Talk:Kerala/Archive 4

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Keralam does not mean "Land of Coconut Trees"

According to renowned historian Sreedharan Nair, Malayalam emerged as a language in 9th Century coinciding with the founding of Second Cheraman Empire. Oldest reference to the word 'Keralam' is found in a writing by the Emperor Ashokan who ruled about 1000 years before Malayalam evolved as a separate language.

It is implausible that the word 'Keralam' has anything to do with coconut tree since 'Kera' is a Malayalam word, and 'Keralam' Precedes the language Malayalam by atleast a millennia.

Really? I never knew he said that. I read a similar account in Keralapaaniniiyam, where it claims that "Keralam" was an alternative name for the land then known as "Malayalam" (if you think about it, it makes more sense to call the LAND "Malayalam" rather than the language) before the coconut tree was introduced to Kerala. (At least that's how I understood its explanation; Keralapaaniniiyam isn't easy to understand...) --Kuaichik 02:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

On Mundum Neriyathum

It was confirmed by the Kjrajesh, who contributed the image, that the lady in the photograph was wearing a mundum neriyathum (See south india talk page). I was wrong.MANOJTV 12:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment

The culture of Kerala, as it says here is not derived from Tamil culture, which is very different. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.93.9.59 (talk • contribs) . Saravask 05:12, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Here mentioned only ten Districts only why —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.211.37.26 (talk) 05:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Is there a "roman-catholic" culture in Kerala too? I guess there should be one. --Hypocrit (talk) 10:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

On Mundum Neriyathum: Yet again

In my earlier communication (see above) I accepted the claim made by the user Kjrajesh that the dress worn by the lady in the photograph was a mundum neriyathum and not a sari. Now I don't think so.

Reason: Mundum Neriyathum is a two-piece dress. The one the lady wears in the photograph is obviously a single-piece dress.

Even though the user claims (see south india talk page) that it is what is called set mundu, I don't think so. It is in all possibility a set-sari, which is nothing but a sari (in one piece) but with shiny kasavu border. It should not be confused with set mundu or mundum neriyathum, which should come in two pieces (1. Mundu & 2. Neriyathu).

When set mundu is worn, the kasavu border will be clearly visible on left side (the left thigh) of the person who wears it. This ksavu border is that of the neriyathu which is worn on the top of the mundu. (See this link: http://www.keralafashion.com/set.htm to know how a set mundu really looks like). It is not so in the photograph.

Hence the user Alniko and myself are correct. Thus the description in the photograph is changed. MANOJTV 09:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

"Reason: Mundum Neriyathum is a two-piece dress. The one the lady wears in the photograph is obviously a single-piece dress. "

From the photograph , it is impossible to differentiate the two. I wonder how you have concluded that this is a set mundu.I am going to revert to its original name Bharatveer 10:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Clarification

It seems the user Bharatveer was in a hurry to edit out the changes I made and hence he did not care to read my comment in its entirety. Had he done so, he would have thought twice before reverting the changes I made. For his information, I reproduce (with a few changes - for further clarity) the significant observations I made above.

When a set mundu (mundum neriyathum) is worn, the kasavu border will be clearly visible on the left side (diagonal to the left thigh) of the person who wears it. This kasavu border is that of the neriyathu which is worn over the mundu. (See this link: http://www.keralafashion.com/set.htm to know how a set mundu really looks like). It is not so in the photograph appearing in the wikipedia.

From the photograph , it is impossible to differentiate the two, says the user. Impossible?! Even a cursory look at these photographs will bring out the difference. One need not be a Keralite to note the difference. Still, if any user finds it difficult, let him/her download the two images and view them keeping side by side.

Again, if any user uploads an image to wikipedia claiming that it represents something, the image should be unambiguously representative of the object of the phtograph. The image should also bring out precisely the uniqueness of the object represented. It it does not, such an image will only confuse the wikipedia users and hence should not be used.

I hope I have made myself clear. I once again correct the description of the image in good faith. MANOJTV 06:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Idukki in Northwestern Kerala?

I know this is a minor edit, but I just wanted to point it out and discuss it (if anyone objects to my proposed edit). Under the "Flora and Fauna" section, both illustrations mention the "nortwestern Idukki district." Since when was Idukki in northwestern Kerala?! Shouldn't that be SOUTHEASTERN rather than NORTHWESTERN? (Or at least EASTERN??). I am planning to change the word "northwestern" to "southeastern." If anyone has any objections, please reply to this message (either on this page or on my talk page). --Kuaichik 03:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Be BOLD, Kuaichik. :)-- thunderboltz^{a.k.a.Deepu Joseph |TALK} 15:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

You're absolutely right, Deepu. I was just using a Wikipedia tactic that I've used before on the Tongyong Pinyin talk page: propose a modification and see whether anyone objects in a month! Athre ulluu. But I guess I should be bolder than that...anyway, I made the change. :) --Kuaichik 02:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Parasurama legend in the opening sentence of the History section — necessary?

The History section opens with the Parasurama legend and the legend's own origin!

"Popular legend has Kerala saved from the aggressing sea by an act of Parasurama — an avatar of Mahavishnu. This legend however, is a Brahmin appropriation of an earlier Chera legend where a Chera King, Velkezhu Kuttavan, flings his spear into the sea to claim land from it."

Is it necessary? It seems out-of-place to me. Can we not move it to some other section perhaps? Just wondering. &mfash;Veliath 14:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

IMO, it would look extremely out of place in any other section. The legend also has a possible scientific explanation, so it shouldnt be left out of the article. Anyways, where do you suggest we move it to?-- thunderboltz^{a.k.a.Deepu Joseph |TALK} 14:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in responding. I've seen the Parasurama legend mentioned in connection with the geology of Kerala. Apparently the kinds of rocks and soils of Kerala seem to have been under water once or some such thing. There is atleast a reference to recovery fom the sea. Perhaps it can be moved there? —Veliath 04:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I guess that would be fine, given that you let it blend along with the flow of the article.-- thund e rboltz ^(Deepu) 04:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

ഇന്നുമെന്റെ കണ്ണൂനീരില്‍ നിനോര്‍മ്മ പുഞ്ചിരിച്ചു..

ഇന്നുമെന്റെ കണ്ണൂനീരില്‍ നിനോര്‍മ്മ പുഞ്ചിരിച്ചു.. ഇറന്മുകില്‍ മാലാകളും ഇന്ദ്രധനുഷ്‌ എന്നപോലെ. സ്വര്‍ണമല്ലി നിര്‍ത്തമാടും നളെയുമീപൂവ്നത്തില്‍ ത്തെന്നല്‍ കൈചേര്‍ത്തവയ്ക്കും പൂവോണപൊന്‍പണപോല്‍.....

