Talk:Nai (caste)

resolving the conflicts

joshua project reference was also taken in arain caste so what't the problem why can't it be taken here??

Other stuff exists. Check out WP:RSN, where you will find umpteen discussions that have determined consensus that it is an unreliable source. Or just use common sense: how are Christian missionaries authorities on this issue? - Sitush (talk) 12:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Untitled

hi now days Nai is not caste this is just a profession which is easily adopted by the other caste also , so , no diff in them. They are just like other castes like rajput, chauhan and most of the thakur who had laeve their profession, not included in this castesian

Thanks ,

The article seems Neutral and well written

The article seems Neutral... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.166.52.183 (talk) 07:00, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Iam not Fully agree with this article this is incompleted infromation about the sain nayee samaj AJIT SAIN (talk) 09:25, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Degraded

I have again reinstated the term "degraded" - see here. The term is commonly used to describe communities who claim kshatriya status but who are usually considered by those outside the community to be, for example, shudra. It was one of the cornerstones of the sanskritisation phenomenon, just as people refer to"degraded Rajputs", and unless someone can provide a decent source that says otherwise, it is entirely appropriate.

The sourcing for the paragraph was non-existent when the term was introduced, and the source that has now been added does not look great to me, so we really need to tackle this entire set of statements using reliable sources (which for caste articles usually means books and academic papers rather than websites). - Sitush (talk) 14:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

reply

first of all the claim has been for kshatrias not for rajputs.

rajputs and kshatrias are not same thing. Rajputs are white huns who invaded india during 5th and 6th century A.D., they claim themselves to be kshatrias but the term 'kshatria' existed before white huns invaded india.

nais are indegeneos people having origin indian subcontienent so they are much more related to 'kshatria' word then rajputs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.208.101.131 (talk) 16:44, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

You misunderstand me. My use of Rajput was as an example, not as a suggestion that Nais are Rajputs. - Sitush (talk) 17:38, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

I have now removed the sanskritdocuments.org/dict/dictall.pdf source that was used for this paragraph. Aside from being poorly presented and possibly not reliable, it seemed not to mention either "Nai" or "Nay". Regarding the presentation, please could you read WP:Citing sources for further information: the url was faulty, there was no page number, no publisher detail, no access date etc. You might find using Template:cite web, Template:cite book etc to be an easy way to correctly format references. - Sitush (talk) 17:58, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

degraded word

degradation is not a correct word to be used here coz according hinduism and sikhism no work is less important then the other one. according to bhagwad gita all works are equal irrespective of their nature . Different people perform different works in the society. Society cannot exist if any of the community stops working. So degradation does not denote a right sense here. In ancient times the caste system was not rigid as it is now people could easily change their work or castes according to ability. so it's gonna be better if such words are avoided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.208.101.131 (talk) 16:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Completely irrelevant. It is a widely used term in academia for exactly this situation. - Sitush (talk) 17:39, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Merge of Valand into this article

It seems to be generally recognised that Valand is a synonym used in Gujarat for the Nai caste. Given the synonymity, that the Valand article is as hopelessly sourced as this one, and that it includes much content that is already present in this one, any sourced statements in the Valand article should be merged here. The remainder of the statements should be removed and the article should be turned into a redirect to Nai (caste). - Sitush (talk) 19:12, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

as there are different gotras or clans of rajputs(white huns) exist similarly there are different terms used for the nai caste in different regions.

'Valand' is a gujrati word and nai or nayi is a sanskrit word so there's no as such need to merge valand with nai bcoz article valand provides specefic information about gujrati nai so article should exist seprately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.138.57.20 (talk) 15:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

If a statement is not verifiable by reference to reliable sources then it should not exist. There is almost nothing specific to Gujarat that meets this fundamental requirement at Valand and the rest is mostly a copy of this article. The Valand name, and any quirks that they may have which distinguish them from the other Nai communities, need to be explained otherwise the articles should be merged. And if the two terms are not synonymous then we need to remove the statements that claim synonymity.

Basically, merge it for now and if sufficient information should appear in future then we can always fork it again. - Sitush (talk) 18:06, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Sourcing

If people are going to provide sources here then they should probably first make themselves familiar with WP:Citing sources. For example, recent contributions have been poorly sourced or clearly used sources that had not been checked (various lists of OBCs, for example, made no mention of the Nai community). They also failed to include page numbers, publishers etc and contained malformed urls. If all that were not bad enough, quite a few are either not reliable sources or are primary sources that we really should try to avoid.

