Talk:Tamil people

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tamil people article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1, 2

Tamil people is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 24, 2005.

	Article milestones

Date

Process

Result

May 25, 2005

Featured article candidate

Promoted

January 7, 2007

Featured article review

Kept

Current Status: Featured article

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects.
Click [show] for further details

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tamil civilization, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Tamil related topics. If you would like to participate, please feel free to visit the project page to join.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the Project’s quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the Project’s importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dravidian civilizations, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Dravidian related topics. If you would like to participate, please feel free to visit the project page to join.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the Project’s quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the Project’s importance scale.

This article 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.

This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)

This article is maintained by the Classical Tamil workgroup.

This article is maintained by the Tamil Nadu workgroup.

To-do list for Tamil people:	edit · history · watch · refresh
Add a food/cuisine section. Contribute to the draft at Talk:Tamil people#Cuisine.
Priority 1 (top)

[edit] A call for help

You guys have done a great job with this article in getting it to FA status, but our Sri Lankan friends are having plenty of trouble. There has been incessant vandalism by various sinhalese chauvinists who peddle the myths spread by their government. In fairness, some tamils have been spreading the BS that some overly pro-LTTE websites promote, but the concerted efforts of the sinhalese chauvinists have essentially ruined many Sri Lankan Tamil articles. This is just trying to draw attention to this so that we can get some people to help fix these articles up. Peace.

[edit] Regions with significant populations

I strongly feel that the current information on "regions with significant populations== should remain unchanged as the data seems realistic. As you all know, the largest tamil population is is in india (At least 55mil) of course, then followed by Sri Lanka, Malaysia ( 1.5mil) , Canada, Singapore and the rest im not sure. So keep up the good work. previously the data wasnt that accurate. whoever found this info did a good job yea.

[edit] Cuisine

The first paragraph is an adaptation of cuisine section of Chennai. Feel free to improve this draft so as to be included in the article.

The staple food of most of the Tamils living in Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka is rice. (Should add info on emigrant populations).This is usually steamed and served with about two to six accompanying items. Typically the items are sambar, dry curry, rasam, kootu and thayir (curd) or moru (whey or buttermilk). Lighter meals usually include one or more of pongal, dosa, idli or vada, and are often served for breakfast or as an evening snack. Coffee is a popular beverage in the metros in general and Chennai in particular. Another popular beverage is strongly brewed tea found in the thousands of small tea kadais.

Each region in Tamil Nadu (someone should add info about other places) has its own distinct variant of the common dishes and also a few dishes native to itself. The Chettinad region comprising of Karaikudi and adjoining areas is known for both traditional vegetarian dishes like appam, uthappam, paal paniyaram and non-vegetarian dishes, made primarily using Chicken. Chettinad cuisine is now popular even in non-Tamil speaking areas as well. Madurai and the other southern districts of Tamil Nadu are known for non-vegetarian food made of goat meat, Chicken and fish. Parota made with maida, perhaps an adaptation of the north Indian Paratha, is also commonly eaten from food outlets in Tamil Nadu, more popularly in districts like Virudhunagar, Madurai and the adjoining areas. Parota is not commonly prepared at home as it is a laborious and time-consuming process.

- I have created a new page Tamil cuisine with an introductory paragraph. I propose to further develop the page during next 2/3 days.--Bhadani 18:12, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
  - I'd been asked to contribute talk here, but it looks like I wouldn't be much help. I've done some research and found a few interesting things, but that's it. If I think any of it might be useful, I guess I'll put it in as notes on the discussion page of your Tamil cuisine. --Mothperson 18:31, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Recent images added

Someone has added a couple of images. But the copyright status is unverified and also I'm sure the actress Sneha image is not copyright free. Moreover, since there is a picture of a female dancer is already given down below, I would like to have the image of a couple (male+female) in the traditional dress than the current one, which gives a synthetic look. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 04:11, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

I don't like the Sneha image either. Commons has a number of images of Tamils and Tamil Nadu. Perhaps we could substitute the Sneha image with commons:Image:Tamil couple working on a farm.jpg (or any of the others at commons:Category:Tamils). We could also use commons:Image:Farm in tamil nadu.jpg or commons:Image:View of coimbatore in tamil nadu.jpg for a picture of Tamil Nadu if the one in there at the moment isn't GFDL. I'll leave it to you to decide. -- Arvind 15:04, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Furthur, the image, Tamil Nadu landscape, looks like the aerial picture of a flood affected region :(! Calvinkrishy 15:27, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

I've added some of the images from commons. Someone please check the formatting. Also, I would like to see this image somewhere. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 06:51, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

Can someone provide free images of Silambam or Jallikattu? The bottom part of the article doesn't have pictures at all. Also if we were to add a section on Tamil cuisine, would it come under the culture section? -- Sundar June 28, 2005 06:36 (UTC)

[edit] Tamil recepients of Magsaysay Award

Moving the following list that an anon has recently added. If you want to have this information, please create a separate list of Tamil recepients of Magsaysay Award, but do not add them here. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 04:01, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Aruna Roy, Chennai
Jockin Arputham, Bangalore
Dr Shanta, Chennai
Dr.M. S. Swaminathan, Chennai
MS Subbalakshmi, Madurai
TN Seshan, Chennai

[edit] New revisions

How's the edit look? Hope I didn't cause any undue trouble to anyone by heavily editing a featured article right before it went up; there was just a lot I felt could be improved. And sorry if I reverted a few grammar fixes, I'm exhausted and there were a bunch of edit conflicts to deal with when I finished.