Set Sari Caption

The "Demographics" section of this article apparently includes a picture of a woman wearing a set sari. The caption for this image describes the woman as a "Keralite Malayali."

1. Isn't "Keralite Malayali" a redundant phrase? Isn't it like saying "Frenchie Frenchman"? :)

2. Isn't the word usually spelled "Malayalee" rather than "Malayali"? Just asking!

I'm going to change the words "Keralite Malayali" to "Malayalee" for now. If anyone has an objection, please discuss your views in this section. kEraLiyar malayaaLialle??? --Kuaichik 21:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

On second thought, I think I'll change it to "Malayali" instead. --Kuaichik 21:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I was under the impression that Keralites are those who reside in the state of Kerala while Malayalis are those whose mother-tongue is Malayalam. Many of my Tulu, Konkani & Tamil friends who grew up in Kerala make this distinction very assiduously and refer to themselves as Keralites. My two cents. —Veliath 04:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

That may be so, but I think "Keralite Malayali" is still somewhat redundant. I think we can safely assume that a Malayali woman shown wearing a sari in an article about Kerala is in Kerala. In any case, it is not crucial information, and it sounds odd anyway. I think some NRI Malayalis call themselves "Keralites" as well. --Kuaichik 05:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Edit in the "History" section

This is regarding the part of the "History" section which alludes to when "human inhabitation" of Kerala took place. I had on two occasions deleted a few lines that appear(ed) rather absurd to me. I would like to know if "human inhabitation" took place only in the 10th Century BCE, as to how the "prehistoric" remains in places in Wayanadu and Idukki and even other districts came into being, and why they are dated to beyond 6000 BC at the least by very conventional scholars. Those who affirm to the "10th Century BCE inhabitation" - I have a few queries - 1) Are those remains not human? Or 2) Are they a hoax altogether? Or 3) Are the dates wrong? Or 4) What is the great secret that you know that escaped the dumb scholars who deemed those places as "prehistoric human remains" and dated them to beyond 6000 BCE at the least? I wish to be enlightened. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anup Ramakrishnan (talk • contribs)

You are right. Neolithic inhabitation did exist in Kerala. I've marked the statement as possibly incorrect. I request other editors to voice their opinions before rewritting the sentence.-- thund e rboltz ^(Deepu) 04:46, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Deepu, since some "editors" here have shown the discourtesy of just deleting statements without even following it up in this section, I am having to show a bit of the same, albeit less as I am at least writing this.

First is the creating/revealing and saving/retrieval of Kerala, where as a Hindu who has read a bit, Kerala figures (as a part of Dravida) in all the epics before that dealing with Parasurama. (Incidentally despite the AIT and everything almost all the epics in Hindu lore till before the Mahabharata base their most ancient and greatest events in the deep South Dravida.) Parasurama is supposed to have only saved PARTS OF THE COAST OF THE REGION and this legend is shared by all Brahmins from Kanyakumari to Gujarat alike, not just by those in Kerala - in Kanyakumari, Malayalanadu, Tulunadu, Konkana, the Maharashtra coast and the Gujarat coast i.e. But the only things in support of creation (and not retrieval) seems to be old outdated "Government documents".

Its even worse in the case of the "Prehistoric remains" where very recently there was an international conference by archaeologists and other scholars in Idukki at Munnar where the rock art is dated back to at least 7000 BC. Not to forget those found at places in Wayanad (Edakkal) etc. Again some old outdated "Government document" has been cited in support of the same.

Regards, Anup.

Anup, you said, " Parasurama is supposed to have only saved PARTS OF THE COAST OF THE REGION.. ". Well this is not correct. The legend in Kerala is that Parasurama regained the entire land of Kerala from the sea, which got immersed in the ocean, after the reign of Mahabali. So, the changes you made in the article is not accurate. Please revert the changes. Thank You, -- Rajith Mohan ^{(Talk to me...)} :-) 19:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I've reverted them. Anup, please do not delete refs and implement bizarre formatting (like striking out text) without discussion. Also, ensure that your prose is FA calibre. Saravask 22:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, maybe I owe an apology for that striking out though I don't know what there is to discuss about what are facts. I shall not be making any more changes to the main article even with discussions anyway.

On the Parasurama legend about retreiving or getting back the lost land, that lies in the realm of either prehistory or mythology, and either way I cannot argue, just like anybody else cannot for that matter. However I do know for sure that ALL Brahmins of the West Coast believe that a part of the West Coast was saved by Parasurama from the aggressing seas for his atoning for his having killed Kshatriyas some 21 times over. In fact Goa is called ParasuramaKshetra. Namboodiris, Pottis (Tulu Brahmins), GSBs of Konkan and Goa, Marathi Brahmins and Gujarati Brahmins all share this legend.

It is not very surprising given the way these states, especially Kerala, suffer from erosion of land every year (Greenhouse Effect etc apart). My roots lie in the Northern and Central parts of the State. Even in my teens and then my early twenties till the earlier part of this decade, we could see the sea as we travelled along the coast by bus or by car, northwards from Palakkad and Thrissur - four years back onwards, big walls have been totally blocking out any possible view of the sea.

Anyway, while I have nothing more to say on that, I am providing a few links (non-Kerala ones to avoid any possible "bias") that give dates way beyond "10th C BC") to places like Edakkal in Wayanad and Marayoor in Idukki. Please make what you will of the same and here too as to whether changes are to me made and if so what, are left entirely to you.

www.wayanad.org/conference/

www.datesaregreat.com/index_files/page0003.htm

www.ourkarnataka.com/Articles/starofmysore/weekend.htm

www.religiousyouthservice.org/projects/details/2006/9.23india.htm

www.hindu.com/2004/12/06/stories/2004120604900300.htm

http://www.bashr.com/en_bio_pics/Marayur

Temples section

I think the section on temples in the article is unncessary and only adds to the length of this article (which is already over the prescribed limits). I propose to delete the section. Comments anyone?-- thund e rboltz ^(Deepu) 04:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Since there has been no opposition, I am removing the said section from the article.-- thund e rboltz ^(Deepu) 17:50, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Please do include section on temples - Why do we need to remove it siting the reason of length? I can't agree. Majority of keralites are temple goers. Keralites have some great temples like Guruvayoor, Sabarimala, Chottanikkara and Padmanabhaswami temple. Kerala culture, history and society in general are deeply related to the DNA of these temples too.Please do include this section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.23.80 (talk) 18:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Revert

Somebody pls revert this page to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kerala&oldid=75841189 all the important portion lost.--Praveen 06:02, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Done.-- thund e rboltz ^(Deepu) 06:32, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Please include a section on temples - There are important ones like Guruvayoor, Sabarimala - all part of kerala identity.

