Talk:Iyer

This Article Sucks

This article sucks. The outline sucks, there are too many sections, there is too much random information. Why can't it be done properly like any other article on a any other community? This whole Aryan origin stuff is also pointless - this is an Encyclopedia, and until there is evidence that Iyers are Aryans, it should not be included. A very brief mention of the politics of it can be made lower down, but this article is seriously nonsense. It sounds like a hotheaded politically inclined Iyer and non-Brahmin Tamilian have made this article; it looks like a compromise between two retards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.117.106.213 (talk) 18:05, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, of course, we ought to imbibe this article with extensive ultra-casteist propaganda like the other caste-related articles on Wikipedia. Anyway, since you find so many drawbacks in this article, why don't you create an account yourself and edit it. This article has 200+ citations, mind you, not one or two but 200. Now could you atleast find a single caste-related article in Wikipedia with so many sources. -The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 05:19, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I've only referred about 50-odd books to write this article. Too little, perhaps! I hope this All-Knowing genius might be able to enlighten us with some useful knowledge on the Iyer community.-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 05:25, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

You can insult me all you want. But the fact remains that this article sucks balls. It really looks like it's been written by politically inclined retards. This article will never get a star rating... ever. It needs a total revamp. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.5.210 (talk) 21:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh no mister! I am not abusing you. I can very well understand that you are exceptionally great person from the way you contemptuously discard this article as "worser than articles on other Indian communities". But you see, I cannot recognize your abilities unless you could show them in "improving" this article.-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 15:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

This article is cheap propaganda written with personal agenda by Non-Iyer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.135.110.2 (talk) 17:34, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

well, the article is very bad. It's still not as bad as "articles on other Indian communities", but that isn't saying much. I have no idea what the GA tag is doing on this page.

The article needs to get its act together, stop bickering over racial/genetics red herrings, and instead give information on this population group in a detached manner, without "shrouded in mystery" and similar hilarities. --dab (𒁳) 15:59, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Sub-Sects grouping

The grouping of subsects is perfectly in accordance with Edgar Thurston, and to a lesser extent, Castes in Indian Politics and Jogender Nath Bhattacharya. This sort of alphabetical group of sections or sub-sections (which, of course, don't comprise a list) are unnecessary and disruptive, almost akin to vandalism. -The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 16:00, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Origin stories

I reviewed the first paragraphs about the origins including the lead paragraph. Notice, that almost every reference regarding "Ayya" = "Arya" as well as North Indian name associations are critically violating against the quality sources guidelines. Such important information doesn't need random website articles, but well reviewed and respected books by all parties. Actually one or two of these references were real books and I googled for "THE EVOLUTION OF AN ETHNIC IDENTITY — The Tamils in Sri Lanka" and I found a review by The Hindu. Another book "The land of the Permauls, or, Cochin, its past and its present By Francis Day" (google scholar) didn't give me any information about Iyers or Bhattar's. I'm ignoring now the random websites, which look simply aweful. Some references were also attributed to the wrong sentence like in the Arya Ayya sentence, where infact no reference was found about Arya. I understand, that this is not merely a coincidence, but possibly an attempt to make the Iyers look as pure Aryans, while their mothertongues were Dravidian for many centuries. We will only know more about it, when we get proper sources. Needless to say, that the paragraphs should be reviewed sentence by sentence, word by word by experienced users. --Neutralpointofyou (talk) 17:35, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Since, despite the fact that you are new to Wikipedia, yet you make such lofty discourses on "quality sources guidelines", I would like to know whether you are actually aware of Wikipedia's expectations. And of course, the book by Francis Day does speak about Bhattars or Putters, see here and this. And the other sources are also pretty okay. There have been plenty of books referred to for the sake of this article.

And then, of course, I agree with you that all Iyers need not necessarily be non-Dravidian. Neither has it been claimed anywhere in the article that Iyers were all Indo-Aryans without exception. The article only chronicles individual waves of Brahmin migrations to the Tamil land. And just because there is evidence of migration of sufficient numbers of Iyers to Tamil Nadu from outside, it does not mean that they are all Indo-Aryans by race. Most proven migrations have, after all, been from the Telugu country; in fact, a fairly large proportion of Tamil people are actually migrants from the present-day Andhra Pradesh, including Naickers, Reddiyars, etc. How come does this mean that they are Indo-Aryans? And are Iyers the only people who had migrated to Tamil Nadu from non-Tamil lands?-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 14:59, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