Also, I'll agree that "most Tamil Christians today are either Catholic or Protestant" is a really, really weird way to phrase that. It made me stop and think for a minute when I read it too. The only way I could think of to make that sentence not sound ridiculous is if you added some sort of statistic saying how many Tamil Christians are Catholic, etc. -Silence

WARNING

Certain idiotic individuals are repeatedly vandalising this page by putting an image of an erect penis at the top of the article, despite repeated attempts to stop them. could the moderators please get involved.

Would the moderators please remove the disgusting pictures of the penis from the history page..Even thought it is not listed in the page anymore, it still shows up in the history...please remove all references to the picture.

I'll look into it. Which picture are you talking about? User:Nichalp/sg 07:18, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A small objection

At the begeninng of the article, the author states: "Unlike many ethnic groups, the Tamils have never been governed by a single political entity;" I do not agree, many (maybe most) ethnic groups have never been governed by a signle political entity. Consider for example Berbers, Kurds, Jews, Gypsies to name a few I can think of. I think this statement should be modified, or at least put in context.

Skander, Sep 24th 2005

Sure, please go ahead and change it. User:Nichalp/sg 08:14, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

I think I disagree with removing it. First of all, the sentence simply says "Unlike many ethnic groups," not "Unlike most ethnic groups"; there are a lot of ethnicities, enough for "many" to not indicate anything like "almost all ethnicities." Second, the Tamils are noteworthy for historically being divided governmentally, but united linguistically, even if they are far from being the only ones; rephrase if you want, but don't remove the actual information provided. Third, all of those ethnicities have never been governed by a single political entity? What about (if you're willing to accept Biblical accounts at all) the united Twelve Tribes under Saul, David, Solomon? Or the theory that the Roma were once low-caste Hindus in India, possibly under one ruler?

But none of that matters overmuch; all the sentence says is "Unlike many ethnic groups," not "like no other ethnic groups". For the sentence to be valid, it's quasi-irrelevant whether there are other ethnic groups who have also never been governed by a single political entity; what matters most is that there are a significant enough number of ethnic groups who have ever been governed by one political entity for the word "many" to merit use. Check out List of ethnic_groups and decide for yourself. -Silence 12:13, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The picture on the main page is awful.

Really, that picture is racist and it portrays a whole group of people as persons who dance in colourful clothes. Change the picture to something more appropriate please. Lapinmies 09:05, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

What alternative do you have? User:Nichalp/sg 09:13, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

"Racist" is a bit strong, but yes. Though I'd also point out that the picture really isn't especially good; it looks like a drawing of some sort, and I'm not sure a featured article's central image should be an illustration unless the drawing is very famous or there are no better alternatives; I'd slightly prefer the image of the two girls at the top.

Of course, then we'll get people complaining about us portraying the Tamil people as all being adorable little girls... You can't teach people anything without offending somebody. -Silence 12:17, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] What? No serious mention of the politics of caste and class? Of separatism?

This article is sadly deficient in that it fails to address Tamils as Dalits, the racism of the caste system, the Tamils' refusal to accept it, and the ongoing struggle for independence from India of the TLF and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Rather topical -- don't you think -- given the violence in Tamil Province and elsewhere in recent years?

You are welcome to draft something. The original author is away till Monday, so please feel free to add some text here. User:Nichalp/sg 12:31, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Sorry. No can do. I've got a couple of deadlines this weekend, and I'm off to the anti-war demonstration downtown. It's a shame no one thought to include any of this, IMO, really obvious stuff in the article before it made FAS, and I don't usually check the upcoming front page pieces, so I'm also at fault. Peace. deeceevoice 13:40, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Agreed that politics of caste and class and separatism needs a serious mention. However, we should take care that the article continues to use summary style. Will try to work on that. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 13:06, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

The Tamil Eelam struggle is mentioned quite prominently in the section on Sri Lankan Tamils and on "Institutions", and has been from the beginning. There are references to the Self-respect movement (Dravidian Movement) and its mission to fight casteism in the section on "Institutions", which have been there since the beginning. In my opinion (others may of course disagree), given the need to keep to summary style, this is adequate. for this article. A more detailed consideration of the question of the introduction of casteism into Tamil culture is, in my opinion, better placed in an article on Tamil history. And, of course, the biggest discussion will have to be in the article on the Self-respect Movement itself, which is at the moment an extremely tiny stub. Separatism in Tamil Nadu has not been a serious issue since the DMK's decision in the 1960s to suspend its demand for independence, and I don't think it's major enough to be mentioned here (although it probably deserves a mention in the article on TN, and perhaps even an article of its own). --- Arvind^{currently on extended wikileave} 14:44, 21 October 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Tamil fonts

The article is excellent -- congrats to all who have contributed. I am having trouble with fonts, tho: for example my current settings seem unable to handle things like ̲

So would someone pls advise me? and maybe others are having the same problems... I am in IE version 6+, with Tools > Internet Options > fonts set to Latin-based. But when I try to change this to Tamil, either Arial Unicode MS or Latha, the browser doesn't appear to accept it: for the former I press OK and instantly it reverts back to Latin-based, for the latter after I press OK it grinds for a bit but then also reverts to Latin-based. And I continue to see a programming box instead of the proper character.