Population growth chart

The graph of population growth rate seems to be wrong (assuming the population graph is correct). The growth rate shown till 1991 is %age increase per 10 years, and in subsequent part it is per 5 years, with the result that an artificial dip shows up at 1996. This should be corrected, by dividing the values upto 1991 by 10, and dividing the values after that by 5, and in the right handside axis, changing the label to "Annual growth rate (%)" (optionally, changing the range of that axis to 0% to 3%).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.134.236.181 (talk • contribs)

I'm planning on fixing this -- it happened because I was in a rush to do the graph before this appeared as the TFA. Thanks for your patience. Saravask 19:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Strange claims

These were produced by speakers of a proto-Tamil language from northwestern India, suggesting that Kerala and Tamil Nadu once shared a common language, ethnicity and culture; this common area is known as Tamilakam.

- Proto-Tamil is not Proto-Dravidian. Proto-Tamil is part of Proto-South Dravidian. The North-West Dravidian language(Brahui) belongs to North-Dravidian and not South Dravidian.

- Proto-Tamil speakers had to cross Karnataka or Andhra Pradesh to reach Tamil Nadu and during movement the language had undergone many sound changes.

Manjunatha (24 Sept 2006) more informetion call kerala 0495-9388964824 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.11.41.144 (talk) 06:38, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Malayali vs Malayalee and Keralian vs Keralite

I think 'Malayali' would be a better spelling in the sense that it would be pronounced as 'Malayali' in many other languages also, as well as in English, whereas the anglicized 'Malayalee' will sound so only in English.

I suggest that the silly 'Keralite' be discarded and 'Keralian' be used instead.Esskay 20:49, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Again, about the 'Malayalee' spelling: many Malayalis may have become so accustomed to that spelling that 'Malayali' might look rather strange to them. It need not be so strange. The pattern has alreadybeen established in India, as in Bengalee becoming Bengali, Hindoo becoming Hindu, etc.Esskay 20:49, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

The Malayali page has a redirect to Malayalee. I presume there was a debate and logic that reached that decision. Why don't we just go with whatever intelligence/discussion went into that and use "Malayalee"? Crewcut 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Neolithic and Megalithic

Dolmens (megalithic tombs known locally as muniyaras) in Kerala's Marayoor region, erected by Neolithic tribesmen.

That is a confusing statement. The Megalithic period of India(more precisely South India) was between 900 BCE to 300 CE. That shows it was Iron age. In fact, from the burial site people have excavated iron tools(at least in Andhra Pradesh). Is there any reason for using "Neolithic tribesmen"?

Manjunatha (31 Oct 2006)

Excess detail in "Culture"

User:Samaleks, two paragraphs on just visual arts is overkill -- I've already condensed the removed info into one sentence. Please put the excess detail in one of the subarticles. Regards, Saravask 00:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The details can be moved to the sub articles. Btw, dont change Kochi urban agglomeration to Kochi, as it create ambiguity with the Kochi city page. --Samaleks 17:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. Saravask 00:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Introduction

The first few lines in the second para of the Introduction, from "First settled in ...." to "....elevated Kerala to Statehood", are not needed there. It should be part of the History section. And that line about the suicide rate should be moved somewhere else in the article, that is, if it should be in it at all.

Um, no. I disagree. Other geography FAs like Australia and Seattle, Washington have this info in the lead. Please familiarize yourself with WP:LEAD and WP:WIAFA. Regards, Saravask 18:26, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with you too. Those you refer to are better said than the way these lines are. These lines sound awkward. There is nothing wrong with introducing points in the lead in, that would be expanded upon in the appropriate sections later. But these lines are neither here or nor there. They don't mean anything.

Please remember the idea is not to fill pages with all kinds of lines as seen to be done in many India and Kerala related topics. What is being said should be appropriate, relevant, meaningful and convey the proper information to anyone who reads it, not jut to those who already know the subject in question. What is in this particular para in question, are a jumble of things that don't connect well. Esskay 21:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Just hidden away

Anybody who cares about making this information more available might fix the redlink at Kerala, India. You might take note that some links in other articles were red because this didn't exist. Likely other similar articles that could do with some redirects as well. Gene Nygaard 00:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. Saravask 02:45, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Literacy Rate

It says 91% in this article, but in the Democrafics section in the India article, it says that "The state of Kerala leads the country with a literacy rate of approximately 94%." What exactly is it? IronCrow 17:55, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Largest Metro

Kochi urban agglomeration is different from Kochi city. Infact, the UA is much bigger and comprise many more areas around Kochi city. Masking the UA name with the city page name will obviously create confusion. Better not to change that. -- Rajith Mohan ^{(Talk to me...)} :-) 17:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, the spelling of Keralam in Malayalam reads as Karelam. Please correct that. -- Rajith Mohan ^{(Talk to me...)} :-) 17:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

God's own country

Tourism department's slogan is just a slogan. It is not even an original one. The phrase is also used in some other places of the world by people to describe their favourite places. Just because it is being heard again and again does not make it relevant to be included in this article. If it should be included anywhere, it should be in the tourism article. 192.30.202.20 18:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

User Bharatveer has reverted to the God's own country catchphrase, with the summary "unnecessary deletion." I think his is unnecessary reverting. Seems like there is a conspiracy of people loving catch phrases instead of substance and they seem to want complete control of this article. 192.30.202.20 17:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

If you can find some historical or cultural significance of this "catchphrase" then its inclusion in the article is justified. However, as far as I know, it is just a slogan made by the tourism industry to attract tourist to Kerala! Remember, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. --Incman|वार्ता 19:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I am the one who originally deleted the phrase form the lead. I thought it was excessive self-promotion for an FA; however, I've seen it used in books and other sources outside of a tourism context. Maybe others can comment on this. Saravask 21:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

The slogan was not coined by the tourist dept or industry as almost all people of/from Kerala seem to think. They just adopted it for their slogan, if not hijacked it. 'God's country' and 'God's own country' are expressions that existed in North America long before Kerala tourism discovered it. Anyway, the reason why it is irrelevant to be included, (besides the fact that it is just a commercial slogan,) is this: What is its bearing on the etymology of the name Kerala? 192.30.202.19 22:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