As for the Ayya-Arya thing, it has been clearly explained. A sufficient minority believes that the word Ayya is derived from the Sanskrit Arya and the fact is mentioned here in accordance with Wikipedia's neutrality policy which you claim to enforce. And even if this derivation is indeed true, then please keep in mind that the word Arya or its derivatives weren't used to denote Indo-Aryans alone, neither does the article claim that Iyers were Indo-Aryans because of that. Take for example, the Arya Vaishyas from Andhra Pradesh. Can you say for sure that they are Indo-Aryans basing your claims solely upon their caste-name alone! There have been various derivatives of the word Arya used in parts of India in order to address people in a respectful manner. Take for example, the -ar suffix which people append to their caste-names; a Mudali is respectfully addressed to as "Mudali-ar" and a Chetti is respectfully addressed as "Chetti-ar". Though I am not a professional linguist, I still feel that these suffixes might very well have been derived from the word "Arya". -The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 15:16, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi! You are following the wrong path. We should'nt do own researches about Ayya-Arya but give proper references for this. Historians might think, that this is related together, but there must be a good source for it. That's the only thing, I'm asking for. The various websites don't provide the quality I'm asking for, that's it. Someone must find books or scientific journals for this kind of claims. Of course I know the different meanings of Arya, but this is not the issue here. However, I don't think that the -ar issue has something to do with arya at all. I think this is nonsense.

I would like to inform you, that in the recent past, there was a nature issue, which has neglected the theory of Aryan and Dravidian human races. The whole country was mixed 40 thousands years ago with 2 different populations. This article doesn't provide these new findings. Instead it's talking about "little difference among Tamils" when there is infact "no real difference in whole India". Maybe the genetics section needs to be rewritten in the near future. --Neutralpointofyou (talk) 17:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Aryan invasion/migration during the time of Raja Raja Chola??????

Is this editor trying to crack a joke?????-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 16:48, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

HLA affiniities shows Iyers are descendents of central asia http://www.geocities.com/tokyo/5220/brahmin_dna_study1.htm

The page is currently not accessible. Besides none of the "sources" you used mentioned the word "Iyer" at all. Please don't try to convertr Wikipedia articles into propaganda pieces or add your own original research. If you wish to use a portion of the webspace for projecting your own beliefs, try creating a blog of your own. Wikipedia is not a place to add nonsense.-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 04:31, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Revert

I have reverted multiple edits by Jaggi81 (talk · contribs) as they removed long standing sourced content, and added dubiously sourced content like Iyers came from Arya, referencing it to etymologyonline for the word Aryan and so on. Unless some clear evidence is presented by the editor that the content doesn't belong in this article, it should not be removed. -SpacemanSpiff 02:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Jaggi81 is a long-time vandal who indulges in persistent racist POV-pushing. See here. -The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 05:49, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Do have a look at the blog he frequently provides as a source. Must be a P. N. Oak-kinda joker :D-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 05:54, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

He has been blocked for a week now. I just noticed that. -SpacemanSpiff 05:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I am beginning to smell a rat here. User:Neutralpointofyou protested against the inclusion of claims that Tamil Brahmins migrated from outside and I replied by explaining that a large number of Tamil Brahmins could have migrated from Andhra Pradesh. Now, User:Jaggi81 claims that Telugu people were Aryans and hence Tamil Brahmins were also Aryans. Could Jaggi81 be a strawpuppet of Neutralpointofyou.-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 06:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I can assure you, that I'm not a sockpuppet of anyone. All I said was, that there is a new study out there about the origins of the Indian people. I have not denied any possible outside Tamil Nadu origin of the Iyers, only the outside India origin. --Neutralpointofyou (talk) 17:14, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I had modified the entry on Iyer genetics using as reference a paper on the subject, which was then removed by SpacemanSpiff on the context of not providing reference - despite the fact that I had. Care to explain? --Coolian (talk)

You should read the edit summary. -SpacemanSpiff 15:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Aiyars and aryans

There was no concept of Brahmins in dravidian society, ie no caste based on Varna. This is imported from aryan system. Brahmins of TN are different from dravidians. Its evident from their traditiosn, skin colour and exxessive use of sanskrit in their dialects. Anyone have more information on this? can we discuss? Vvmundakkal (talk) 08:39, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I am getting reference to prove that Aiyar derived from Aryan or aryar

http://books.google.com/books?id=FL0OAAAAIAAJ&q=Aryan+aiyar&dq=Aryan+aiyar&lr=

http://books.google.com/books?id=rMfWAAAAMAAJ&q=Aryan+aiyar&dq=Aryan+aiyar&lr= Vvmundakkal (talk) 08:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

If this is the case, then Tamil Kshatriyas are also outsiders. As far as traditions, skin colour and usage of Sanskrit are concerned, Iyers do not differ much from Saiva Mudaliars or other forward-caste Tamil people. Do I need to show you pictures of Jayanthi Natarajan, M. Karunanidhi, etc.

Your crap doesn't belong here simply because it is blatant propaganda. And if there was no concept of Brahmins in "ancient" Tamil society it does not imply that there had not been the admission of people of other communities as Brahmins.-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 14:44, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Reply

I heard that they(Palakkad Iyers) were also known as Arya Pattar in kerala. I also believe they are descendents of Aryan migrants from North India

Tn pillai (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:17, 1 December 2009 (UTC).