--Kessler 16:44, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Have you tried using another browser. Its hard to say where the problem lies. User:Nichalp/sg 18:01, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'll try another one on Monday... I have an old Netscape version in here somewhere, altho I'll have to update that... But I think anything in Wikipedia really has to conform to IE: that's 94% of the user market still.

My IE browser has no problem reading Tamil at other sites: for example, [[1]]. So no, I don't think it is IE. Seems to me that it is a settings problem, either that or the syntax used here in the article is wrong -- I see that none of the Tamil comes through, from this article, although Unicode Tamil on plenty of other sites online works fine.

--Kessler 21:52, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

It looks ok on my IE. There's hardly any Tamil on the page to begin with, and I'm sure there would be more complaints if it wasn't rendering properly. I can't pinpoint the exact fault. User:Nichalp/sg 06:29, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

The article uses a large number of unicode diacritics to transliterate Tamil into the roman script. I strongly suspect that is what is causing the boxes. Arvind ^{currently on extended wikileave} 21:27, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tamil language 'Crisis'

The article seems to ignore the fact that there is a reduction in the number of people who speak Tamil. It is on a decline in Singapore [2] (added that) and not many Tamils speak Tamil well. Same is the situation in Chennai, with English overtaking Tamil slowly. Many of my friends can't read or write Tamil, despite staying in Chennai. I'm not sure about the stats but this number seems to be big. - Bnitin 23:33, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

I strongly disagree about the decline of Tamil speaking people in Chennai. Tamil is compulsory subject in schools till 10th Standard in Tamilnadu & Puducherry. Even if you are studying in a CBSE school you should study Tamil has one of the subject (3rd language). The number of students in CBSE schools in TamilNadu is less than 0.5 %. The presence of English has not affected Tamil. Tamil have different ascents and this doesnot mean "not many Tamils speak Tamil well".

This is not true. Many CBSE students take Sanskrit/Hindi as their 2nd and 3rd languages. Even ones whose mother tongue is Tamil. It's not mandatory to study Tamil in Chennai. Lotlil 20:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] division of tamil history, etc.

is the division of tamil history into pre-classical, classical ... etc standard? it it based on literary history? in the article, the dividing dates between the periods is a little hazy. can this be fixed?

i think a shorter summary of the spenser wells study will suffice. for instance, the mention of Kalahari bushmen having the "oldest DNA" and "earliest significant wave of human emigration from Africa was..." are not particularly relevant. retain perhaps only the final line?

the caption for the image of the gopuram(?) of the madurai meenakshi temple shld be labelled as such? i.e. as gopuram. in the text, temple "spires" are mentioned, but not identified as Gopuram.

where in the article is the right place to introduce the pejorative(?) label "tambi"? :)

Doldrums 04:14, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Division of Tamil history into pre-classical, classical, ... is inline with the literary history. The dividing dates are hazy as it's difficult to clearly demarcate the periods.

I'm not able to summarise the Wells study info without affecting the flow. Anyone is welcome to do that.

I've fixed the image caption.

I don't know of the "label" tambi. The Tamil language word tambi literally means younger brother and rarely used as an euphemism(?) for penis. However, I do not know of any context in which it's associated with Tamil people and/or is pejorative? Please explain. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 13:19, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Some North Indians refer to Tamilians as Tambis, but it's not too popular. Madrasis is more commonly used to refer to all South Indians. Tambi is apparently used for Tamilians. -- Bnitin

[edit] Tamil Population Figures - References???

300 000 Tamils in UK, USA, and Canada. Where is this data from? Are these guess estimates? What is the basis for these assertations? --Natkeeran 05:28, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

User:Thanneer added those in this edit. You can ask at his talk page. If there is no response, we can revert to the previous figures. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 05:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Sundar. I am just skeptical about the numbers because, there are only two sources for this data, Ethnologue and Country stats. Both need to be cross checked if possible. Country stats are not always easy to interpret. For instance, some stats about Tamil population in Sri Lanaka indicate that it is around 3.5%, which is grossly misleading. Because, that does not include Tamil people under LTTE controlled area, that not include Tamils of Indian origin, and that does not include Muslims who speak Tamil. Another grossly misleading figure is 300 000 Tamils in Canada. There are no official stats supporting this claim. The last official figure about people speaking Tamil at home is 92 010 [3], in 2001. Usually upto 200 000 Tamils are thought to be living in Canada, and it seems that figure has been pushed upwards to 300 000 within year or two, which is highly unlikely. Similar issues arise in many other countries, including India. However, stats about Tamils living in Singapore, and Norway are quite readily available. This is why an effort to compile such stats in Tamil Wikipedia is stalled as well. Anyway, I’ll pose the above question in the user page and wait for the response. --Natkeeran 14:27, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tamil Cultural Differences in Sri Lanka

I propose a section about the variations of the Tamil cultural groups in Sri Lanka beyond Ceylon Tamil vs Indian Tamil. The Tamils have a different culture based on whether they are from Jaffna area, Colombo, or Trincomalee (east coast).