So what shall it be? You guys want to continue to be at the level where frivolity and catch phrases continue to give you tremendous joy and enjoyment? where removal of irrelevance from the article is considered 'controversial' (because the phrase is popular or its deletion is just plain 'unnecessary') and indulging in reverting gives you personal pleasure? 192.30.202.20 16:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

kerala too much population in middle east

Hello, I spend a lot of time in Dubai, and was very astonish that there are too much keralites population,in almost all walk of lives.The same in Saudi arabia and other GCC countries. I dont know really that why this trend is but too much population is as well in Indian state of about 13800 sq km just. They people are very active in life as they have own tv channels,education policies,language,religion trends and job specification. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GeoIslam (talk • contribs)

source of the name(keralam)

thei are can see alot of cocanut tree.the plant are very important role in daily food.cocanut in their local language(malayallam)call 'kera'.that become change the to kerala(in in english)original is kerallam.by nijas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.11.41.144 (talk) 05:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

What I see in these pages is this: Revert Meisters Rule

If user 59.92.94.241 thought that he could do any edits here, he was naive as some others who may have thought the same thing and made attempts to improve the article. I had noticed that particlular line user 59.92.94.241 tried to edit, would have done the same thing myself, but I know better from what I have seen on this and other article pages. It just is not worth the effort. Why? Because,like on many of these pages, here too is a clique of people who want to protect whatever they have written, hovering around like hawks to swoop in on anyone who make any attempt at any kind of edit. They are the Revert Meisters. They will always have their way. So anyone who is naive enough to believe that they can contribute anything meaningful here or to some of the other article pages, please do not waste your time. The Revert Meisters won't give you a chance. If they want to revel in their mediocrity, just let them. Wikipedia says be bold and edit, that is just the theory. In practice, the clique won't just let you. --Esskay 17:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The comment above is not about valid reverts such as removal of vandalism etc. but only to reverts based on the reverters' idea of what should be right.

Please read 'he or she' where 'he' is used to refer to user 59.92.94.241 in the first line. Esskay 19:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

translators needed at Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Translation

Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Translation Please add your name under translators--D-Boy 13:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Kerala Community

If anybody have an Orkut account can join the "Wikipedia Kerala Community". Search for this community and just join. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kjrajesh (talk • contribs) 07:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

Unemployment and Suicide Rate

In the introduction it is stated that Kerala has rates of suicide and unemployment that are among India's highest. However, when you look at the page of the source referenced (page 26), this is not what is actually stated. That page states that Kerala had, at the time of the report, India's third highest rate in terms of crime. The paper also points at Kerala's high (and increasing) incidence of reported Rape cases. I think that the mention of suicide rate should be removed, unless a better source can be located... and perhaps the introduction should include mention of Kerala's crime rate and the increasing number of crimes against women. [Too often, Malayalis take pride in all of Keralas statistics, without admitting some of the problem areas in our culture.] Another source should be listed in the case of unemployment.

Statistics - a thought Kerala's high crime, suicide, unemployment and alcoholism rates may have more to do with the openess and diligence of the government in investigating and reporting them as compared to other Indian states. I think that makes more sense rather than a increased degree of social breakdown. The state government is after all the least corrupt in India. I doubt for instance that the government of Bihar is accurately gathering crime and suicide statistics 149.99.63.218 16:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Kerala userboxes

Hello,

Here are a few Malayalee userboxes for people to use. Wiki Raja 12:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[1] <-- its not kerEla, its kerAla

Hi webmasters,

please make the change right away. The wrong spelling for Kerala appears only on the public url http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerela; and thankfully not anywhere across the corresponding article.

Thank You. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Punarnava (talk • contribs) 08:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

Etymology and other points

What is the source of this assertion? "It may derive from Sanskrit keralam, which means 'the land added on,...' How can Keralam mean "land added on" in Sanskrit? (forget the Yahoo answer entry)
The negative things in intro, alcoholism % co. are not supported by the cited page in the cited document. It seems to be the result of vandalism by some vested interests. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Damnnote (talk • contribs) 05:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

I've removed the sentence now. You are correct in noting that it has no reliable sources. However, coming to point no.2, I can see no scope for any vested interests, as it is common knowledge (across Kerala, that is) that the state ranks among the highest in (reported) cases of rape, road accident-related deaths, rates of alcohol consumption, suicide, and divorce. I've changed to a more acceptable source. Please see this page.--thunderboltz ^(TALK) 14:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Confusing statements

Someone please clarify or rewrite the following sentences in the article.
"First settled in the 10th century BCE by speakers of Proto-South Dravidian, Kerala was influenced by the Mauryan Empire."
"The Chera kings' dependence on trade meant that merchants from West Asia established coastal posts and settlements in Kerala.[4] Many—especially Jews and Christians—also escaped persecution, establishing the Nasrani Mappila[5] and Muslim Mappila communities." Walky-talky 05:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe I have successfully addressed your concerns. Please take a look.--thunderboltz ^(TALK) 14:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You have no reason to believe so. It looks like you don't even understand what the problem is. "The Chera kings' dependence on trade meant that merchants from West Asia established coastal posts and settlements in Kerala.[5] Many — especially Jews and Christians — also escaped persecution, establishing the Nasrani Mappila[6] and Muslim Mappila communities." What persecution are you talking about? Egregious weasel, nothing else. "In written records, Kerala was first mentioned in the Sanskrit epic Aitareya Aranyaka. Later, figures such as Katyayana, Patanjali, Pliny the Elder, and the unknown author of the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea displayed familiarity with Kerala." What is the source of Aitareya Aranyaka? Leave the drivel on the sarkari website alone. That's no reliable source. And the citation for the second sentence is Wikipedia article on Natural History (Pliny)! Neither Pliny nor Perplus author used the name Kerala. The weasel word "familiarity" is merely used to hide the writer's ignorance. The result is that no reader gets any idea other than confusion. Nazranimappila 08:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Thunderboltz (deepujoseph), its a long time we met. I should say that your tweaking about the second paragraph was a nice attempt to address some point. However I should say that tweaking something to pacify the pov of one individual is a danger for the wikipedia.

check this bbc radio documentary on muziris http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/rams/unearthingm_20060103.ram

The second paragraph is hardly a problem. In fact after your tweaking there is real problem because we have to keep updating according to new findings. please check the bbc links. Besides the reference by De Beth Hillel, David (1832) is for the earliest reference by a scholar in support of the arrival of the Jews in kerala in 573 BCE so it is important to not to distort the citation to please a pov. Infact there are gross assumptions through out the article with which people have no problem like the assertion about the namboothri brahminical principalities even though historically the brahmins arrived only in the 7th century. Or the even presumptiive assumption in the culture section that states that kerala culture has elements of aryan influences, all this without anything called references. yet no one has any problem. How come?? Why always the problem is with anything got to do with nasranis or jews. please explain. thanks Robin klein 17:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

