Talk:Western Pahari

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

India: Himachal Pradesh / Uttarakhand Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Himachal Pradesh (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Uttarakhand (assessed as Low-importance). This article was last assessed in Feb 2018. Languages This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages 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.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This is an important article, however it needs major surgery. Ceti 16:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not use green to represent Kham and Magar as well as Gurung, since these three "janjati" groups are similar in their relationship to Pahari peoples and languages?

In the Terai, perhaps show Tharu (and other terai janjatis) and Mahdeshi languages (Hindi, Urdu, Mathili, Bengali, etc.) in a different color, with overlap shown as in the Kathmandu area. 76.80.26.121 16:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

parts of this page are redundant, and the copy towards the end of the entry needs major cleanup. Ceti 22:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Text in this article should be merged with Pahari languages because it doesn't get into uses of the word beyond languages.

However Pahari can also refer to people of Khas (indo-european) provenance who are Hindus and not belonging to any local tribes (Magar, Gurung, Tamang, Limbu, etc. etc.). It can also be used as an adjective referring to almost anything that is indigenous to the 'hills' northward from the top of the Mahabharat Range and south of the main Himalayan range, as distinct from the Terai (region south of the Mahabharats) or the higher, more northerly region occupied by 'hill tribes' who may not be completely Hinduized or by culturally Tibetan peoples. LADave 10:55, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also suggest that it be merged. These two articles appear like two half articles. G Purevdorj (talk) 00:56, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this article could be a disambiguation page linking to 1. Pahari languages and 2. LADave's first definition (that is, Pahari-speaking Indo-Aryan Hindus). Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 06:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That would require a major rewrite. I've moved it to Western Pahari languages, and will shift the content between the two to reflect this later this evening. — kwami (talk) 22:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: {{WP India}} Project Banner with Uttarakhand workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under Category:Uttarakhand 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?)} - 13:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is difference between Dogri and Pahari language

See also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogri_language

Dogri is a sub category of Western Pahari — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harbingervishal (talk • contribs) 07:45, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Nepali word is "Pahadi" or "Pahaadi" and not "Pahari". How do we change the spelling of the main page? VividTara (talk) 13:41, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed himachalibhasha.in again as it is nothing more than a personal website of a user who is now blocked. If you click the link, it even says as much. This is not a reliable source and I am under the impression that we do not allow self-proclaimed experts with nothing supporting their expertise to dictate content or links. Praxidicae (talk) 15:54, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Struck as I EC'd with K6ka. Praxidicae (talk) 15:55, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a personal blog. We generally encourage links to community-led initiatives on articles about minority languages. – Uanfala (talk) 16:14, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is. It literally states as much on their official pages. As I said elsewhere, specifically #2 of WP:ELNO: Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research, except to a limited extent in articles about the viewpoints that the site is presenting. Emphasis mine. What part of the research and content there is verifiable? And what are those sources? Original research is not allowed, ever. It doesn't matter what form it takes. Praxidicae (talk) 16:17, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly what claims on the website do you believe are misleading readers by the user of unverifiable research? (and on a side note, original research is not allowed on wikipedia; if original research didn't exist at all, there wouldn't be anything for wikipedia to write about.) Anyway, where does it state the website is a blog? It is not structured as one and it does contain the type of content that personal blogs contain. – Uanfala (talk) 16:23, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All of it is unverifiable research. What sources exist to support any word of it? Praxidicae (talk) 16:25, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And what misleading claims do you see there? Again, this is not used as an academic source, this is a community-led project that we're simply linking to. – Uanfala (talk) 17:01, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please re-read 2. or unverifiable research. I'm not sure what is unclear about this or WP:NOR. Praxidicae (talk) 17:04, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ping Praxidicae I guess you yourself don't have any idea about Himachal's Languages. That website is legit. The Government of Himachal Pradesh has been trying to combine the Western Pahari languages of the state under single language called Pahari or Himachali. This doesn't comes with no basis; these languages have a very high mutual intelligibilty with each other. I am a speaker of Kahluri, a Western Pahari language & with almost no exposure can understand Kangri, Mandeali, Baghati, Bagali, Dogri, etc. As per your claim that it is his 'personal blog', you are again wrong! I guess you are not a Hindi speaker. All of the work on his website is present under Himachal Pradesh Academy of Languages, Art & Culture's work inform of books, magazines & papers. He only shows that! He only has made a website where he showcases that work. Nik9hil (talk) 07:47, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Uanfala:, can you explain your revert? Pahari (Pothwari) is different from Western Pahari, and is not just spoken in Western Kashmir, but also across Pakistan's Pothowar Plateau.VR _talk 21:56, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Pahari of Kashmir is very closely related to the variety spoken on the Pothohar Plateau, but that other variety it not known as "Pahari" (see Pahari-Pothwari#Pothwari). The point of the sentence that I edited was to distinguish the subject of the article from other varieties known as "Pahari", not from ones not known as "Pahari". The main focus is on the Pahari of Kashmir, as that often gets confused with the Pahari of Himachal. I'm not aware of any confusion with the varieties of the Pothohar Plateau. – Uanfala (talk) 22:09, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Western Pahri languages are called Himachali because a majority of them (except of Bhadarwahi, Dogri & Jaunsari) are present within presesnt day Himachal. I am really tired of making the changes & adding the necessary photos. Please revert back to the original form. Nik9hil (talk) 07:52, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Uanfala, Kindly justify your previous (and repeated) edit(s) on this page "....throughout the Indian state of Himachal Pradesh, and in parts of Jammu Division and Uttarakhand...." , which I've been constantly reverting.

