Talk:Kho people

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kho people article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in Pakistani English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Ethnic groups

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Pakistan: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Mid‑importance

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Kho people in Jammu and Kashmir

Where do these kho people live in Jammu and Kashmir and that too in such a heavy number of 1900. I looked at the Jammu and Kashmir page and there was no mention of Kho people in Jammu and Kashmir. Anyone who is editing this page should provide reliable sources. According to Rehmat Aziz Chitrali a famous chitrali linguist there are no more 1000 Kho people in India who live in Chatur district. Imazharyes (talk) 00:50, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indo-Aryan genetics

See The Kho people: archaic Indo-Aryans. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:54, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019

@Fylindfotberserk: The link you provided in support of Kowar spoken in India contains no mention of Khowar. Provide the proper link, your link contains nothing as such.

@Identityanddifference:Check the link https://www.ethnologue.com/language/khw here]. Scroll to "Also spoken in" section, open it, you'll find "19,200 in India (2000)" written. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:20, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: I cannot open this link it requires a subscription and I seriously doubt the authenticity. Provide a survey conducted by the government of India or other such official statistics. I don't understand why are you referring to some commercial site. @Fylindfotberserk: So, are you going to remove India from this article or should I remove it myself?

@Identityanddifference: It is a third party reliable source. Doesn't need subscription. Create a free account and see. Ethnologue has recently started restricting anonymous viewers. And Kho article is well patrolled by Wikipedia editors. Why do you think we will keep unsourced stuff here? And about the genetics section you added, I can only view the abtract and the supplementary docx, which doesn't mention the mtDNA percentages. Is there a free full PDF? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:40, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: See, here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331844587_Genetic_structure_of_Kho_population_from_north-western_Pakistan_based_on_mtDNA_control_region_sequences

@Identityanddifference: Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:54, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: Welcome :) I got the Indian statistics, but now I'm going to update the statistics for Pakistan since the current figures are not official and without reference.

@Identityanddifference: Keep in mind that the source you provide is WP:RS and explicitly mentions "Khowar"/"Kho". We cannot add data if the source only mentions the total amount of people in XYZ district. As you can see it is better to have conversation and edit after mutual agreement. Cheers!. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:06, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Identityanddifference: You know what, I'll use this Ethnologue source to quote population figures of Pakistan as well as source Gizer district, etc. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:39, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: How do they collect statistics? Do they conduct their own survey or get data from gov?

@Identityanddifference: They get data from government as well as other means. Ethnologue is a reliable WP:Independent source which is used by almost all ethnic articles I've seen, but obviously if someone has a more recent data, they can update it in the article. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:15, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: They've not mentioned anywhere how they collect data, this issue is mentioned on its own wiki page as well. I don't find any mention of Khowar spoken in India other than this site and few other Christian missionary sites (which contain reference back to this). I checked Britannica and "European Foundation for South Asian Studies" [1] and there is no mention of Khowar spoken in India, neither it is stated anywhere by the gov. of India.

I've seen mention of specific census study in Ethnologue articles, which proves that govt. data are used. As for Khowar, it might be possible that they were grouped within Dardi or Others within the mother language Kashmiri in the Indian census [2]. Indian census typically group the minority languages under related majority languages. If you are interested, you can see that a lot of different languages like Haryanvi, Bhojpuri, Sadri are all grouped under Hind, when infact Standard Hindi speakers are much lower in number. Same with Punjabi, Bengali and other languages spoken by majority of the region. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:20, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: "it might be possible that they were grouped within Dardi or Others within the mother language Kashmiri" If that were the case they would have merged all Dardic languages under one group, but I see the separate mentioning of Shina and Kashmiri in Indian state census. "Might be" is not a strong argument. "I've seen mention of specific census study in Ethnologue articles, which proves that govt. data are used." The gov. doesn't provide details on Khowar then how do they know the population of Khowar speakers?

Might not be a strong argument, but it is a fact that many related languages are clubbed within a larger regional language in India. There are other ways of getting data on a population. Govt. census is one of them. CIA sources are also used. Though I'm not sure how Ethnologue does this. Since Ethnologue has been used reliably in a lot of articles, but your concerns are also legit, I'd like the discussion to be on the Khowar language article. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: yeah, great!

Indian popualtions numbers deleted as per discussion in the Khowar language article talk page. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:51, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020 Religion