The problem is not the mention of the Nazranis or Jews but stupidity. The sentence as such didn't tell you anything other than confuse the readers. The writer apparently didn't know what he was talking about. Even after the claimed successful addressing it remains so. These writers should try to understand the facts before copying factoids from unreliable sources. I fully agree with you that the article is full of gross assumptions. Much of it was introuduced under duress from pov pushers of Brahminical religion. And it was wrong of Thunderboltz to remove warning tags from the article. The article is full of weasel nonsense which hides more than it tells you. See the revision made by Thunderboltz. "There is evidence of the emergence of prehistoric pottery and granite burial monuments in the 10th century BCE that resemble their counterparts in Western Europe and the rest of Asia. These were produced by speakers of a proto-Tamil language." "evidence of the emergence of prehistoric pottery and granite burial monuments", "These were produced by..." Such clumsy weasel language in a Featured Article! And the citation? The home page of the Government of Kerala! Maybe, the fellow gave this citation thought that the existence of a website for government of Kerala supports these slimy claims on a pre-historic age. If the pages on that site won't allow identification by url, leave that site alone. As a rule Kerala government web pages merely deal in stupid drivel. Most of those sites are created by an extremely inept institution called CDit. And the amount of nonsense the Cdit has floated on the Web is stupendous. There is a site exclusively on Kerala History run by Kerala Council for Historical Research. Why don't find sources from there rather than the unreliable sites created by Cdit? I suggest to Thunderboltz to stop owning the article and let others work on it. First of all, reinstate the tags placed by Wikytalky (and btw, your talk page shows an excellent Assume Good Faith mention of Wikytalky). You haven't been able to perceive the problems. Leave it for others. Featured or not, the article is full of crap. Nazranimappila 08:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

A note on Kerala Government website as Reliable Source Just look at this "history" on the site to determine the reliability.

History

The ancient history of Kerala is shrouded in the mists of tradition. The most popular legend would have it that the land crust that forms the State was raised from the depths of the ocean. Parasurama, the Brahmin avatar (incarnation) of Lord Vishnu, had waged an epic series of vengeful wars on the Kshatriyas. Came a moment when Parasurama was struck by remorse at the wanton annihilation he had wrought. He offered severe penance atop the mountain heights. In a mood of profound atonement, the sage heaved his mighty axes into the midst of the distant ocean. The waves foamed and frothed as a prawn-shaped land extending from Gokarnam to Kanyakumari surfaced from the depths of the sea to form the state and hence the sobriquet - "Gods own Country".

Incoherent rant as history, again from government website.

Civilization

Legends apart, the first set of people who left their footprints on the soil of Kerala can be identified at present only with reference to their burial practices. Though records are lacking, a reasonable assumption is that they spoke an archaic form of Tamil. They constructed strange burial monuments in granite, literate and pottery, most of which are strikingly similar to the megalithic monuments of West Europe and Asia. These monuments are, however, younger than their counterparts in the rest of Asia. Historians have postulated a time bracket between 10th century BC and 5th century AD for these people. It is clear from the grave relics, including iron tridents and daggers, that the megalithic builders had long emerged out of the stone age into the iron age without passing through a bronze age. In fact, there is very little evidence of the old and the new stone ages in Kerala. It is quite possible that the Mauryan invaders who reached the Mysore borders in their conquest southwards, encountered the megalith making tribes who lived in hill forts and controlled the surrounding countryside. Fortunately, a whole corpus of ancient Tamil literature known to scholars by the name of Sangham literature, has been preserved. It is believed that during the period of Asoka the Great, the southern most tribes were just emerging from the tribal status of civilization. Contacts with the more advanced Mauryan world could have accelerated the pace of political and social movement among the Cheras and the minor chieftains of Kerala.

another piece of pure drivel

A new father for "the entire social world of Kerala".

cThe sage Agastya is the father of Tamil grammar and literature and the entire social world of Kerala, as part of Tamilakam (Tamil land) is reflected in the rich collection of secular poems which form the characteristic legacy of the Sangham age.

@Nazranimappila: Forgive me for being so churlish, but I have to say that your tone of speech leaves little desire for anyone to consider your comments seriously. I find it highly amusing that you would rather taint the article with ugly banners rather than take the least effort to address these "so called" issues. Also, tell me when I have acted as "owning" this or any other article. That is an allegation; and a baseless one at that. Since you never mentioned what the "gross assumptions" were, all I could do was revert the first two paragraphs to the earliest FA prose (as I have already mentioned in the edit summaries).

If there are problems with the article, fix them. Or at least list them out so someone else can fix it.--thunderboltz ^(TALK) 17:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Your regret in advance looks like a poor ploy. If you had any sense of propriety (which you admittedly go without) you would have first ventured to answer your old friend who said there were "gross assumptions through out the article". You may find it amusing after your failure to address the questions already mentioned on this talk page. "Or at least list them," you say? Scroll a little upward and see some stupidities pointed out and also the comments on your "successful addressing". If you are worried about "ugly banners", ask the Wikipedia community to do away with them. But I am sure, you are not worried about the ugly blunders like Kerala being a Sanskrit word with meaning "land added on". Your reversion to remove the tags (before looking at the points raised) clearly showed your ownership of the article.

A poor ploy for what, may I ask? Both the confusing sentences pointed out by Walky-talky were removed/re-written when I reverted to the FA-prose. And I did read what Robert said. He was referring to a discussion that happened some time back. Before I reply to him, I need to prepare. While the uncouth drivel of yours requires little preparation. Also, you speak as though I am in some way obliged to attend all comments and criticisms on Wikipedia. I'm a volunteer too, and I chose who I speak to. I hope you would allow me at least that right.

