Talk:Devendrakula Velalar

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

India: Tamil Nadu Redirect‑class Low‑importance

	India portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Redirect	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This redirect is supported by WikiProject Tamil Nadu (assessed as Low-importance).
	This redirect was last assessed in January 2020.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Controversial Claim

The title of the page Devendra Kula Velalar is a controversial title, the name which is claimed by certain community in tamilnadu called pallars, and this claim is heavily opposed by those communities which already are identified by the velalar name. I have added a disclaimer to this article that the name "Devendra Kula Velalar" is a controversial claim due to the following facts.

Fact#1: There is no community in tamilnadu with the name Devendra Kula velaalar. This name is not officially recognised in the gazette notification or in any of the government community certificates.

Fact#2: The pallar community were never identified as velalar at any point of history. They have not given any proof or reference so far in this article to support their claim. The references given in this page do not provide any substantiation or proof to establish the validity of this name.

Fact#3: The name "Velalar" is a community name and not a occupational name. The pallars are trying to establish a false notion that velalar means farmer, which is wrong. →Rvptiger18 (talk) 11:36, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Devendrakula Velalar Chola kings

Devendrakula Velalar Chola kings - any books which state this will be helpfull in expanding the article Byasa Banerjee (talk) 22:04, 20 June 2020 (UTC)Byasa Banerjee[reply]

There are no way in existing literature and history by which a king's caste can be determined. This wikipedia page is being used by Pallars to push propoganda about their caste. The whole section about devendra kula kings must be deleted EruTheLord (talk) 14:33, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The kings mentioned has been stated from the source provided and it's not a propaganda. Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 08:48, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No it is not. The conclusion you arrived from the source is dubious please provide quotation to prove that the authour mentioning the king belonging to a particular caste or remove the propoganda EruTheLord (talk) 06:31, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This whole article is a duplicate article of already existing article.

Devendrakula Velalar is a duplicate article of already existing article titled Pallar. I request administrator to initiate necessary action to remove this entire page or add a redirect to the page Pallar. This page is filled with disputed claims and is unworthy of being in wikipedia.EruTheLord (talk) 15:07, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nope it's not an existing article, as pallar doesn't represent the whole Devendrakula velalar community. The Devendrakula velalar community is made up of Devendra kulathar, kudumbar, kadaiyar, kaaladi, pallar, pannadi, vathriyar. What is the dispute in this. You are the one who is making it as a dispute, so explain your statements before removing the existing ones. Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 08:12, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. Pallar is just a title not community and so are other titles. They are title denoting same community they are interchangeable. Therefore pallar page is enough this is a duplicate and must be removed. You must explain your propaganda about kings caste. You are the one creating controversy by claiming chola kings as Pallars. EruTheLord (talk) 09:55, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The pair of you need to start providing reliable sources to support your claims here. - Sitush (talk) 15:32, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Uhh I am not claiming the whole chola kings as chola caste, the two kings provided are the one being mention.What you mean by tittle than why is it being recognised as a community in the government records. The anthropology report says all the 7 community are the same and they can be called as Devendrakula Velalar. Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anthropology report doesn't mean a thing. Government has not yet recognised the title Devendra Kula vellalar. EruTheLord (talk) 06:19, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I note that EruTheLord is socking. That said, I do have doubts about this article so let's start from the top. Please can someone provide a quote from Venkatasubramanian, T. K. (1993). Societas to Civitas. Kalinga Publications Press. p. 74. ISBN 9788185163420. I'm not convinced it is a great source anyway but I'd like to know what it actually says about this issue. - Sitush (talk) 17:09, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, note that we are going to have to bin citation 6 from Shodghanga - we do not use those theses because their quality is so variable. This has been discussed at WT:INB. Also, cite 7 will have to go because it is very clearly taken from a snippet view of the source and thus lacks context - if you cannot see the whole source, don't cite it. - Sitush (talk) 17:12, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, per what has been said at Talk:Pannadi#Subcaste, the Venkatasubramian source and associated statement really should be removed pending clarification or an alternate source. - Sitush (talk) 22:49, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citation

Give citation for population distribution it is not having any proof . So I was right to remove it. EruTheLord (talk) 17:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also remove venkatasubramanian and associated statements.EruTheLord (talk) 17:38, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There was proof for the distribution and it was removed from there if I am not mistaken. Why was is it being removed. Explain things here before removing!!! Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 18:04, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

you mean venkatasubramaniam 1993? That was to be removed.Also use indent. EruTheLord (talk) 18:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Let's revert everything back to how it was first and we will start discussing abt the ones we have to remove, as it makes it easier to understand which one has to be removed and which ones stay. We can come to a conclusion as well regarding this disputes rather then it continues. Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 04:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's now how it was, let's come to a conclusion together on the disputes mutually then we will take action according to it. Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 04:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is tedious that way you can provide a better proof and after that you van revert. It is established that venkatasubramanian should be removed. There is no point in reverting. EruTheLord (talk) 05:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now it's messy, as you have removed more than that. Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 05:36, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like few other sources have been removed as well, why is it so? Venkatasubramaniam the quote will be provided and then we can discuss abt it. Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 05:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No he also said remove citation 6 and 7. But I did not delete associated statements. Only venkatasubramanian and associated statements were removed. FYI. EruTheLord (talk) 05:47, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the water float festival removed? Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 10:50, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another 2 references was also removed, give your explanation for it regarding the chola kings and water irrigation Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 11:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

@EruTheLord please discuss before doing changes, as you are removing on your own as usual! Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 17:57, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Venkatasubramanian and associated statement was to be removed already. That was the consencus. Dont understand your concern. EruTheLord (talk) 18:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see, he has requested for the quote for it, I was busy a bit so wasn’t able to provide it and we can discuss everything here, I will revert my talk on Sitush talk page and let’s make our discussion here. Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 18:28, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]