Please do so - this article has been written almost entirely by people from Tamil Nadu, and we don't really know enough about these differences. There is an article on Sri Lankan Tamils, which has really improved in recent times but could probably use more information. The best way forward may be to add very brief information here, and detailed information in the article on Sri Lankan Tamils. Arvind 15:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sri Lankan Tamil cuisine

How about adding Sri Lankan Tamil cuisine to the already established cuisine category? There are some differences with Indian Tamil cuisine.

Please add more details to Tamil cuisine article. Currently it has practically nothing specific to Sri Lankan/Malaysian/Canada Tamil cuisines. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 09:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tamil Language (Dialects?)

Some discussion within the language section needs to consider that Sri Lankan Tamils speak a different dialect of Tamil than people from India.

That probably belongs in the Tamil language article. The differences between the Tamil spoken in northern and southern Tamil Nadu are nearly as big as the differences between southern Tamil Nadu and Jaffna, and there are a number of similarities between southern Vellala dialects and Jaffna Tamil. And, of course, Batticaloa Tamil is quite different from Jaffna Tamil. If you feel like starting an article on Tamil dialects, that would be more than welcome! -- Arvind 15:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Would love to see that article come up. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 08:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

See stub Sri Lankan Tamil dialectsRaveenS

[edit] Tamil Guiness Record Holders

I am looking for information on a Sri lankan Tamil Guiness record holder who was active during the pre 1983 days. He died either swimming across the Palk Straights or soon after. I have not being able to locate his name. Please help. RaveenS ^\talk\ 1:15, 1 March 2006

Could you be thinking of V.S. Kumar Anandan? He held several records in his day including for the quickest crossing of the Palk straits although - if I remember - he met his end in 1984 trying to swim across the English Channel rather than the Palk Straits. -- Arvind 21:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes that's him. Thanks RaveenS ^\talk 8:52, 3 March 2006 (EST)

[edit] Population numbers proposal

As of today (March 9, 2006), the population numbers given in the infobox are too many for that context. We should retain only those numbers with sufficient references. Also, only countries where either there are significant number of people (in millions) or their population percentage is significant (>10%) shall be mentioned in the infobox. Other numbers can be given in an appropriate section or in an article like Tamil diaspora. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 06:53, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Which among the numbers shall we retain? -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 11:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I vote for India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, and Singapore (Canada, South Africa: optional). - Cribananda 01:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree - India, Sri Lanka and Malaysia have populations in excess of a million, and it is an official language of Singapore. We might perhaps consider adding "Diaspora" and lumping the other countries together. I would also suggest reverting to the numbers which the Ethnologue gives, unless we can find some sources for the higher numbers that have crept in. -- Arvind 12:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

As a first step, I've removed the entries except those mentioned above. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 12:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Myths surrounding the Tamil people

As a proud Tamil, I feel the need to reiterate my opinion on certain myths surrounding the Tamil people:

Firstly, I don't agree that Tamils are Dalits. Culture is horizontal, caste is vertical. Tamils are Tamil by culture, and Dalits are Dalits by caste. The Tamil people include people of all the castes, including Brahmins.

Secondly, I don't believe that caste was Brahmin-initiated. It was a king, Manu, who initiated the caste system, and kings are Kshatriyas.

Thirdly, the picture of two Tamil girls on the article creates an impression that Tamils are uniformly dark and rural-looking. I would advise you to have a picture which is more representative of Tamils (who are of varying colours and appearances).

I'm not sure if you're commenting on the correct article. This article does not say that Tamils are Dalits, nor does it discuss the origins of caste apart from saying that it was institutionalised during the Pallava period (which is a historical fact). As far as the pictures of the two little girls go, there is also a picture of a Brahmin couple lower down in the article. It's going to be pretty hard to get a picture of Tamils of all hues, and I think having different pictures does the job just as well. -- Arvind 16:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I strongly object to the suggestion that the picture of the two girls should be replaced, because it may represent Tamils as dark. On average Tamils are dark people compared to North Indians, and if the picture reflects that fact, that is accurate. --Natkeeran 21:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Natkeeran, the issue is a dead one now. :) -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 06:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Tamils" and "Tamilians"

I removed a rather odd statement that Tamils in India find being called "Tamil" insulting, and prefer to be called "Tamilians". This is simply not true. I'd like to see the source whoever inserted this claim is relying on. -- Arvind 16:17, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flag and interwikis

I'm the one who inserted this flag into the article - I put it there largely to fill the need for pictures and to have something at the top of the template. Neither of these applies any longer, and I personally think we should remove it from this article because I don't think it's notable enough to merit inclusion in *this* article (as opposed to an article on Tamil nationalism or some such topic).

Also, bizarrely enough, the interwiki link to the Sinhala wikipedia seems to lead to the article on Sinhala people. I can see why someone might have thought it funny, but it really should go after someone who can read Sinhala takes a look at the link. -- Arvind 00:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

True, I accepted the inclusion of the flag not without a pinch of salt. Let me go ahead and remove it. Regarding Sinhala wiki, let's approach some Sinhalese Wikipedian. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 07:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Martial arts

It was the arts of Kuttuvarisai and Varma Kalai which is believed to be learnt by Daruma Bodhidarma who travelled to China.