And as for the banners, once you can list out the "gross inaccuracies" you may put them back on. But as you are even now reluctant to point out what they are, I find no reason in defacing the article. The tinier {{fact}} or {{Failed verification}} does the same trick in a much neater way when there are only a few inaccuracies.--thunderboltz ^(TALK) 19:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

"Kochi" vs "Kochi UA"

This is the 3rd or 4th time that someone (anons? IPs?) has been reverting the "largest_metro" field to "Kochi urban agglomeration". Who is doing this? Please speak up. I think it's ridiculous to double-specify "UA" when it is already clear from the infobox field label that we're talking about "metro", not "city" population. It is for this reason that WP:IIJ includes both "population_metro" and "population_total" for cities like Srinagar or Mumbai. There is no need to double-dab the city name since most Indian city articles do not have specific "city" and "UA" pages. Thanks. Saravask 04:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Rajit, can you please explain your unilateral double-dabbing, which you haven't yet established consensus for? Why we need to state "urban agglomaration" again when the infobox field already includes the word "metro"? I hope you will provide a compelling reason or precedent; else your edit may need to be reverted and/or the article will need to be locked until the dispute is resolved. The same applies to your unilateral (attempted) move of Kochi metropolitan area to "Kochi UA". Once again, your reverts disagree with the convention followed by all the other WP:INCITIES articles (e.g., Mumbai metropolitan area and Kolkata metropolitan area). Remember, Mumbai and Kolkata are featured articles that set the standard for other cities to follow, not vice versa. BTW, WP:INDIA's de facto standard is to include details about both city- and metro-wide features in the main article, so as long as the field name "Largest metro" makes clear we are talking about metro pop, there should be no problem. There is no need to disrupt well-established project-wide norms. Thanks. Saravask 11:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Kochi urban agglomeration is different from Kochi city. Moreover, we have two pages here in wiki for the both. It is very confusing to put Kochi city instead of Kochi UA name in the infobox. It was your unilateral decission to change the name in the infobox without discussing in the talk page. Remember, this was discussed before, and the name Kochi urban agglomeration was kept as the result of the consensus. Why are you too particular in the name ? From the history tab, I got to know that the reason you provided was "there is no need for a bulky/ugly dab name"!! This is surely relative, as it is not an ugly or bulky name for me. It provides the user, a clear picture about the urban agglomeration area, which includes Kochi city + 11 adjoining villages + 4 muncipalities. Masking the UA name with the city page name will obviously create confusion.

So, as far as the name is providing accurate information, and as far as the article on that name exists, and as far as the name is not creating confusions, it is better to use it in the infobox, rather than masking it to hide so-called ugly/bulky name.
Thanks, and Cheers... -- Rajith Mohan ^{(Talk to me..)} 01:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I hope I'm not intruding. My addition of Kochi and Coimbatore to the South India page got undone, and so I was trying to figure out which among Kochi and TVM was the bigger city. That was how I chanced upon this convo. I do agree that we have an interesting case here. I am unaware of any previous discussions that took place here, but in my opinion, User:Saravask is correct. A double disambiguation is unnecessary. The Kochi page already discusses the metro details:

The current metropolitan limits of Kochi include the mainland Ernakulam, old Kochi, the suburbs of Edapally, Kalamassery and Kakkanad to the northeast; Tripunithura to the south east; and a group of islands closely scattered in the Vembanad Lake. Most of these islands are very small, varying in extent from six square kilometre to less than a square kilometre (1,500 to less than 250 acres).

Moreover, see this from the India page, another excellent article:

India's largest urban agglomerations are Mumbai (formerly, Bombay), Delhi, Kolkata (formerly, Calcutta), Chennai (formerly, Madras), Bangalore, and Hyderabad.

The cities are linked to the city page and not to the page for their metropolitan area despite indirectly referring to them. Stating Kochi urban agglomeration in a field that accepts only UAs is indeed a redundant specification. I would like to even delete off the Kochi UA page.--Seraphiel 05:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

We have seperate pages for Kochi city and Kochi agglomeration. Infact, the total area of other places in the UA is more than the city. I too agree that there is a reference about the metropolitan area in the Kochi, India page. But, it doesnt means that it holds all the details of the UA. The Kochi UA page and Kochi city page are different. I believe that since the largest metro in Kerala is the Kochi UA, but not the Kochi city, why should we mask Kochi UA to be displayed as Kochi ? It will only add the confusion. Note that for Kolkotta and Mumbai, the largest city itself is the largest UA. So, the confusion is less. Here the situation is different. So, it should be clearly reflected in the infobox. I couldnt understand why we want to mask an actual information!! --Samaleks 07:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Did either you or RM read my (or Seraphiel's) comments? This is not about "masking" information. This is about the lunacy of going against the WP convention of linking to only the main article whenever discussing general city/metro characteristics. What is also bizarre here is that RM also wants to rename the "Kochi metropolitan area" (which follows the standard "X metropolitan area" naming convention) to "Kochi UA" (talk about bizarre). Should we move "Kerala" to "Kerala state" (or, following RM's example, to "Kerala S")? Then, when we are listing information in city infoboxes, should we list the state as "State: Kerala state"? People are not stupid enough to need the same infomation pointed out again and again. Thanks. Saravask 21:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Dear Saravask, The Kochi UA and the Kochi city is entirely different. The city is only a part of the UA along with 4 muncipalities, and 11 villages. The muncipalities are North Paravur, Kalamassery, Aluva, Fort Kochi and Angamali along with the Kochi city. So, can I put Angamali in the largest metro field, just for the reason that it is also a part of the UA ? Can I put North Paravur or Aluva in the largest metro field ? If the answer is NO, then why are you insisting to put Kochi city, which is also a part of the UA. If some one enquires about the largest UA in North India, the answer is NCR, (which includes the neighbour state towns of Faridabad and Gurgaon in Haryana & Noida, Greater Noida and Ghaziabad in Uttar Pradesh, along with Delhi), not the city of New Delhi. The accurate information is obviously putting NCR rather than New Delhi. This applies here also. No question of redundancy appear here. Let us insist that the information be accurate, so that a common reader will will not be confused. Cheers, -- Rajith Mohan ^{(Talk to me..)} 06:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

NPOV and "patriarchy"

The article cites a paper by Anna Lindberg to the effect that gains by women in Kerala are suffering under the "patriarchy-enforced oppression of women". The argument is at least partly attributable to Lindberg, but is it an objective description or an ideological one? The most relevant text from the Lindberg paper (searching on the substring "patriarch") seems to be:

The story of the cashew workers in Kerala has been described by some ... as a story of victimized women who suffer from ignorance and patriarchal oppression.

Lindberg describes "patriarchal oppression" as one interpretation of conditions among others. In another passage, she writes:

such structural concepts as capitalism and patriarchy ... may still have great relevance

But she goes on to argue that "these concepts must be analyzed in a complex way". The other reference to "patriarchy" implies the "patriarchal nature of unions". Is the article's invocation of "patriarchy-enforced oppression" then an accurate summary of Lindberg's research?

In any case, shouldn't an analytical characterization of "patriarchy" be qualified? Any unqualified description of the "capitalism-enforced oppression of the poor" would raise the same objection. Not that such modes of analysis don't belong in Wikipedia. But they ought to be adequately qualified per NPOV, rather than presented as uncontroversial facts. -- Shunpiker 22:07, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

What wording do you recommend? Saravask 22:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I tried rewording the paragraph to specifically address the position of low caste men and women described by Lindberg. I also moved the part on gender relations before the section describing the use of matrilineal and patrilineal systems. -- Shunpiker (talk) 22:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

OK. Saravask (talk) 05:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Karelam?

