Talk:Kachhwaha

message: kushwah and kachawah are same please clear that  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suryaprakashkushwa (talk • contribs) 21:27, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

message: How Kachapgatha is related to kachawaha.Holywarrior 05:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Arbitrary heading

message: Note:  Project Banner with Rajasthan workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article  falls under :Category:Rajasthan or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article --  TinuCherian     (Wanna Talk?)   - 07:15, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:INDIA]] Banner/Rajasthan workgroup Addition 

message: Dear , For past many days Wikipedia is showing irrelevant information for kachwaha . Kindly note that the kshatriya's clans were not known by one or two names , there where many names or synonyms used for them. Because of being descendent from Kush (2nd son of lord Ram) Kachwahas usually known as Kushwah , but the name got stolen or copied by many Schedule Tribes and Castes of India in order to get Social recognition. Kachwaha and Kushwah word is same but the second is being copied by many other masses of India . This is a regular practice in India to copy surnames of other prominent races to gain recognition, there are other Kshatriya clans as well who are getting copied by many other masses . Ex.: Chauhans getting copied by Charmkars and Rathores are getting copied by Telies and many more. But this should not degrade the honor of any clan who put every effort to make his Nation , Culture and Race to be ahead of everything else.
ear , For past many days Wikipedia is showing irrelevant information for kachwaha . Kindly note that the kshatriya's clans were not known by one or two names , there where many names or synonyms used for them. Because of being descendent from Kush (2nd son of lord Ram) Kachwahas usually known as Kushwah , but the name got stolen or copied by many Schedule Tribes and Castes of India in order to get Social recognition. Kachwaha and Kushwah word is same but the second is being copied by many other masses of India . This is a regular practice in India to copy surnames of other prominent races to gain recognition, there are other Kshatriya clans as well who are getting copied by many other masses . Ex.: Chauhans getting copied by Charmkars and Rathores are getting copied by Telies and many more. But this should not degrade the honor of any clan who put every effort to make his Nation , Culture and Race to be ahead of everything else.
There is nothing like "Suryavanshi Kurmi" . Kurmis are entierly different then Kurms which is the other name of Kachwahas . Do not try to mix up by having similar pronunciationSiddhapratap (talk) 12:25, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You really should have started a new thread because you are replying to something that is very old. However, since you ask, we have had this discussions before somewhere and until someone comes up with reliable sources that state the two to be synonymous, they are going to be treated as separate. In fact, they may well still be treated as separate even if such sources exist because there are plenty of reliable sources that do consider them to be different - we'd just mention the other opinion in both articles.While I am well aware that sanskritisation and other forms of uplift attempts go on, nothing relating to how these subjects are presented has anything to do with the nationality of contributors to Wikipedia. We work off sources, period. - Sitush (talk) 08:28, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate Page: Kachwaha vs Kushwaha 

message: This article has for some time now been tagged for maintenance regarding various issues. I recently inserted various specific citation requests etc where there were already some citations provided for a section. However, the completely unsourced sections have been simply removed as a part of what will probably be a fairly extensive clean up.
Of course, anyone is welcome to reinstate those sections provided that they do so with citations of reliable sources. - Sitush (talk) 05:39, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up 

message: For past many days Wikipedia is showing irrelevant information for kachwaha . Kindly note that the kshatriya's  clans were not known by one or two names , there where many names or synonyms used for them. Because of being descendent from Kush (2nd son of lord Ram) Kachwahas usually known as Kushwah , but the name got stolen or copied by many Schedule Tribes and Castes of India in order to get Social recognition. Kachwaha and Kushwah word is same but the second is being copied by many other masses of India . This is a regular practice in India to copy surnames of other prominent races to gain recognition, there are other Kshatriya clans as well who are getting copied by many other masses . Ex.: Chauhans getting copied by Charmkars and Rathores are getting copied by Telies and many more. But this should not degrade the honor of any clan who put every effort to make his Nation , Culture and Race to be ahead of everything else.
There is nothing like "Suryavanshi Kurmi" . Kurmis are entierly different then Kurms which is the other name of Kachwahas . Do not try to mix up by having similar pronunciation.Siddhapratap (talk) 12:22, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have any sources to support what you are saying? Flat Out let's discuss it 12:25, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The principle of co-opting/assimilating names is common and formed a part of the sanskritisation process: Indian society has a peculiar obsession with "rank" and castes etc come and go as a consequence of both fission and fusion. However, for any individual group we do require reliable sources relating to the situation of that group - we cannot just take your word for it because that would be original research. - Sitush (talk) 12:58, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Kachwaha 

