Talk:Dhobi

Pop-Culture Question

A possible international popular culture reference: Did author J.K. Rowling reference the Dhobi caste in naming a supporting servant character "Dobi" in her Harry Potter novel series? USA 4 January 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 19:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Stop promoting caste system in India, let the people forget this menace which caused misery for thousands of years

This article which enlists the surnames used by the underprivileged castes, promotes caste system and keep it surviving in the society. The educated urban people who are slowly forgetting caste divisions,are reminded of their caste and others castes , they start identifying different people on the basis of surnames used by them. Also by linking the caste and its occupation this article develops in reader's mind of reader, a lowly image of people of that caste. Such references to the surnames of people should not be made and information should be given for general awareness without promoting castiesm. Caste system is a menace and has caused thousands years of misery to our people, even today it is responsible for harassment and insecurity, and unequal treatment of people. Lets help them to live their life with dignity and pride. Like minded people please support — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raasbihari (talk • contribs) 16:25, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

This article has historical and contemporary facts, and is notable for Wikipedia.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 19:08, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Pasupuleti Kannamba

Pasupuleti Kannamba is not belongs to Dhobi Caste She is a Kapu. Pasupuleti surname belongs to kapu caste only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.3.10.72 (talk) 08:54, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dhobi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141211045717/http://archive.tehelka.com/story_main13.asp?filename=Cr082705Caught_in_the.asp to http://archive.tehelka.com/story_main13.asp?filename=Cr082705Caught_in_the.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:58, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Is it correct to use the name banned by the court as the common name of the article?

The name Dhobi is banned by the court but it is used in the wikipedia article if the admins say it at the place no change happens.I see it is wrong in law to pronounce the name of a community like this and the correct name of this community is Rajak and I request you to use it as the title of the article thanks. https://m.thewire.in/article/law/calling-people-harijan-or-dhobi-is-offensive-supreme-court Rajathi 123 (talk) 02:35, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for creating a move discussion in the section below. Any discussion should probably best happen there. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:56, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 6 November 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus is that the current title is still the common name, and that we should use a commonly recognisable name. Despite the vigorous legal-centric arguments put up by the proposer, no arguments had been made to establish that the proposed title is the common name. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 13:53, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

---

Dhobi → Rajak – The name Dhobi has been banned by the court, especially when words like Dalit Arjans are so disturbing, it is sad that Wikipedia has given this name as the title of an article. Moreover, this name is not a community name, but a caste name, and Wikipedia admins should change their identification of. https://m.thewire.in/article/law/calling-people-harijan-or-dhobi-is-offensive-supreme-court Rajathi 123 (talk) 14:51, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose: per WP:COMMONNAME. The Encyclopaedia Of Untouchables: Ancient Medieval And Modern, authored by Raj Kumar, states that "This group of washer men, dyers, calico printers and tailors are called Dhobi, the Chhimba, the Rangrez, Chhipas, the Lilari and Charhoa." The name "Rajak" does not enjoy popular currency colloquially or in academic literature. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam^Talk 00:13, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Dhobi is not a caste and administrators need to understand that, not only that but every community has a profession, for example Vishwakarma is a person who can do 5 different professions, then can you name them according to each profession, can you call them Yadavas, sheep herders for that? Can you connect with that community? Rajathi 123 (talk) 02:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

The Wikipedia administrators should understand that the profession is different from the caste. Apart from that, these people were kings and generals. They were changed to the name and profession of washerman during the time of the british people. Unless it is their clan profession, they are called Rajput and choudary chowhan in many states. The sources for that are given state wise in this article. You highlight the title of the article by the declared name on which basis these people should not be called Dhobi by the court Rajathi 123 (talk) 02:29, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Dhoba is said to be the name of the community but Rajak is the caste certificate given to these people by the government all over India and it is on that basis that we are highlighting this point.Repeat to the respected Wikipedia admins, is it right to attach a common name to the article where the court has made it illegal to use the name Dhobi? https://books.google.co.in/books?id=6h2Gm1gPZZQC&pg=PT1212&dq=dhoba+caste&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwixv9rU8c3yAhVNyGEKHYIwDIU4ChDoAXoECAIQAw#v=onepage&q=dhoba%20caste&f=false Rajathi 123 (talk) 02:34, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose: WP:UCRN. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 16:05, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

What is the purpose of using the name not to be used by the court in this one article? Not only that, every community has a profession name, for example Yadav - sheep herders, Kulalar - potters, but is it right to combine the profession name with the caste name only for this one community? Rajathi 123 (talk) 04:15, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 23 February 2024

Remove the term,'scheduled caste' and replace it with either 'community' or 'backward community' in the introduction as Dhobi in many states come under OBC. For eg. Even in UP some are obc while some sc. Similarly add Gujarat where Dhobi is OBC and many such states. AshishAgniMusk (talk) 04:50, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 14:07, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2024

Virendra Kannaujiya (talk) 05:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. The AP (talk) 06:06, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Need for sensitivity to discrimination problems is probably a real issue here

I came to this talk page to write a query on the question of why this was actually the title of an article if it was defined as an offensive term in the place where many of the people it refers to live. This is in part a commentary on what has already been said on the subject, particularly in response to the issues raised by @Raasbihari and @Rajathi 123 and the arguments made against their requests. I am more-or-less arguing for their concerns without necessarily arguing for their solutions: the correct solution to the problem is perhaps a more complicated issue.

I don't think the knowledge should be suppressed or removed from the project, but it should be written up in an appropriate and sensitive way allowing that there is still an existing problem.

If a Wikipedia article was seen to present information in a way that might result in a worsening of racism against Black people in the USA, or was using a word such as "n*gg*r" as a normal way of referring to people of a certain heritage, I very much doubt that concerns about it would be rejected on the basis of notability, or by the notion that the offensive term was a normal academic one somewhere else! (There is an article on the word in question explaining that it is offensive and how it came to be so - there is no suppression of the knowledge - but it is not used as the title of the article on the group of people that it was used as a slur against). And if this was a list of black heritage surnames, and the complaint was that people were likely to use that knowledge of the ethnicity of those they were considering employing or being friends with, in order to discriminate against people of that heritage, I think the concerns would at least be considered valid, whatever the ultimate decision as to what to include and in what language.

It does not seem to me that the old-caste-system problem in India is all that different, though of course it has a different history and different nuances.

I think that if people dealing with the current consequences of this social system are saying there is a problem here, the rest of us should be listening. I agree that we should not supress information that is genuinely notable, but I think we need to aim to make sure it is as sensitively and carefully conveyed as we would if we were dealing with one of the Western world's common discrimination issues. I would argue that if the people spoken about find the language offensive, their preferences should prevail unless there is a significant moral, epistemological, or other problem with them. Certainly those of us who live elsewhere should be taking more local concerns very seriously.

If people are wondering about my background here, I am an Englishwomen with a degree in philosophy that included several modules on Indian thought systems. I do not know very much about it - it is a massive subject - but I know enough to have some idea what the nature of the concerns could be, and to have reason to think that the other users who raised protests probably have very solid reasons to do so.

FloweringOctopus (talk) 21:14, 15 December 2024 (UTC)