Nepal Template‑class | |||||||
|
Ethnic groups NA‑class | ||||||||||||
|
Please note the following fact:
"Several low-level groupings are well established, but the higher-level structure of the family remains unclear. Although the family is often presented as divided into Sinitic and Tibeto-Burman branches, a common origin of the non-Sinitic languages has never been demonstrated, and is rejected by an increasing number of researchers. A minority of researchers call the whole family "Tibeto-Burman", and the name "Trans-Himalayan" has also been proposed."
As for Newars, this template discusses ethnicity not language and thus should not be there. ( 137.147.16.237 ( talk) 01:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC))
My idea is that for each of the classification, the classification should be complete. For example, it's a bad style and unfair to put some people in the classification by caste and other people in the classification by geographic. If an ethnic can be removed by such reason, all Sino-Tibetan (TH) can be removed under janajati and all Aryans can be removed under those castes. -- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 01:47, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
To put them together, all caste groups and "janajati" should be removed as they are not ethnic classification. -- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 01:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
I agree. The bottom part of this template can be split into a separate templates. However, there is some problem you must consider: although Khas is an ethological concept, it has also become a pejorative among some Indians and consequently some Nepali do not want to be called that. Instead, those Nepalis use their caste as their ethnic group although caste are not ethnic groups. Here comes the problem, Eastern Pahari editors may list those caste into this template in the future. If the caste part if removed, they may put those caste directly into the Indo-Aryan section, which will bring big problem as certain Sino-Tibetan-speaking peoples, such as the Newars, share the same caste.
I don't have access to this book via Google but I've requested it to my library. -- 146.96.147.38 ( talk) 23:37, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
The case of Newar is somewhat different from the case of Tharu and Danuwar languages. It's well-established that Newar is a Sino-Tibetan language with intense Indo-Aryan influence, not an Aryan language with a Sino-Tibetan substratum. -- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 01:17, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
-- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 01:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Why is Tharu removed from the category Indo-Aryan speakers with a non-Indo-Aryan origin? They clearly have a distinct origin and many linguists have pointed that out. -- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 01:43, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Please seek a good term for "Hill people". It's a pity that the term Pahadi is so ambiguous that it can also refer to Pahari-speakers or even Eastern-Pahari-speakers. -- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 02:32, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Anyone who have information whether Rajbongshi-speaking Rajbansi people consider themselves a Madhesi nation or a general indigenous Terai group (like Tharu), please post it here. Thanks a lot! -- 146.96.147.38 ( talk) 22:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Most sources indicate that Damai are the Nepali-speaking tailor caste. No source gives any link to Damai in Kameng. I removed this ethnic group from the list until any source is presented. -- 146.96.147.38 ( talk) 23:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
@ Nepalichoro255: made a very effective classification on caste which is temporarily undid by me. Below is his list:
FYI, I have a supplement:
Frankly this is a very good job but I have the following concern about this:
I just had to update the article on Walung people. I am not sure how they fit in Nepalese ethnic groups. Could someone advice? -- Voidvector ( talk) 03:08, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
I think Tibetic will be a more appropriate name for the group as it is already a well established fact that those people speak Tibetic language. Please advice.
Nepal Template‑class | |||||||
|
Ethnic groups NA‑class | ||||||||||||
|
Please note the following fact:
"Several low-level groupings are well established, but the higher-level structure of the family remains unclear. Although the family is often presented as divided into Sinitic and Tibeto-Burman branches, a common origin of the non-Sinitic languages has never been demonstrated, and is rejected by an increasing number of researchers. A minority of researchers call the whole family "Tibeto-Burman", and the name "Trans-Himalayan" has also been proposed."
As for Newars, this template discusses ethnicity not language and thus should not be there. ( 137.147.16.237 ( talk) 01:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC))
My idea is that for each of the classification, the classification should be complete. For example, it's a bad style and unfair to put some people in the classification by caste and other people in the classification by geographic. If an ethnic can be removed by such reason, all Sino-Tibetan (TH) can be removed under janajati and all Aryans can be removed under those castes. -- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 01:47, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
To put them together, all caste groups and "janajati" should be removed as they are not ethnic classification. -- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 01:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
I agree. The bottom part of this template can be split into a separate templates. However, there is some problem you must consider: although Khas is an ethological concept, it has also become a pejorative among some Indians and consequently some Nepali do not want to be called that. Instead, those Nepalis use their caste as their ethnic group although caste are not ethnic groups. Here comes the problem, Eastern Pahari editors may list those caste into this template in the future. If the caste part if removed, they may put those caste directly into the Indo-Aryan section, which will bring big problem as certain Sino-Tibetan-speaking peoples, such as the Newars, share the same caste.
I don't have access to this book via Google but I've requested it to my library. -- 146.96.147.38 ( talk) 23:37, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
The case of Newar is somewhat different from the case of Tharu and Danuwar languages. It's well-established that Newar is a Sino-Tibetan language with intense Indo-Aryan influence, not an Aryan language with a Sino-Tibetan substratum. -- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 01:17, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
-- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 01:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Why is Tharu removed from the category Indo-Aryan speakers with a non-Indo-Aryan origin? They clearly have a distinct origin and many linguists have pointed that out. -- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 01:43, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Please seek a good term for "Hill people". It's a pity that the term Pahadi is so ambiguous that it can also refer to Pahari-speakers or even Eastern-Pahari-speakers. -- 146.96.147.126 ( talk) 02:32, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Anyone who have information whether Rajbongshi-speaking Rajbansi people consider themselves a Madhesi nation or a general indigenous Terai group (like Tharu), please post it here. Thanks a lot! -- 146.96.147.38 ( talk) 22:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Most sources indicate that Damai are the Nepali-speaking tailor caste. No source gives any link to Damai in Kameng. I removed this ethnic group from the list until any source is presented. -- 146.96.147.38 ( talk) 23:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
@ Nepalichoro255: made a very effective classification on caste which is temporarily undid by me. Below is his list:
FYI, I have a supplement:
Frankly this is a very good job but I have the following concern about this:
I just had to update the article on Walung people. I am not sure how they fit in Nepalese ethnic groups. Could someone advice? -- Voidvector ( talk) 03:08, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
I think Tibetic will be a more appropriate name for the group as it is already a well established fact that those people speak Tibetic language. Please advice.