Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
==Vandalism in [[Ezhava]]== |
==Vandalism in [[Ezhava]]== |
||
{{{icon|[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px]] }}}Please stop. If you continue to Vandalize out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to [[:Ezhava]], you '''will''' be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing.[[User:Tulu war|Tulu war]] 11:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC) |
{{{icon|[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px]] }}}Please stop. If you continue to Vandalize out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to [[:Ezhava]], you '''will''' be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing.[[User:Tulu war|Tulu war]] 11:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC) |
||
==3RR== |
|||
Please cease with your reverts to [[Ezhava]] Article. You have now broken [[WP:3RR|the Three Revert Rule]] and have been reported. [[User:Tulu war|Tulu war]] 12:40, 19 October 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:40, 19 October 2007
How can you be a Dravidian and an Indo-Aryan? The two are not interchangeable.
I was just browsing your User Page - and saw that you're from Kerala, and are a Dravidian, yet claim to be an Indo-Aryan.
Indo-Aryans and Dravidians do not have the same origins - so how can you claim to be both? The Dravidians are a Melanid/ Veddoid/ Australoid type and occupy Central and Southern India whereas the Indo-Aryans occupy Northern India and are Caucasaoid/ Europid type.
As you're from Kerala, you must definitely be a Dravidian. I think you need to rectify that.
Well first of all I highly doubt your "Indo-Aryans occupy Northern India and are Caucasaoid/ Europid type" or that "The Dravidians are a Melanid/ Veddoid/ Australoid type and occupy Central and Southern India". You need to rectify this false assumption, I have seen many Australoid/Veddoid looking Indo-Aryans, who actually look more stereotypically Dravidian then me, as I have seen many Indo-Aryan(Caucasoid/Europid) looking Dravidian peoples, and the Kodava Dravidians are actually Indo-Scythians. "As you're from Kerala, you must definitely be a Dravidian" is also a false assumption as Brahmins of Kerala are of primarily Aryan descent (at least paternally) and Nasrani are of partial Arab descent. Genetically and phenotypically an upper caste Dravidian can be closer to one Indo-Aryan ie a Gujarati than a Bengali,Bihari or a Sinhala is to the same Gujarati, and have more West Eurasian MtDNA than a person belonging to any of these groups. My reason for adding both is my view and argument that both terms do not connote different races, as Eurocentrics, divide and conquer tactics, Afrocentrics and leftist politically motivated historians would have people believe, but rather is a blanket term for various peoples and communities of different genetic and racial history based on the languages they are natively known to speak. In that case I most definitely am a Dravidian but this does not map out my genetic history and community origins most definitely. I do have partial Namboothiri Brahmin blood in my veins just to add, however this is not relevant to the argument. Most Indians are a definite mix of many races and the only North Indians who definately deserve the "Caucasoid/Europid" (though a humorous description for most North Indians) tag are some communities in the North (Gujjars, Jats etc) and most of the Punjabi peoples. Thank you for asking this awaited question and I hope more Indo-Aryans or Dravidians with assumptions which I can challenge do too. B Nambiar 10:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Reply
http://books.google.com is very useful some times if you want info on something useful for supporting your arguement.
I hope this will clear ur doubts http://books.google.com/books?q=Nair+Sudra http://books.google.com/books?q=Malayali+Sudra
Its a know fact that ezhavas were never part of chathur varna. So case of alling with any layers of that. See wiki is not the page add content with no reference. You can see from this Nair woman goes everywhere thus, uncovered and unashamed. from the book found here [1]. So thing we cant add and some details we can add. in 1931 servay, there was no reference of Nair and vellala, but called Malayali Sudra and Naanchinadu sudra. The page scanned and added in SN director from Koumudi publications page number 86. The english books say same thing with ref to Nair http://books.google.com/books?id=KCm1s6NYjpkC&pg=PA219&dq=Nair+woman&ei=OT8XR6umPJXC7AL-2IjLBQ&sig=GumwrbX-BESLz7ouHTHT8Bda8Q8
61.95.201.56 11:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
This is a rather pointless comment. It just brings up text which contains the words Nairs and Sudras, Im not sure what to make of this. Well aware of the fact that Nairs are Sudras in the eyes of Namboothiris if thats what you commented to suggest, however unofficially in most accounts they were Kshatriyas in profession. B Nambiar 11:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. I think kshtriya samaj will sue u if the seen this. See 1931 Census information if you can get it from somewhere 61.95.201.56 11:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I fail to see on what grounds Kshatriya Samaj will sue me. I have acknowledged the census information that at 1931, and I have concluded that perhaps in the city of Travancore in 1931 "number rich business people among the community was better compared to Malayali Sudra(Nairs) and Nanchinattu Sudras(Vellalas)". You must be brimming with Ezhava pride, for surely now if never before Ezhavas are greater than Nairs. Congratulations old chap. I shall campaign for similar numerous cited comparisons that compare Nairs favorably to Ezhavas to be included in the Nair article. B Nambiar 12:07, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Ezhava
Thanks for your input to Ezhava. As you can see, I have been doing a lot to clean up the article. It was poorly written, full of POV and peacock terms, and also had a lot of extraneous information that had nothing to do with the caste. Can you help me out with rewriting the article too? I'm facing an uncooperative lot who seem disinclined to even discuss the issue. --vi5in[talk] 16:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! Yeah, it's probably going to get reverted. But I've been doing my best to cleanup the article. Oh well! If we end up facing too much opposition, we can take it to WP:MEDCOM. I faced the same issue with the Nair article where I faced a lot of opposition from overzealous Nairs (the irony is that I am a Nair myself) when I was trying to improve the article and make it more objective. Speaking of which, I have initiated a discussion on the talk page to remove the quotes section as I feel it really doesn't add any information to the article. It only seems to glorify the caste. Could you add your input to that please? Thanks! --vi5in[talk] 17:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism in Ezhava
Please stop. If you continue to Vandalize out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Ezhava, you will be blocked from editing.Tulu war 11:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
3RR
Please cease with your reverts to Ezhava Article. You have now broken the Three Revert Rule and have been reported. Tulu war 12:40, 19 October 2007 (UTC)