One editor says Bodhidharma was a master of Kuttuvarisai and Varma Kala, another says he was a master of Kalarippayattu, another says he was a master of Vajra Mushti, one editor even says that Bodhidharma was a master of Gatka. If all of these editors are to be believed, what Indian martial arts was Bodhidharma not a master of?

How about saying "x says that Bodhidharma was a master of y" instead of "Bodhidharma was a master of y".

This way, one makes a cited, verifiable statement instead of an uncited, unverifiable one.
--JFD 02:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] black

The Black people article is lumping Tamil together with American blacks. American blacks user:deeceevoice are saying that Tamil people are really Africans that had been walking along to Tamil Nadu.

Tamil people cannot be classified as blacks as we range from dark brown to olive in colour.Our facial features are clearly different from africans.

That user user:deeceevoice must be an afrocentric.Afrocentrics ideas dont have any base.They even claim that Jesus was black. So just ignore those morons.

[edit] Who put the pic of those kids?

who ever put that pic there should remove it, its not like all tamil kids look like those.

[edit] Population Estimate

The estimate for the number of Tamils is around 10 years outdated! Can we find a more recent census?

[edit] Ayyavazhi

I think that can be mentioned in the article with a NPOV. Doctor Bruno 12:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Guys, please stop revert warring on this. It needs to be resolved - find a way to discuss and resolve the issue with comments from people instead of going back and forth. Cribananda 20:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I've many time told them and am ready for the discussion though it is of no use because i may have to repeat what I told earlier. And i noted in every my reverts, to discuss . But they don't and reverted and even I was blocked for 24 hours for violating WP:3RR. Please see the edits and edit summaries i wrote here

Regarding Ayyavazhi, Three districts are declared as a Holiday for an Ayyavazhi festival. Then how it become unnotable in a Tamil Society article? Asuume if three states declare holiday for a festival of a particular socity named XXX. Was that XXX society unnotable in a article about India society?

Also in this case of Ayyavazhi I've cited with university sorces for the thousands of Ayyavazhi worship centers. Even Few thousands and few syrian orthodoxies are noted. But they are refusing in Keeping Ayyavazhi. I don't know why. - Paul 21:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Given the list of different religions followed by Tamils already present in the article, I don't see how Ayyavazhi can be excluded in good faith. Can the people removing mention of Ayyavazhi please explain their reasoning on the talk page? —Hanuman Das 23:46, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see the latest government policy in Southern Districts regarding this Doctor Bruno 00:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Please note that the Hindu article states very briefly that 4 March 2006 is a holiday. Please note that per [4] governement offices are closed on Saturday. --BostonMA ^talk 00:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

If Ayyavazhi is mentioned, then it would seem that all other sects should be mentioned as well. Otherwise, we would be giving undue weight to one sect. Is it appropriate to mention all sects in given state within that state's overview article? I am inclined to think not. For a related discussion see Talk:India/Ayyavazhi --BostonMA ^talk 00:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you say sect rather than religion. I've browsed some of the Ayyavazhi writ. Unless the translation is wrong, it self-identifies as a religion. —Hanuman Das 00:10, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

~~(edit conflict)~~There are many sects which self-identify as a religion and claim to be "the true Hinduism". However, I find it difficult not to view a denomination of which its adherants claim that it is the true Hinduism to not be a sect of Hinduism. --BostonMA ^talk 00:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

The problem is with the notability and verifyability criteria. Ayyavazhi followers may claim their faith to be a separate religion. They may even cite a research paper to support that. However the fact remains that this is not a recognised religion by the Government of India. This religion has dozens and dozens of articles in WP, all created by a single user. He has also inserted links in hundreds of articles. However if you go searching for independent sources, both online and off, you will be hard pressed to find any supporting the claims of the articles in terms of its spread and the number of adherants. There is nothing wrong in keeping the dozens of articles on this faith, but my problem is the incessant proletyzing by this user. the question is is it notable enough to be included in a summary article dealing with the whole ethnic group? IMHO it is not. Thanks Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 00:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't see what the Indian Government has to do with it at all. Maybe it is because I was born in the U.S., but it is my understanding that whether or not something is a religion is determined by its followers. The government may recognize it or not as it wills, but that has nothing to do with anything except the government - it does not change whether a religion is a religion or not. The article on it says it is a religion. It also says it is monotheistic, which immediately differentiates it from Hinduism. I'm not necessarily arguing that the text about the holiday should be included, but I think it should be included in the list of religions of the Tamil people. Allowing the govt to determine what is and is not a religion seems to me to be the ultimate in foolish abdication of responsibility! —Hanuman Das 05:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree that we shouldn't let the government dictate as to which religion to include here, however it is a good measure of the notability of the religion. The only difference IMO between Ayyavazhi and any other minor religion that may be practiced by a small minority of people is that one of the Ayyavazhi follower has the knowledge of WP and its power and the time to create these dozens of pages which have proliferated across the internet space into the thousands of mirror pages, thereby giving it a numerically higher presence in the web. Thanks Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 05:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