Doesnt it say Karelam in the malayalam text or is my malayalam that bad? I fixed it. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Corpx 17:32, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Bleh, I should've read the discussion above. Changes reverted Corpx 17:38, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

IPA transcription of "Kerala"

Why does the IPA transcription read "['keːɹəˌɭɐ]" rather than ['keːɹəˌlɐ] (i.e. with ɭ instead of l)? The former phoneme [ɭ] corresponds to the Malayalam letter [ɭa] (ള). If I'm not much mistaken, this article is trying to give the English pronounciation (rather than the Malayalam pronounciation of the word കേരളം). If so, it would be ridiculous to include [ɭ] (especially when you include [ɹ]!), since that sound does not exist in English (certainly not any dialect that also includes [ɹ] as a pronounciation for "r"!). --Kuaichik 03:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

In fact, assuming again that we are talking about the English pronounciation, shouldn't the first consonant ([k]) actually be aspirated ([kʰ])? Unless, of course, you're using broad transcription...so I guess this is more of a nitpicky question :-P --Kuaichik 04:17, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm..this is indeed a nit-picky question. :-) I was wondering if there is something called the English pronunciation of "Kerala". When people ask me where I am from, I end my reply with a ള sound, not a 'la' sound. The word "Kerala" originates from popular Malayalam usage. (eg. Kerala Naimasabha, Kerala poratta, etc) I doubt it was introduced from English. But you are the linguist. Just added my two cents on this.--thunderboltz ^(TALK) 16:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

And while we are discussing IPAs, can you please check if the one at the Kochi page is correct. I got that done by the reference desk. I cant read IPA, but the more I look at it, the more wrong it looks. Gut feeling, I s'pose...--thunderboltz ^(TALK) 16:42, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

By "English pronounciation," I mean the pronounciation of a native speaker of English (particularly in an English-speaking country, e.g. the US, UK, Australia, etc.), as opposed to the Malayalee pronounciation. I listened to the audio recording, and it doesn't sound like the Malayalee pronounciation at all (it sounds more like what I call the "English pronounciation").

I never said the word "Kerala" was adopted from English (my goodness, if I had said so, what a horrible linguistic mistake that would have been!! :-D). All I'm saying is that the way the IPA transcription is currently written, it looks as if the word should be pronounced some really weird way, more like *കേഴള (that is, with the "English" pronounciation of "r," represented by [ɹ] in IPA). So even if you were trying to indicate the Malayalee pronounciation (and I guess disregarding/changing the audio file's pronounciation), the letter ര would be written [ɾa] in IPA, not *[ɹa].

The IPA for "Kochi" is written correctly. I should check the audio file, too (just to make sure it sounds like the IPA). Don't go with your gut on IPA; the transcription looks stranger than it is. I know at least one phonologist who believes it is a weird-looking, ugly transcription system :)

Anyway, on a more non-linguistic note: Are you sure you're still on wikibreak? BTW, I like your last edit summary here. Clever! :) --Kuaichik 22:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, also, I said Malayalee pronounciation above (not Malayalam pronounciation) because Malayalees use the same pronounciation in both Malayalam and English (unless of course they grew up in an English-speaking country, outside of the Indian Subcontinent).

And actually when I said I might be acting a bit "nitpicky," I was specifically talking about the use of [k] vs. [kʰ] :-P --Kuaichik 22:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, the pronounciation and IPA of Kochi (India) are consistent with each other. --Kuaichik 04:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, so that is the "English pronunciation". At the back of my mind I was having memories of the CNN weather anchor announcing once that the monsoon had arrived over Kerala. She nearly gave me a heart attack by the way she pronounced it. :P

Like I said before, I'm a big zero when it comes to phonetics. (Wonder why my teachers never thought it necessary to teach them). I trust you to make the necessary changes, if no one has objections. Just add the correct native IPA as well, in case someone finds it useful. And thanks for confirming the Kochi IPA. Now that I look at the Thiruvananthapuram IPA, Kochi seems much more tame.--thunderboltz ^(TALK) 05:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I think I'll wait a bit before adding the corrects IPA transcriptions. But you still haven't answered one question: Are you sure you're still on Wikibreak? Or can I post messages on your talk page now? :-D --Kuaichik 14:33, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Indian the Language?

Does this exist? Looks to me like Malayalam, except written with English words. Need comments at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Indian_The_Language Corpx 15:07, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

This is a bogus concept, in my opinion. Lots of people who don't know how diverse India is think that all Indians speak "Indian." Malayalam isn't the only language to be called "Indian" by ignorant foreigners; Hindi/Urdu/Hindustani, Gujarati, Tamil, etc. are all the same to many non-Indians.

In fact, I think that to claim that Christians in Malabar (i.e. northern Kerala) are special in this respect is ridiculous. Christians are a minority in Malabar anyway, as opposed to Hindus and Muslims. --Kuaichik 04:45, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

In ancient days the term "Malabar" was used to denote the entire Kerala(from Kanyakumari to Mangalore),not today's Malabar alone. The usage of name Malabar to denote N. Kerala came from the "British Malabar".Princemathewalleppey 13:04, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps. But even if that was what you meant by Malabar, why single out only Christians in Malabar, as opposed to Rajputs in Rajasthan (or really all over the place!) and Sikhs in Punjab and Parsis in Gujarat, etc., etc.? Or for that matter, Hindus anywhere in the country? Why should only Christians in "Malabar" (Kerala) have their particular dialect of Malayalam called "Indian"? (It isn't all that different from standard Malayalam anyway. I think Palakkattu Malayalam is more different than this so-called "Indian" language!) --Kuaichik 01:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Villárvattam

Claims to have used the "Indian" language. Anyone know anything about this? Corpx 15:19, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

See above :-P --Kuaichik 04:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Scarlet Rain

un protect. Requesting unprotect to include newsworthy event as reported from space.com http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060703_wild_weather_top10-7.html Describing red cells that rained down upon Kerela and which flourished in very high temperatures. From space.com: " In the summer of 2001, at least 50 tons of red particles fell over Kerala, India, continuing as scattered rain for nearly two months. Theories as to the source of the scarlet showers include rusty particles from a dust storm and biological cells of an extraterrestrial origin. In the April issue of the journal Astrophysics and Space Science, scientists from Mahatma Gandhi University reported that the particles have the appearance of biological cells, can reproduce at sizzling temperatures, and have no similarity to dust particles. " Acenyc28@hotmail.com 74.73.104.65 05:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

There is an entire article about that on Wikipedia. See Red rain in Kerala.--thunderboltz ^(TALK) 16:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow. With a bit of spit-and-polish, that article could become featured. Strange. Saravask 05:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Dravidian civilizations

Wiki Raja 08:44, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

is there a reason to use the Indian numbering system in the article?