All of these issues can be seen by examining my reverts over the last few days, and also by examining how I improve the referencing of those that are still present. - Sitush (talk) 17:13, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

AnSI as a source

There are real problems with using the "states series" of People of India, published under the auspices of the Anthropological Survey of India by various outfits, such as Popular Prakashan. Tne national series was published by Oxford University Press but things went downhill with the states series, which involved various less meritworthy publishers and were largely produced after the death of Kumar Suresh Singh. Among the problems is that the series relies almost entirely on colonial accounts, which are notoriously poor, and that it often does not make clear which sources were used for which statement. As an academic exercise it was hopeless nad it is no surprise to find that this political exercise is not frequently cited by "true" academics.

In the context of this article, I have just removed yet another claim to kshatriya status that is at best dubious puffery. I cannot see in full the Uttar Pradesh volume that is referenced, but neither the Gujarat nor the Rajasthan volumes make any mention of this theory and thus, if nothing else, the statement as presented in our article is cherrypicking. No surprise there, then. Feel free to reinstate the point if you can provide a decent source, which AnSI is not. - Sitush (talk) 01:25, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring

Yet again, this article is being subjected to poor contributions from anonymous/IP editors. It has not long since being unprotected after a spate of this behaviour, so don't be surprised if it is protected once more.

I have just reverted here because the edit summary suggested that reasons would be given on this talk page but they have not surfaced. Removal of valid maintenance templates without explanation is not acceptable, and wilbourhall is not a reliable source. Further, while I cannot see the People of India book but it is known to be poor and the edit introduced an element of unsourced info in the same paragraph. Can anyone provide a copy of the relevant pages from the book? - Sitush (talk) 11:28, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 September 2012

Sandeep sain nirvan (talk) 14:36, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

You need to explain what it is that you want to contribute. - Sitush (talk) 15:36, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Copyvio deleted. Dougweller (talk) 10:53, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

What has to be done? Bladesmulti (talk) 10:39, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

We are not clans. If is right then i would like to put contributions about our ancient castism people.

First i would like to clear term about NAI =NAAYI=NYAYI=NAAY=RULAR= WHOS DIRECTED ALLS. In Aayurveda & Surgery, all medical science Teacher's( aacharya's) has keeps a great role. And stills in all the world our peoples serving this arena. We are "not clans" i revise this word. We are Greate rular & Creator of centralise politics in indian history NAND/SAIN/MAURYA Density ruled by our kings. ( Quoted you can find in Mudraraksh Book). After amendment of First "Indian Education ACT" we are first-time add in OBC Category and our castism peoples becomes jobless. But one more important thing we are not beggers we are fighters and still fighting for Nation, self, prestige, education, molestation, castism. But one day we will raise and rise like sun. Our castism peoples categorized in different GOTRA'S & SUB GOTRA'S. FOR THAT I WILL DISCUSS FURTHER. LONG LIVE NAI BRAMHAN Hanysingh (talk) 17:26, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 12 April 2019

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 section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:40, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

---

move Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:40, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Nai(Caste) → Nai (caste) – need to correct the spacing and case for disambig Dl2000 (talk) 21:36, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

If anyone have question how Nai is Ikshvaku clan so Answer is written in ancient literature ex mahabharat, Ramayan ,Devi bhagvat,Buddhist literature, indian history . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajnabh (talk • contribs) 09:18, 14 April 2019 (UTC) Many people don't like my bold edit but truth of nai clan should know by every one in India because every one claiming for Ikshvaku and Nai are original Ikshvaku clan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajnabh (talk • contribs) 05:19, 17 April 2019 (UTC) Just like Chalukyas king show in there book he wrote clan name and he mentioned only name of his clan but in many form. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajnabh (talk • contribs) 05:22, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Nai(sain) Categrory Kashtriya,Worrior Class

Why your Team Deleted the important information about Nai caste, like they comes in Kashtriya Class, in some parts of India they called sain nai-thakur and Many kings comes from Nai community like The Nand empire was a Hindu nai Kingdom. AJIT SAIN (talk) 09:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Kindly update full and correct knowledge of nai(sain) caste thankyou. AJIT SAIN (talk) 09:26, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

See WP:V: please present reliable sources for your claims. utcursch | talk 12:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Sitush many people are claiming this and this should be more than enough evidence? https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=866034620141616&id=678969278848152 Sam.Johnanderson (talk) 00:12, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Anyone can write anything on Facebook - see WP:RS. - Sitush (talk) 04:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2023

"PLEASE ADD "MAHAPADMA NANDA's NAME IN THE FAMOUS PEOPLE OF NAI CASTE NAME LIST "Rahulbhardwaj0209 (talk) 08:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Rahulbhardwaj0209 (talk) 08:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 08:23, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

નાયી સમાજ નો જન્મ કેવી રીતે અને કોના દ્વારા થયો?