It is an incorrect view of Hinduism to identify it as polytheistic. Monotheism is a very strong trend in Hinduism, perhaps the strongest trend. According to monotheistic views, there is a single god who has many forms, or aspects. Not so different from the Christian trinity. So no, Ayyavazhi does not differ from other sects of Hinduism on this point. I am not contesting that Ayyavazhi is a religion, however, I don't think sect and religion are necessarily exclusive of one another. --BostonMA ^talk 14:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Having read this discussion and the extensive one on Talk:India/Ayyavazhi, I guess a consensus was reached not to include this. (My two cents - Notable, may be, but not worth a mention in the article. In some ways - I'm not really equating the two - a bit likeJedi). Cribananda 03:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

First of all I am telling Ayyavazhi is not a sect. Right from the beginning the LMS missionarries placed them in a Triangular venue in Travancore where Christianity (LMS based protestant as majority and a very few chatholics) Hinduism and Muthukuttyism (Ayyavazhi) are the main players. They see Ayyavazhi exctly away from Hinduism and moved hard against Ayyavazhi because it stood right against the fast spread of Ayyavazhi. The same LMS reports itself says about the fast spread of Ayyavazhi spreading equal to them, in Travancore where the LMS highest succesive venue in India. Don't think that LMS report reports are not valid in Ayyavazhi matter. LMS acts as a anti-ayyavazhi agent and called Vaikundar and Ayyavazhi as satanic agents. So their social views towards Ayyavazhi is completely acceptable.

Again i come to know that the 'Temple entry aggitation' commonly seen fact in 19th century Travancore remain untouched by Ayyavazhi followers. All the denominations of Hinduism (saivite vaishnavite etc..) participated in it without sect varriations. But Ayyavazhi don't belive in entering to Hindu temples. They have worship centers of their own. If they've seen them among other Hindus they might have participated as other sects do. But they palce them significantly outsite Hinduis. Not only this there are many to tell about the diverted nature of Ayyavazhi from Hinduism.

The above mentioned facts says about the deviated sociology of Ayyavazhi right from the mid-ninteenth century. And in belief related matters completely different. Hinduism as accepting other hindu scrptures of other denominations can't accept Akilam mainly because it says all previous (Hindu) scriptures had gone awry.

Like other Hindu denominations Ayyavazhi doesn't forms a part of Hinduism and vary from others in minor issues. But says original Hinduism had dead. If I say that 'XXX' religion is dead. Then how would i be considered as a follower of that XXX religion?

I was not telling all these of my own. But with university papers as citations. And have repeatedly cited all of them many many times. Weather it's true or not, Iam not claiming that Ayyavazhi is "true Hinduism" here in wikipedia. But only saying Ayyavazhi as seperate from Hinduism backing with university papers. The citations mentioned here are not self identities but independent third party University papers.

Also User:Venu62 noted that "They may even cite a research paper to support that". The reserch papers are from two leading Universities in Tamil Nadu. Are the university research is considered invalid in wikipedia? Also one user can't write many articles here in wikipedia? The article about the ethnic group deals with the 'religion' issues in Tamil Nadu and so the religion with holiday for its festival in three districts is definitely notable. Also i cited already for the thousands of worship centers across south India with University papers. It show that Ayyavazhi is 'not so minor' as highlighted by you in every discussions.

As told by user User:Hanuman Das, weather or not the India govt recognise that. it doesn't matter. But the university papers are really valid much more than that. May be the Ayyavazhi article find a place to not the lack of official recognition. And it was already noted two times in Ayyavahi article. Fist in the introduction and then in the controversy section. Also in every cross reference it was noted as the first sentence.

Also if it is not notable then why it is not appropriate to mention in the article? Easpacially because three southern districts are declared as a holiday for an Ayyavazhi festival. Neary 9 % of the population of Tamil Nadu is experiencing the holiday. See even few thousand jains and very few syrian orthodoxies are mentioned. And see that few thousand Jains are even added in the Tamil people template in the article. But Ayyavazhi have no right even to find a place even in the article?

Ayyavazhi differ from Hinduism religiously very much than it do so sociologically. See the discussion in Talk:India/Ayyavazhi - Paul 18:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Paul Raj, in my opinion, posting very long comments, such as this one here, and the one that you posted on the India page makes discussion difficult. Rather, when someone makes a short point, I think it is best to respond succinctly just to that point. Could you please name one property, that you believe that Ayyavazhi has that is shared by no Hindu sect. Then let me respond to that one property. And let us continue discussing that one thing until we have some agreement upon it. Sincerely, --BostonMA ^talk 19:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I see now that Ayyavazhi is mentioned in the religion section, in fact near the beginning of the section. I agree with others that it does not need to be covered in any more detail in this article. —Hanuman Das 19:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Also the Ayya Vaikunda Avataram should not be excluded. Because it was not like other local holidays which was usually for one district. It should be seen very next to State holidays since this holiday was for three districts. Since other festivals without holidays such as Thaipusam and Adipperukku are noted apart from the major festivals Deepavali and Pongal. - Paul 19:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Many to tell but as you told so I say one thing. Religiously, Akilam says all Hindu elements (including that of all denominations) are true till the birth of Kali Yuga. But then onwards it had gone awry and only Akilam should be followed.(this was the issue i previously mentioned in the discussion page of India and so for the detailed discussion about it see there. Thanks - Paul 19:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see here for the thousands of worship centers here Grand sacle is not point of views because three districts are declared Holidays. Do a holiday be declared to one or two people's celebrations? Also Daily thanthi is a leading news paper in Tamil Nadu. I've cited the paper Edition and name published date. Also it was cited from the Tamil Wikipedia, here translated here.