@Patriotpk: The sentence on religion is divided in parts. The first part : The Kho people formerly practiced a religion that is akin to that observed by the Kalash today,.. was already sourced and only establishes the similarity between the religions of Kho and Kalash. The second part of the sentence only clarifies the type of religion followed by the Kalash not the Kho : ..which academics classify as ancient Hinduism or animism which is also well sourced. Where is WP:OR is that? Pinging Anupam. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:44, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The source for the first part says "..however, it is quite clear that the pre-Islamic culture of the Kho was of the Peristani type, and probably akin to that of the Kalasha". I'll add that part. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:22, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Only the first sentence is about Khowar which says their religion is akin to that of Kalasg doesn't explicitly mentions Hinduism or if it is the same religion. The second sentence is about Kalash and sources don't mention Khowar. Blending sources to prove your point is violation and original research. Read the sources first. Patriotpk (talk) 08:24, 27 January 2020 (UTC) Ban evading sock -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:38, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Patriotpk:, Now keep the discussion here. And wait for Anupam to join us - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:28, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Patriotpk:, Coming to the point, original research would mean if we directly mention that Kho were followers of ancient Hinduism like the Kalash, which we are not doing. We are simply using a compound sentence, the first part of which reflects the similarity between the cultures of pre-Islamic Kho with Peristan, and that of Kalash. The second part merely explains what it means by the "Kalash religion". The source mentions the words "akin" and "peristani-type culture", I have reflected that in the text and that follows WP:NOR. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:33, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree User:Fylindfotberserk. We are not violating WP:SYNTH as we are not saying that the Kho practiced ancient Hinduism. We are simply restating what references say with respect to the religion the Kalasha observe. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam^Talk 13:37, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The combined edit implies that the religion is Hinduism (deliberately). Is mentioning Kalash religion is necessary here? No, you are manipulating multiple sources to prove a point, original research. Keep it to Khowar religion that's enough. Patriotpk (talk) 08:38, 27 January 2020 (UTC) Ban-evading sock -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:38, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Who is Anupam? Is he some sort of authority on the topic? Patriotpk (talk) 08:39, 27 January 2020 (UTC)~~ Ban-evading sock -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Patriotpk:, You cannot make changes unilaterally. Wikipedia is a community. We need to discuss as per WP:BRD, if you want to reach a consensus, if you keep edit warring, you'll get blocked. And who is Anupam, he is the one who added these texts with source. Better discuss with the person here. Kalashas follow ancient Hinduism, and "akin to that" would be left to the WP:READERS to decide. There was nothing deliberate here. Pinging @Kautilya3 - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:48, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone with no knowledge of History and just good at playing with keyboard should not edit wikipedia or he'll destroy it. Yes, limit the discussion to Khowar people and let people learn from Kalash pages about their religion. Why would you deliberately change others beliefs about a community just by linking information? You are emphasising your point here. Patriotpk (talk) 08:59, 27 January 2020 (UTC) Ban-evading sock -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:38, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly refrain from making snarky comments and personal attacks. Secondly, the part that Kho follows "an ancient form of Hinduism" has been since 2017, see here. So as per WP:STATUSQUO, longstanding things need to be discussed before any change is made (which I'm trying to enforce here). Anupam on the other hand made it clear that the Kho followed a religion "akin to" that of Kalasha (sourced), and then explained the religion of the Kalasha. That's a much better version IMO than saying they followed Hinduism. As for History, I've seen historians write contradictory thinks. It is always better to attribute the text. Now wait till the others come to join the discussion. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:30, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking me to comment here User:Fylindfotberserk. I agree that the information about ancient Hinduism should be mentioned because we have reliable sources that make it clear that this is the religion that the Kalasha follow (there is a section on the Kalash in the ancient Hinduism article itself). It is helpful to mention this in the article because it elaborates on what the Kalasha practice, cf. "probably akin to that of the Kalasha". To not mention this leaves the reader wondering what the religion is. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam^Talk 12:59, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fylindfotberserk, please see the latest research I've done; this reference, in my opinion, solidifies the decision to retain the information in the article. What are your thoughts? Anupam^Talk 14:10, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Anupam: Nice. Thanks for the source that explicitly supports the religious similarity between Kho and Kalash. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:56, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are not a historian, neither is Anupum. If there are contradictory things leave them to historians. Your job is not to provide explanations from other articles to prove your point or change other's opinions. That clearly is original research. It doesn't matter for how it is there. If it's wrong it's wrong. Second, I don't know why are you so much interested in Pakistani pages, if you are trying to relate yourself to indigenous communities of Central Asia that is not just racism but clearly shows your inferiority complex. I see from your user page that you believe yourself to be a decendent of some Aryan, white Scythian race whatever. If someone in the past pegged your mothers during invasions doesn't mean you legitimately belong to them. Beloved Shudderas please edit your own pages and your own history. Leave Pakistan to Pakistanis. Patriotpk (talk) 15:11, 27 January 2020 (UTC) Ban-evading sock - Kautilya3 (talk) 21:38, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Patriotpk, this kind of racist, nationalist nonsense does not belong here. I advise you to remove it, and state any policy-based objections you have to the content. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:21, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not surprised by this kind of an attack by a Pakistani POV pusher. Where did central Asian indigenous groups come from in the discussion? We have only established a relation between the religions of pre-Islamic Kho and Kalash of today. And last time I checked, Chitral comes in Pakistan which comes in South Asia. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:03, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are supposed to have known this guy! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:35, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I knew that after his/her/its second revert. Just not enough evidence to nail them. These should know insulting someone, some country or religion effectively is hard. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:43, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]