"more than 50% of Keralites who rely on some 30 lakh (3 million) water wells" (emphasis mine)

Does it make any sense for the article to switch to the Indian numbering system in this sentence? Though I found it interesting to encounter, click, and read about the "lakh", I don't understand its use here in an article that doesn't otherwise use the Indian numbering system. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Czyzczyz (talk • contribs) 20:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It would make the article less cluttered. Saravask (talk) 03:41, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

absent mentions of University of Calicut and Kannur University along with Sanskrit University

It is quite surprising to see that the authors forgot about Calicut University (Sukumar Azhikode was PVC) and a few other prominent universities were missed in the page. I will be glad to provide content, if you are interested. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulignatius (talk • contribs) 20:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Literacy rate (2)

According to the French wikipedia, the literacy rate of Kerala is 90,92%, not 100% (fr:Classement des États et territoires indiens par taux d'alphabétisation). They state that the source is the 2001 census. They do not provide any link to the census but I don't think they made up such a figure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.115.179.199 (talk) 12:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:KeralaSeal.jpg

Image:KeralaSeal.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Biased View Point

Lately the unbiased views of Kerala Article seems to be getting diluted.Isolating the Hindu Aikya Vedi stating "Nevertheless, there have been signs of increasing influences from religious extremist organisations such as the Hindu Aikya Vedi" is a biased view and clearly validates my view. What about the extremist approach of Islamic Fundamentalist Groups like PDP and SIMI and Anti-Establishment Literature promoted by the Church to conspire against an elected Communist Government and the blatant disrespect shown to the National Flag where it was striped and removed from an International Airport by a Regional Partys cadres. These are the underlying currents that forms the basis of Fundamentalism in Kerala. If Hindu Fundamentalism -and "signs of increasing influences from religious extremist" exists in Kerala,its onus lies on Keralas Minority Fundamentalism which is the real Cancer.Malabarspices 14:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Citations and References

There could be better citations and references for many topics in the article. By restricting editing access, the Kerala page is losing out on the input that people across the world could otherwise contribute.

Below are a couple of examples of incomplete, insufficient or inaccurate references.

The two preeminent educational institutions in Kerala are at Kozhikode - NITC and IIMK. It barely receives a mention - all in one sentence after all the other academic institutions in Kerala are listed. There are no references to the quality of educational institutions in Kerala, even though many are available.

Another example is the citation for God's Own Country, numbered 10. How does an article in the Hindu in 2002 be a citation for this topic? At minimum, you should cite the webpage that was created way back in 1993 (www.cs.cmu.edu/~vipin/kerala.html) that coined this phrase for Kerala.

In the section on Language, there is no mention of Thunchathu Ezhuthachan, but two lines are devoted to Arundhathi Roy!! She has the only two citations in that section. The rest of the Malayali literary stalwarts deserve at least one citation, agree....? Keraleeyan1 (talk) 07:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Most Popular Sport in Kerala

It is written that football is the most popular sport in Kerala and cricket which is the most popular game in other parts of India is not as popular in Kerala. Both are clearly mistakes of fact. Football is highly popular in Malappuram district. In the district of Kannoor also, the game is highly popular, perhaps, more popular than cricket. In pockets of Trissur as well as Kozhikodu, football enjoys high popularity. But cricket is undoubtedly more popular. In all other districts, cricket is infinitely more popular than football. In fact, football is not at all popular in the southern parts. I accept that Keralites' attitude towards other sports/games is not the same as that of people from other Indian states. But that doesn't mean cricket is not very popular here.

In 1994, there was a survey by Mathrubhumi Sports Masika, to choose the most popular sportsperson among Keralites. 'Surprisingly', Sachin Tendulkar was adjudged the most popular and Kapil Dev coming at the second postion. Azharuddin came at No.5. I used the word surprisingly because of four reasons: 1. A large number of the magazine's readers are from the northern parts of Kerala, where football is popular. 2. The magazine unlike Sportstar did not give much much importance to cricket till then. 3. As a young boy from Central Travancore who has little knowledge of the life in northern Kerala, I was led to believe that cricket is a word unheard of in the north Kerala. 4. In 1994, football, in fact, was a popular game.

If you go through the sports pages of Malayalam dailies, you can observe a visible trend. Cricket has been occupying the more space since the mid-1990s. Manorama recognised the direction of the wind faster and slowly, Mathrubhumi caught up, too. In fact, from 1996 onwards, even Santhosh Trophy goes unnoticed. Before that year, Malayalam newspapers would give a lot of importance to Santhosh Trophy.

So, I believe Wikipedia should correct these mistakes and stop relying on outdated information —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rmahesh01 (talk • contribs) 09:03, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

too large

Article size is too large. someone please cut short unwanted stuff. --Crazyguy2050 (talk) 10:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Kerala geographic map

Hi. I made a geographic map of Kerala (Image:Kerala geographic map.png) which I think could be used on the Kerala page. I wanted to get some feedback about it. Please let me know if any corrections/additions need to be made. Thanks. Mkeranat (talk) 14:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Religion

I'm user '70.72.222.220'. I recently joined Wikipedia.

I believe that the religion section of the article is essential to explain to Wiki viewers if the religious customs of the people of Kerala! I believe it is very important to discuss the caste diversity amongst Hindu devotees. - Cryptographer —Preceding comment was added at 06:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to add separate article on Hinduism in Kerala or similar title. This article is in compact form and it is FA article, without editors agreeing on adding such a section, it should not be added. If you add without a consensus, it will be removed. GDibyendu (talk) 08:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit conflicts

Please do not edit the article while I'm stripping out unsourced additions and vandalism. This is a lengthy process. Thanks. Saravask (talk) 01:47, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

No worries, I was just wondering why you stripped out more than unsourced additions. It would help if you could produce notices like these before editing. Trips (talk) 02:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Growth in Enterprises

Please have a look at this statistics on growth in enterprises. Kerala has clocked a 8.93% growth from 1998 to 2005 compared with the national average of 4.80%. Is it worth adding?? Docku (talk) 11:49, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep, it is. Trips (talk) 13:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I did update it. Docku (talk) 14:05, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Literacy Update

According to this survey conducted in year 2005-2006, Mizoram has a literacy of 91.1 % and Kerala has 89.9%. Guess it is a reliable source (Government of India) and thus deserves an update. Any opinion on this? Docku (talk) 13:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I have updated the information. Docku (talk) 13:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)