Also please discuss before the reverts. Thanks - Paul 07:01, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ayyavazhi POV

Paul Raj/Vaikunda Raja please stop inserting your POV into this article regarding Ayyavazhi worship centres. Whether the celebrations are of a 'Grand Scale' or of a 'Stupendous scale' is POV of the person writing it. There is no need to insert such adjectives into this article. There is no other instances of such superfluous glorification in this article. Be happy with the mention of Ayyavazhi in this Featured article, eventhough I have strong reservations against mentioning this minor un-recognised religion. If you revert again I will ask for a RFC on this matter.Thanks Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 07:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I have cited with university papers for the number of worship centers. My queastion is simple, Will the government declare a holiday for one or two peoples's celebrations? Also, The local holiday is cited from a leading news paper of Tamil Nadu . Here is no place for the POV. And i may decide to remain happy or not for anything done here. I am ready to scan and present the news paper report. Offline notabilities are impotant. Also, Please don't make personal attacks.

Also after these citations, some two users decided to format out the sentences moving away from the path of citations. They collectively reverted 4 times and If I revert with citations, they say they will complain.

Others please comment. - Paul 09:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My opinion

General Comment. There are dozens of local festivals like Feast of Our Lady of Snows (Aug 5 - Local Holiday in Thoothukudi District), Nellaiappar Car festival (local holiday in Tirunelveli District), Nagaraja festival (local holiday in Kanyakumari DIstrict), Kallagar festival (Madurai District). So if we start to include all the functions, just because a local holiday has been declared, that will become a big list. That can be included in an article like "Religious festivals of Tamil Nadu", but I think that such a list is beyond the scope of this article on "Tamil People"

Dear Paul, I am living in Southern Tamil Nadu. While I can see that the Ayyavazhi function has been recognised and is being observed in Thoothukudi, Tirunelveli and Kanyakumari and that the community and the celebrations have become notable, I am still having doubts over the use of word "Grand Scale" If at all something is celebrated in Grand Scale in Southern Tamil Nadu it is the Kulasekharapattinam Dasara. I fully support the inclusion of Ayyavazhi, and I can verify that the functions are celebrated and government has taken note of the increasing popularity, but as of today (year 2006), i don't think it deserves the word Grand Scale in an Encyclopedia. I agree that Ayyvazhi is a religion. But I have few questions. The article does not mention about Ramzan or Bakrid. Do you say that more people celebrate this function compared to Ramzan or Bakrid. OK !! You can tell me that Ramzan and Bakrid or common all over the world and that Ayyavazhi is the local phenomenon. I understand, but I hope that you too understand that Grand Scale is not NPOV.

Dear Venu, While I agree with your stand regarding this matter, I am having reservations about your comment regarding daily thanthi being non-verifiable. How can you claim the newspaper with 1 crore readership as non-verifiable. Can you please explain Doctor Bruno 12:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean that daily thanthi newpaper is non notable nor unacceptable. I mearly meant that the offline paper is not easily verifiable. My language might have reflected my frustrations with this matter and I apologise fro that. Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 19:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

OK. That settles it. Keep the good work going on. Doctor Bruno 20:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with User:Doctor Bruno

But presently, the article give high importance to festivals centered on Tamil Nadu or Tamil people, and seemingly so the reasons for exclusion of muslim festivals. Ayyavazhi is a religion centered mostly on Tamil. I think the Thaippusam and Adipperukku are not even holidays and still mentioned in the article because it is tamil based. Ayya Vaikunda Avataram is that of a Tamil based religion. Also the head quarters (Swamithoppe), which receives a high religious Gathering for this festival is in Tamil Nadu. So definitely it deserves a place in the section.

May be the phrase ' grand scale ' not fit here. But the present mentioning, "The Ayyavazhi Festival Ayya Vaikunda Avataram is celebrated in the southern districts of Kanyakumari, Tirunelveli and Thoothukudi." says that this festival is only celebrated in these three dists. But as per the earlier presented citations, for 'thousands of worship centers across south india', this festivals are celebrated also outside this dists and across south India.

So as per my view the sentence should be reframed. Some thing like this, "The Ayya Vaikunda Avataram is celebrated by Ayyavazhi's across the state, mostly in the south." - Paul 00:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Your preferred sentence is self-contradictory. - Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 00:57, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I mentioned that the present text show that the celebrations are bounded within the border of those districts. But i've cited the presence of Ayyavazhi across the state and also beyond. I just told to mention it so. Also the text mentioned above is my preference. That's all. But a reframe needed to the present text as per the citations. Thanks - Paul 18:01, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Generally, why 'grand scale' cannot be used? This festival is not like other local holidays. First, it was not for one but for three districts. Secondly, this was not a temple festival, where people gather in one place in large number as, Feast of Our Lady of Snows, Nellaiappar Car festival, Nagaraja festival, Kallagar festival etc.. But Ayya Vaikunda Avataram is declared as a holiday not for people gathering in Swamithope, and the celebrations are not confined to Swamithoppe, But across the place where Ayyavazhi people live. But the car festival in Swamithoppe too attracts a huge crowd, and if it is declared as a holiday then it could be compared to other local Holidays since the celebrations are confined to Swamithoppe.