Please provide an justification under the following boundaries of facts:

As you might know the province of Lahaul&Spiti(area: 13,833 sq.KM, src: district govt. website) and Kinnaur(area: 6,401 sq.KM, src: district govt. website) speak predominantly languages of the Sino-Tibetan Family, which DOES NOT fall into the catagory of W.Pahari. This Implies that 36.4% of the total area of the state(55,673 sq.KM, src: state govt. website) DOES NOT speak W.Pahari languages. Further, I've refrained myself from inclusion of the provinces of Una, and PARTS OF Solan, Hamirpur and Bilaspur which speak Punjabi dialects such as Powadhi, Doabi etc, inclusion of which will surely push that percentage to north of 40%. How can one claim that the w.pahari dialects are spoken "throughout" the state of HP and in "parts of "UK and J&K? Binsarhills (talk) 08:52, 12 April 2021 (UTC) @Uanfala Binsarhills (talk) 08:55, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Pahari varieties may not be spoken in the sparsely populated higher regions in the north, but they're otherwise spoken across and the length and breadth of the state, and account for the vast majority of the population. Your preferred wording put Himachal on the same footing as Uttarakhand (where Wester Pahari is found only in a region along the border), and J&K (where it accounts for a fraction of the total area and population, and then it's represented mostly because of the inclusion of Dogri, which is not as widely accepted as for the other languages). Any ideas for a different text that will fairly represent the situation? How about ... spoken in a region of the Western Himalayas centred on Himachal Pradesh and including parts of Jammu and Kashmir and Uttarakhand? – Uanfala (talk) 17:15, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That definately reads better. Ho Binsarhills (talk) 17:20, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That definitely reads better. However, I would like to know whether you are considering Jaunsari language as the only W.Pahari language of Uttrakhand. If that's the case, I urge you to look into Bangani, Jaunpuri, Rawalti and Gangadi languages as well which are unknown to many. If you consider these languages along with Jaunsari, it does qualify the state of Uttrakhand to be placed not equal but at a comparable footing as Himachal. Binsarhills (talk) 17:30, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it makes a difference how many varieties of Uttarakhand we choose to count here – even under the most inclusive interpretation, Western Pahari will account for only a relatively small portion of the state. – Uanfala (talk) 16:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Western Pahari Languages.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:08, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Several people (who may or may not be the same person with a habit for editing while logged out) have recently been insisting that the Western Pahari group should be introduced as being spoken in Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Punjab. The inclusion of Punjab is surprising: I don't recall ever seeing the region named in general discussions of Pahari. Its mention here appears to rest on the presence of some Dogri/Kangri speakers in the north of Indian Punjab (the two refs in the lede of this version seem to relate to that). However, there appear to be relatively few of those speakers: unless they somehow systematically report their language as something else, there's just about 18,000 Dogri speakers in that state (as of the 2011 census [1]). That's < 1% of all Dogris, and < 0.1% of the population of Punjab. There are some Dogri speakers in the far north-east of Pakistani Punjab; I haven't seen any population estimates, but as far as I'm aware, their numbers should be of the same order of magnitude. One other possible reason for wanting to include Punjab here may be a confusion borne out of reading the older literature: the core Pahari areas are in Himachal Pradesh, and that was part of Punjab before getting split out and finally assuming its current extent in 1966.