message: People keep removing sourced content from this article. As a general rule, they are removing statements associated with William Pinch and/or Christophe Jaffrelot. Although not the only two writers on the subject, those two are contemporary academics and Pinch in particular is probably the person who has studied and written of the community in the most detail.
I am open to suggestions regarding other sources that might contradict or support what the existing ones say. However, the repeated and usually unexplained removal of sourced material just because you do not like it must stop. Useful policy pages for reference include those concerning verifiability, reliable sources, neutrality and that Wikipedia is not censored. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 05:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated removals of sourced content 

message: We have an entire section concerning ancient history that appears to be based on the premise that the Kacchapaghatas are the Kachwahas. The source is respectable & got some rave reviews in academic journals - . However, I can only see a snippet view and from that I can see nothing that connects the Kacchapaghatas to the Kachwahas.
Om Gupta does mention the connection (some sort of Sanskrit root) and much more that is at odds with contemporary academic thought but we cannot use him because it is a tertiary source that does not itself give any sources and, worse, it is published by Gyan. Quite simply, we don't accept Gyan stuff, as explained at User:Sitush/Common#Gyan. We also cannot accept anything directly from Encyclopaedia Indica because that is known to contain vast amounts of copyright violation, poor synthesis and poor research (we could use stuff mentioned in EI if we can find the original from which EI got its information, if that original is reliable).
I am aware that there was a debate about the connection, which seems to have its origin in something published in 1834 by a British gentleman-scholar, but do we have anything reliable and recent? I can find this but it points out that James Tod (hopelessly unreliable) was involved and that there isn't "any really trustworthy evidence" to substantiate the connection.
If nothing decent turns up then I fear this section will have to go & a separate article concerning the Kacchapaghatas should be created. Sources for the new article could include this, this and this, none of which mention Kachwaha. - Sitush (talk) 06:37, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kacchapaghatas 

message: I have raised some valid questions related to this article in the form of edit summaries of the article. 
First of all we have to be clear in this article that Kachwaha is a Rajput clan or a separate caste group. Another possibility is that it is a Rajput clan but a Kushwaha caste group of same name also exists. As we can see the case of Khatri and Khatri clan. Both have same names, but they are different. Khatri is a caste and Khatri clan is a Jat clan. But the good thing about that case is that we have separate articles for both. I also suggest a separate article for Kacchapaghata, as suggested in the previous discussion by Sitush, if we can't clarify the things here.
My point regarding Kachwaha is that just because one or two sources refer Kachwaha as a Kushwaha sub-group, we can't ignore other hundreds of sources which refer Kachwaha as a ruling Rajput clan. The daughter of same clan got married to Akbar and she is still remembered as the first "Rajput bride" of Mughals. -Owsert (talk) 15:37, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reverted you. Please read the article properly - it already notes the Rajput claim - and also read, for starters, WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:LEAD etc. If you want to give examples of your sources from modern academic literature then feel free to list them here but don't screw up a well-sourced article just to suit your now very evident POV regarding Rajput issues. - Sitush (talk) 14:49, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

text: Sigh. Have you read the things I pointed out to you? For example, WP:LEAD explains why citations are not usually required in lead sections. There is an entire section in the article devoted to the rulers of Jaipur, who considered themselves to be Raijput; there are other sections that explain the wider 20th-century claim to that status. - Sitush (talk) 15:12, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

text: Your last paragraph defies the reliable sources. most of the rest does also, although some of it is outright original research. For example, please can you quote  a couple of paragraphs from pages 91-92 of the cited William Pinch source that demonstrates your opinion. Can you even see that source? - Sitush (talk) 16:26, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Some questions related to this article

message: Kushwah are also Kachawa rajputs but you don't mansioned it. Yogendra Pratap Archaeologist (talk) 18:30, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:V and WP:RS. And we do say , so I am unsure of the point you are making. - Sitush (talk) 19:01, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong and less information. 

