Talk:Tulu people: Difference between revisions
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
all communities have their own uniqueness,removing them does not make sense.you said only major communities should be added.you are contradicting yourself now.and also you haven't explained your previous edit behaviours including starting edits wars .[[User:Linguisticgeek|<font color="#AA22CC">Linguistic</font>]]'''[[User_ talk:Linguisticgeek|<font color="#2B18BA">Geek</font>]] |
all communities have their own uniqueness,removing them does not make sense.you said only major communities should be added.you are contradicting yourself now.and also you haven't explained your previous edit behaviours including starting edits wars .[[User:Linguisticgeek|<font color="#AA22CC">Linguistic</font>]]'''[[User_ talk:Linguisticgeek|<font color="#2B18BA">Geek</font>]] |
||
No, I never started an edit war. It was you who tried to avoid a discussion challenging your edit by issuing me a warning. From the begining my stand was to restore the article original form and discuss your edits. You were simply reverting and calling my edits vandalism.[[Special:Contributions/188.52.8.156|188.52.8.156]] ([[User talk:188.52.8.156|talk]]) 08:49, 12 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
==Picture at the begining of the article== |
==Picture at the begining of the article== |
Revision as of 08:49, 12 November 2010
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tulu people article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | India: Karnataka Stub‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ethnic groups Stub‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Dravidian people Stub‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
|
Are there really any tulu christians
hey there aren't any tulu christians left anywhere.most are assimilated with konkani catholics or are reconverted to hindu faith.the madhva monastries and Hindu nationalism is pretty strong a force in mangalore.though there are a few koraga christians,but koraga is listed as a separate language.They can't be added as tuluva.Tulu culture is pretty much hindu and the remaining jain.Koragas are listed as a separate ehtnic group though they associate more with tulu than kannada.what is Tulu chritian culture?.Most protestant churches sing kannada konkani hyms not tulu except the pavoor church.Beary muslims can be classified as Tulu since beary find mention even in paddanas.there is vibrant mangalorean konkani christian culture not tulu.Muskeeter8 (talk) 03:49, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
- Please add new sections to the bottom of the page. Or just click on "New Section" to add a new topic. There are Christians among Tulus. I had added a referece some time back but someone removed it. I have added it back. Hope that erases any doubts. --Deepak D'Souza 05:03, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
i doubt there are tulu christiansAttagirl (talk) 05:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that some ethnicities have strong relations with a particular religion. For example, the Arab identity is strongly related with Islam. Likewise, the Tuluva identity is strongly related with Hinduism and Jainism. But on Wikipedia, irrespective of what anyone considers, all religions have to be represented. Forget Christianity, even if there any Muslim Tuluvas or Buddhist Tuluvas, even they have to be mentioned.
- Bulletin, Volume 25, Issues 1-4, p. 41
- Google Book search on Tulu Protestants KensplanetTC 05:18, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
- 2001 statistics of Tulu Nadu from the Diocese of Mangalore clearly states that there are 60,434 Protestants. Are you trying to say, none are Tulu-speaking. KensplanetTC 05:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Seriously doubt the presence of Tulu christains, most of the articles on the net do not mention any thing about Tulu Christains, except for the sources provided above most of which are christain sites. We need some neutral source. The word Christian can be taken out of the infobox and be mentioned in the para.188.54.84.236 (talk) 18:31, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- IP dont delete the majority of the article when you disagree with somone, it looks like an edit war in the article history, ive removed the warnings linguistic gave you, but it looks like you may have a history of blanking articles to cause an edit war, don't do that please--Lerdthenerd (talk) 18:59, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the warning issued by Linguistic to me. I have no intension to start an edit war. My point is large edits as the one made by linguistic needs to be discussed. Until a discussion is made, let the original version be in the article.188.54.14.205 (talk) 13:17, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
what is the problem with the content.you mean to say other communities are irrelevant even if they have articles.that's not how wiki works see Malayali article.anyways this article is stub.expansion is required.`13:26, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
This article is about Tuluvas and a brief description of each communities is not required. Each community has its own page and is hyperlinked. So anyone who wants to know more about the communities can click on the hyperlink. Also description of each community make this article looks un-encyclopedic. 188.52.8.156 (talk) 05:45, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
sorry but all you have done with your dynamic ip is remove hyper links of shivalli brahmins,tuluva gowda,devadiga,sthanika brahmins etc.that is pure vandalism.do you think i don't see the edit history.the article is a stub description abt various communities does not violate any rule.and also please stop removing kannada fonts from other articles.LinguisticGeek 07:02, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
While I have removed the hyper links, I have stated the reason. You could have contested the edit there and then itself. This discussion is about the current edit. Don't bring in old issues. We can have a discussion for it also. Now by adding brief descriptions of various communities does not violate any rule, by definitely it make the article look shabby and un-encyclopedic. Discussing the edit and comming to conclusion is better than protecting the article. 188.52.8.156 (talk) 07:54, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
not even a single edit of yours on this article has been constructive.your reasons are invalid.all communities are notable if they have articles.and old issues?.you edit behaviour shows all you are intersted is in vandalizing and removing other people's referenced content with citation.you don't even discuss which is a violation of wikipedia policy and also use multiple ips to avoid detection.read wikipedia rules before you come again to edit this or any other related page.also see this Malayali page.the format is pretty good and it has all malayalam speaking communities mentioned.and what shabbiness ?.the article is stub.expanding it makes the article look better and you are clearly not interested in expanding or improving.all you do is remove content or kannada fonts.LinguisticGeek 08:08, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Why are you just referring only to the Malayali article. Why don't you refer to other articles pertaining to other linguistic groups. None of these articles have any brief description of communities. Your reference to only the Malayali are seems absurd. More over the Malayali article is not even a featured article to hold it as a reference for the Tuluvas article. Yes I have made previous edits according to what I think is right. If anyone has an issue with the edits, they have to contest the edits I made then and there it self. This discussion is contesting your edit where in you have put brief description of each community. Lets stick to it.188.52.8.156 (talk) 08:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
first stop sock puppeting and using multiple ips and this account User:PDheeru.secondly your edit behaviour has been contested see Kasaragod Town page and also warnings on pdheeru user page.also what you are doing is not just removing description but even links of other communities.there are only abt 40000 jain bunts and you are keeping it and removing other communties who have their population in lacks.thats absurd.LinguisticGeek 08:38, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Jains Bunts are mentioned just because they are Jains. Showing a uniqueness. You need to read the para completely to understand the essence of it. It has nothing to with population.188.52.8.156 (talk) 08:41, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
all communities have their own uniqueness,removing them does not make sense.you said only major communities should be added.you are contradicting yourself now.and also you haven't explained your previous edit behaviours including starting edits wars .LinguisticGeek
No, I never started an edit war. It was you who tried to avoid a discussion challenging your edit by issuing me a warning. From the begining my stand was to restore the article original form and discuss your edits. You were simply reverting and calling my edits vandalism.188.52.8.156 (talk) 08:49, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Picture at the begining of the article
It would be better if we include a sport person's pic also in the group. Kindly suggest some names for inclusion, of which one pic can be finalised 117.198.108.120 (talk) 04:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
- Stub-Class India articles
- Mid-importance India articles
- Stub-Class India articles of Mid-importance
- Stub-Class Karnataka articles
- High-importance Karnataka articles
- Stub-Class Karnataka articles of High-importance
- WikiProject Karnataka articles
- WikiProject India articles
- Stub-Class Ethnic groups articles
- Mid-importance Ethnic groups articles
- WikiProject Ethnic groups articles
- Stub-Class Dravidian people articles
- High-importance Dravidian people articles