Given that the Dogri/Kangri speakers in Punjab are a very tiny fraction of both the population of all Pahari speakers and of the total population of the Punjab state, mentioning them in the lede along with the core Pahari areas would be misleading. All the more so when the classification of Dogri/Kangri under Pahari is itself subject to debate.

So, is there anything I'm missing here? – Uanfala (talk) 11:57, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You got a point in the sense that there are few speakers of western Pahari (although numbers would increase if you include all western Pahari dialects like Kangri, Bilaspuri etc) although it's also due to fact that western Pahari already has less speakers but the thing is that most of them are native to those regions not immigrants so completely excluding them would be unfair that's why I specified small parts of other two states so I think it does justice to facts. 1506Sd (talk) 12:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At the 2011 census, there were 156 people in Punjab who gave their language as Kangri. The numbers for Bilaspuri were 0, and those for "Pahari" (a much broader term that doesn't include just Western Pahari) were 13,138. Together with the 18,155 for Dogri, that adds up to just over 32,000. The total number of Western Pahari speakers anywhere is at least 7 million. This means that unless there's been some serious underreporting in the census (which I don't rule out), the Western Pahari speakers in Punjab are less than half a percent of all Western Pahari speakers.

Now, I'm not against enumerating all areas with any Paharis in them, but this has to be 1) done outside of the introductory paragraph, 2) accompanied by at least some indication of the orders of magnitude involved (Jammu and HP each have more than 100x times the number of Pahari speakers than Punjab), and 3) done in a comprehensive manner (why list just Punjab when there are a number of other territories – like Uttarakhand, Azad Kashmir, and Delhi – each with more speakers than Punjab?). – Uanfala (talk) 15:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Uanfala Bear in mind that in India, the census does not formally survey language use, and in Pakistan, the available language categories has varied considerably. On top of this, due to the high mutual intelligibility of Dogri/Kangri with Punjabi, the idea of these being separate languages would be deemed controversial and/or politically motivated by many, including some of those who speak a dialect which could be called Dogri. (The average person is also not familiar with the many names of each of the language varieties of the region; there are almost certainly people who speak Dogri who have never called it Dogri.) So it is highly likely that any figure given of Dogri speakers in Pakistani or Indian Punjab is an underestimate. I myself being familiar with Punjabi find it genuinely difficult to identify differences when watching videos of Dogri being spoken. عُثمان (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well I have listed Uttarakhand as well and list POK or Azad Kashmir as well infact you bought a good point. Technically all regions where western Pahari speakers exist natively should be marked. Delhi is not where western Pahari speakers are native they all came as immigrants but Jammu, Himachal, PoK or Azad Kashmir, parts of Uttarakhand and Northern and eastern districts of Punjab have these speakers who were always there not immigrants. 1506Sd (talk) 16:05, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And this page is about western Pahari not other Pahari langauges (Eastern or Central) aso obviously I haven't taken them in consideration. 1506Sd (talk) 16:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]