message: Looking at various sources, many seem to say/claim that Kachhi and Kachwaha are very much interrelated, many of the sources are already listed in the article, I would talk about one such source "District Gazetters of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh: Jalaun".
It says "Kachhis are the fourth most numerous caste, number 27,016 souls and form 7·22 per cent of the Hindu population. Both in Kunch and Jalaun they form 8 per cent., in Orai 6·3 per cent. and only 4·3 per cent. in Kalpi. They belong almost entirely . to the subdivision called Kachhwaha Kachhis, who declare they are descendants of the union of Kachwaha Rajputs of Narwar with women of inferior caste. Their traditions point to Narwar as their home, and the fact that they are found in largest numbers in the same localities where Kachhwaha Rajputs predominate suggests that. Their claims are not wholly groundless. Possibly the Rajputs brought them with themselves when they spread over this tract of country. In Jalaun as elsewhere they are among the best of cultivators and by no means confine themselves to market-gardening."
Also the source is listed in the official Uttar Pradesh government archives http://uparchives.up.nic.in/gazetters.aspx
(Page64 :: http://dspace.gipe.ac.in/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10973/37254/GIPE-017950.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y )
:Sources from the British Raj era are not reliable, so I'm afraid this is somewhat pointless. - Sitush (talk) 11:36, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kachwaha or Kachhi 

message: As per Indian repository Shodhganga Kachwahas conquered amber from meena rulers by treacherous act and same stated by colonel james tod Cjpatanbaaz (talk) 16:53, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  How Kachwahas conquered Amber from Meena rulers 

message: The writer of this content is clearly misleading the facts and not ready to listen Madhogarh (talk) 17:52, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading information/ Kachwaha 

message: kachhwahas are not the branch of kushwaha. In my village(Bihar) kushwahas comes under OBC and Kachhwahas do not. If they would be same, they would have classified into same category. In hariyana also the same classiification. 
And also this article says that kachhwahas started claiming themselves as Rajput since 1920 but if this is so, then, look at your second wikipedia about raja man singh( 1550-1614), it states that he was a kachhwaha rajput:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_Singh_I
so, it's a request please have a thorough study and edit this content. and if u don,t want to and have some valid facts, so, please let me know  103.87.59.179 (talk) 11:19, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , no, this is a 19th-century non-scholarly source, which was authored by a British army officer. To be more specific, this is reprint of a book which was first published in 1899 – for more details, see this page of National Library of Australia. Details about this type of outdated & unacceptable Raj-era sources can be found at User:Sitush/CasteSources, which also contains relevant links of previous discussions. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:53, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

text: Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. Jack Frost (talk) 03:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 8 April 2020 

message: I was checking the Kachwaha article and it would seem that there are no proper citations to be found, resulting in it amalgamating to the Kushwaha article. This  A History of Jaipur: C. 1503-1938, By Jadunath Sarkar pg.20 is written by Jadunath Sarkar, who is an accomplished historian. He has clearly written that the Kachwahas are Rajputs. I hope this info helps the article. Ranadhira (talk) 12:24, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation for the article 

message: the source u put will not be liked by  as i think.Second i have also read that Kachwaha were called by this name as they used to hunt tortoises i.e Kachhap.Heba Aisha (talk) 14:19, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Also yes i know both are different one is agricultural caste and other is Rajput clan.And u  are correct here.But WP:verifiability Applies.Heba Aisha (talk) 14:39, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding book 

message: Dear  Ji, The Kachwaha dynasty was established by Dulherai after the end of Raja Alan Singh Chanda, the ruler of Chanda dynasty.Therefore, in the history of Kachwaha dynasty, include the history of Raja Alan Singh Chanda, the ruler of Chanda dynasty. Karsan Chanda (talk) 02:56, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  suggestion 

message: King Alan Singh Chanda of Khogong. -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 12:21, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alan Singh Chanda 

message: When and how was the Kachwaha dynasty established? Karsan Chanda (talk) 04:27, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  When and how was the Kachwaha dynasty established? 

message: Kush Son Of Ram Sanjeev singh kushwaha (talk) 09:12, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clan 

message: Plz 2401:4900:16B7:6F7A:2:2:7519:E100 (talk) 03:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hi it is yashwanth singh kachwa do we belong to this clan?? plz suggest us!! 

message: Kushwahas and Kachhwahas are same castes. Kushwahas who migrated from Ayodhya region to Rajasthan via Bihar, Madhya Pradesh are being known as Kachhwahas. Please make Kachhwaha and kushwaha same on internet. It is dividing the Kushwaha Kshatriyas Prajeshkushwaha (talk) 09:35, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kushwahas and Kachhwahas are same.