanfala (talk) 19:38, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
    At the very least, most of the the current version's refs for the infobox can't stay: #13 only mentions Hindu Pasthuns within the context of hearsay, #15 and #17 are the same ref to the CIA World Factbook, which talks about Afghanistan but says nothing that I can see specifically about the Pashtuns, #16 is alright (but it only supports the statement about the Sunni and Twelver Shia), and only #14 talks of Hindu Pashtuns. That last source looks good, and it's definitely worth using with some caution, but I'm weary of having a strong statement about Hindu Pasthuns being supported by an article in a newspaper. Can't we find an ethnographic source for that? The fact that the group self-identifies as Pashtun is a strong indicator that it should be considered as such, but there are still lingering doubts given the well-documented overall importance of Islam for Pasthun identity. And the fact that they speak Pashto doesn't mean much: language ≠ ethnicity, even for the case of Pasthuns; for example, there are Hindko-speakers of Kohat and Peshawar districts who are shifting to Pashto without presumably losing their previous ethnic identities, and there are Pasthuns in Hazara, who are abandoning Pashto in favour of Hindko apparently without their ethnic identity as Pasthuns getting affected. – Uanfala (talk) 20:12, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
Uanfala, just to be clear, you only advocate removing the mention of Hindu Pashtuns in the inbofox, right? If that's the case, do you also support removing mention of another minority community, Twelver Shia Pashtuns, from the infobox too? Take into consideration that the font size in the box is different for the majority religious community and the minority religious community. I agree with your statement that "the group self-identifies as Pashtun is a strong indicator that it should be considered as such". There are other sources available regarding Hindu Pashtuns, a reason why the material in the article should be retained. [23] [24] [25] [yourstory.com/2018/01/filmmaker-goes-back-roots-traces-history-hindu-pashtuns/] [26] Aman Kumar Goel(Talk) 06:40, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
You are showing the same ladies again, the sheen khalai movie ladies who identify as such. Identifying as Pashtun does not make you ethnic part of it. As, long there is no Ethnographic source showing that there is a existence of a blood ethnic group of Hindus, there is no point to put Hindu into the infobox as Uanfala also explained. But as Uanfala, Dough Weller and Kansas Bear agreed on is that it should be mentioned and can be described at length in the relevant section as it is worthy to mention. Like it was done in Dough Weller's Version [27] Casperti (talk) 16:33, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
Doug Weller and Kansas Bear both reverted you, actually and supported the inclusion of the material you censored. [28] [29] Allow them to speak for themselves instead of misquoting them. You appear to be cherry picking on all sides here. Shivkarandholiya12 (talk) 08:32, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

You guys know nothing of Hindkis or Pashtuns ... only the one recorded in Makhzan e Afghan is a Pashtun so we don't have any Pashtun Hindu or Sikh but only some would speak this language out pf necessity. Hindkis aren't always of Punjabi ancestry or Hindu ancestry like Karlughs, Awans, Maliyaars, Marjans, Ghakkars and many others aren't Khatris or Punjabis per se but reckoned as Hindkis. Anyone who's not part of the majority tribe is classified as a Hindki also at times especially if he had no ownership of land. No Kakars are Hindus please do update yourself before qouting a news item as this one Regards Azmarai76 (talk) 17:00, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you @Azmarai76: for the explanation. Casperti (talk) 19:33, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Shivakarand before making claims. Just check what was reverted and open your eyes. The infobox religion info was not reverted. They (Kansas bear and Dough) did not want me to revert the relevant section (Like Uanfala). Everyone can see that [30] [31]. So they wanted that information to stay in the relevant section. They did not revert me on the infobox section like you do. I now agree with them, it is worth it to be mentioned in the relevant section like Uanfala also wants here above. The sentence that starts with "Lastly there is little information.....". But like Uanfala said here above Identifying as Pashtun (like they admit) does not mean they are ethnic part of it. Therefore it should be not mentioned as it would be a dubious claim. Pure ethnically based like here above explained by Azmarai. As long as you cannot show a reliable ethnographic source. Do not change it back. There is not even a single ETHNOGRAPHIC source that is mentioning that Pashtuns have Hindus. Even the christian converts are mentioned in some ethnographic sources but not even a single one mentions Hinduism. What you want to achieve is an excepetional claim: WP:EXTRAORDINARY read this WP. Again, identifying as such based on language and culture does not make you one + they (the Quetta ladies) admit being of Punjabi ancestry .So I do not see why you keep reverting. Yes, they are indeed mentioned and identified sometimes as Pashtun / Afghan hindus based on their language and customs because they live/lived there. Also what Uanfala mentioned show an Ethnographic source then I will accept it. But for now the suggested solution ,that it should be solely mentioned in the relevant section (like it is now), is a good idea. So try to find an ethnographic source about Pashtuns that says Pashtuns have a hindu minority. Every source citing religion for ethnic groups is based on ethnographic (including statstic and Census based sources) sources. Like on other wikipedia's ethnical pages (Randomly chosen): Visayans, Punjabis, Norwegians, Berbers, Lebanese people, Oromo people Balochis, Kazakhs etc. So show an ethnographic source and be our guest and change the infobox's religion. Till now none of them do neither do the ethnographic acadamic reliable sources above. They only mention Sunni Islam and Shia minority (1-2 sources mentions Christian converts too) Casperti (talk) 19:33, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Maybe @El C: has an opinion too. Hello EL_C, because I can understand you do not like to constantely change the protection level of this page. You can maybe give an opinion on this if you like. What do you think of @Uanfala:'s suggestion? Casperti (talk) 19:33, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, this is not a dispute with which I am familiar. Maybe launch an RfC to better determine the consensus...(?) El_C 19:38, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Well that not a problem @El C:. In that case we will wait if Shivakarand has an pure reliable Ethnographic source supporting his WP:EXTRAORDINARY claim. If he cannnot find/prove his claim then we will call an official third opinion to decide. Thank you for the advice. Casperti (talk) 00:25, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Fer sure. Certainly, extraordinary claims require extraordinarily-strong sources. Failure to live up to this may be viewed as tendentious editing. El_C 00:33, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Given you have already tried enough for more than 1 year now, I would recommend WP:RFC to get rid of the parameter. There is no consensus until now to remove it. Shashank5988 (talk) 20:36, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
This source was disputed for 1 year and stood as such. That you dont accept it because of your own POV is another case. Maybe you should read what other people write about this too?! Uanfala, El_C, Azmarai and the edit of Dough weller say enough. Just supply an ethnographic source that supports this extraordinary claim of these ladies. If you are so certain of this case it should be in ethnographic sources?? As you can read here above faillure for this is just tendentious editing. So just prove an ethnographic source and nobody will hold you down and be our guest and change it :)Casperti (talk) 12:58, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
El_C has offered no view and Azmarai76, just like you, is relying on his personal view. I don't have to bother finding sources because you don't need anymore reliable sources here than what we already have. Shashank5988 (talk) 12:51, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Everyone has eyes and can read what others write. If you are so aggresive and certain provide an ethnographic source proving the claim. Simple as that. until then Uanfala's solution will stay.Casperti (talk) 10:45, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pashtuns/Archive_19&oldid=1033965178"