નાયી સમાજ ને ઋષીવંશી સમાજ તરીકે પણ ઓળખવામાં આવે છે.નાયી નો જન્મ ભગવાન શિવ ની નાભી માંથી થયો હતો.અને ભગવાન શિવ ની નાભી માંથી નાભિક ઋષિ નો જન્મ થયો.તે કારણ થી નાયીઓ ઋષિવંશી પણ કહેવાય છે. Raj Limbachiya (talk) 15:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Sachi vaat chhe Raj Limbachiya (talk) 15:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

સાચી વાત છે Raj Limbachiya (talk) 15:37, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

no nai and rushi vanshi are different because valand are rushi vanshi. Bhagruti (talk) 17:13, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Reliability of Sources

• Ekdalian and Utcursch, need advice on these edits: [1] One which removes a reliable looking source without tagging it for "Page Needed" and [2] another which adds the unreliable and rejected source from "Popular Prakashan".-Admantine123 (talk) 04:15, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

  Hey Admantine123, first one may be reliable but no page number is provided, therefore the same could not be verified! "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material", as per WP:BURDEN. I have removed the second one since the community considers the source as unreliable! Thanks. Ekdalian (talk) 07:45, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2023

Add Telangana under “Regions with significant populations”. Also add Telangana in other backward caste section. Dahn888 (talk) 05:12, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. DreamRimmer (talk) 16:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Some texts told they are the surgeon?

There is the debate nai was the surgeon what is the view on it 112.79.123.60 (talk) 22:16, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Please provide reliable and verifiable sources in order to support your claim! Read WP:RS, WP:V, and please avoid WP:OR. Ekdalian (talk) 07:51, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Nai Surname

Nai is not Thakur .Thakurs are became barber by occupation and that's why they are using thakur so you can't blame nais for that so that part should be remove so how can you say that nai are attempt for upper mobility hole paragraph is base less many author who are paid wrote anything so that is not teken as citations you have to took source which is connected with nai caste only or from ancient history. Bhagruti (talk) 16:13, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Ekdalian

(Personal attack removed)

(Personal attack removed) Bhagruti (talk) 17:03, 9 August 2023 (UTC) this world is free to choose their occupation and surname and religion so behalf of any other people you can't blame different person okay.

Missing something

Mahapadma Nanda was also from nai community can you please add him in notable person 2409:40D0:13:7C08:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 18:31, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Please provide reliable and verifiable source supporting the same and note that a separate article (on the proposed notable) must exist in Wikipedia. Ekdalian (talk) 05:39, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

महान अर्थशास्त्री अमृत्यसेन भी सैन/सेन समाज से थे

बंगाल के महान अर्थशास्त्री अमृत्यसेन भी सेन/सैन समाज से थे। 2409:4085:8291:4B57:0:0:2AAB:10AD (talk) 16:15, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Claiming for thakur surname

Claiming for thakur surname it's false information thakur are considered as Koli and they don't have up status in civil society they consider as low status but some thakur became barbers and their for their surname is thakur. And nai are oriented from bramhin only they are not claiming for status they are bramhin rushis. Bhagruti (talk) 20:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2024

Dipanshu pilkhuwala (talk) 13:34, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

नाई जाति नही

नाई जाती नही है नाई जाति मुगलों के समय रखी गई इससे पहले इस जाति के लोग सर्जन , क्षत्रीय , ब्राह्मण , नापित , न्यायि, हुआ करते थे ।

ब्राह्मणों से ऊंचा दर्जा दिया जाता था इन्हे क्योंकि ये आर्युवेद , सर्जरी , चिकत्सल्य,में माहिर थे। इसी कारण ब्राह्मणों ने इन्हे नीच बोलना शुरू करा । Dipanshu pilkhuwala (talk) 13:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)