It is just as the difference between Diwali and Nagaraja festival in Kanyakumari district. while both are holidays here, the former is celebrated by all Hindus in their houses while the later is celebrated in only at Nagaraja Temple.

The celebrations in Swamithoppe during this festival is in high vein because of religious importance Swamithoppe earns from Akilam and Ayyavazhi ideology. The celebrations of the festival here is grand than any other parts in the country but still the celebrations took place across the whole worship centers through out the country. In Chennai and in Mumbai Ayyavazhi's celebrate the festival with processions. Also in Thiruchendur (where Ayya incarnated) the grand celebrations next to Swamithoppe.

So if users compare this festival with other local holidays and through reject the usage of the word 'grand scale' for this fest, then it is incorrect. Or can, 'celebrated grandly be used alternative to 'grand scale' ?

Any way the present format, "The Ayyavazhi Festival Ayya Vaikunda Avataram is celebrated in the southern districts of Kanyakumari, Tirunelveli and Thoothukudi." does not fit even as per the cited sources for the spread of Ayyavazhi beyond those areas. Please consider - Paul 19:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

The current sentence is appropriate. - Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 21:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear Parthi, I've explined above well, why the present sentence in not fit. How can you tell simply "The current sentence is appropriate." Iam telling once again, the current sentence will bring a false notion that the celebrations of this fest in confined to these three dists and not outside those areas. No Ayyavazhi's are living beyond these dists? Also what about the citations for the spaning of W.Centers across the country? - Paul 16:15, 20 December 2

[edit] Language, Ethnicity, and Tamil

Hello all,

I have noticed a sentence which contradicts itself in the next. Please read below:

The Tamil identity is primarily linguistic, although in recent times the definition has been broadened to include emigrants  
of Tamil descent who maintain Tamil cultural traditions, even if they no longer regularly speak the language. Tamils are  
ethnically, linguistically and culturally related to the other Dravidian peoples of the Indian subcontinent.

Should the first sentence be taken off? After all isn't Tamil an ethnicity as well? For example, if a couple from Japan had a child in the U.S., and the child born for the parents from Japan does not speak Japanese, is the child ethnically a Japanese or not? I know that sounds like a wierd question, but I just had to mention this. I think the second sentence is good though since Dravidian is a family of ethnicities as well as a family of languages primarily in Southern India. I also wanted to bring this up since there are others who have helped contribute to Tamil people, I would not want to make any edits without notifying anyone and having constructive dialogue. Regards.

Wiki Raja 10:17, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

REMOVE THE AFROCENTRICS QUOTES IN TAMILS PAGES-VANDALISM

[edit] REMOVE THE AFROCENTRICS QUOTES IN TAMILS PAGES-VANDALISM

Why there is quotes of Afrocentrics in the Tamils Page-Remove it once and for all!!!! Why should we have to quote afrocenntric quotes hereE.g Dops and Rushidis here.I have long noticed that tamils and tamil pages in wikipidia have been vandelised by Afrocentics or people who pretent to be afrocentrics. Even in the black peoples artices there was furious arguments by the afrocentrics to include tamils with them.THIS IS NOT THE PLACE FOR AFROCENTRIC IDEAS.please remove any association with the africans in the Pre-historic period in this article ASAP.Those dont have any base —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.136.100.93 (talk • contribs)

I introduced the information you're referring to, and it is accurate and sourced. Not only that, it is corroborated by mainstream historians and by objective fact. You cannot discredit information simply by labeling it "Afrocentrist" (or any other thing) without providing some sort of rationale why it is objectionable and should not be included. Hell, I learned 30+ years ago in a mainstream American classroom, in a white public school system that the ancient Dravidians of Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa were black, African peoples! There is ample evidence in the historical/archaeological, linguistic and genetic (DNA) record that supports these facts.

I'm sorry that such information offends you. It's tragic when people have bought into white supremacist lies and refuse to learn/accept their true history. There are, in fact, at least three types of Dravidians/Veddoid/Sudroid peoples of southern India: 1) the peoples to which Diop refers (similar to the peoples of the African Horn, with straight hair and narrow nasal indices, the so-called proto-Caucasoid, African blacks who later gave rise to Caucasian, or "white", peoples), who migrated out of Africa through the Levant; 2) the Africoid (Negrito types), who traveled a more southerly route and followed the sea coasts; and 3) the Australoid peoples indigenous to Africa (nowadays found, I believe, only in Iraq and the Saudi peninsula, who have remained there since ancient times, who also migrated from the Levant (the Habshis and others, who settled in the north of India) and, according to geneticist Spencer via a more southerly route (the Tamils) and went on to populate Australia and portions of Southeast Asia. Afrocentrist historians have been saying this for decades -- and now mainstream scholarship, finally beginning to free itself of old, white supremacist assumptions and racist propaganda and spurred on by science-based study and objective analysis, is finally catching up. Y haplotype studies show a significant percentage of Australoid and Bantu lineages in southern India -- where many of the black populations migrated from Africa and remained, and to where others migrated, fleeing Aryan persecution.

I suggest you do some serious reading on the subject of your own history instead of engaging in meaningless ad hominem attacks.

Horen Tudu was born in Bangledesh into the Santhal tribal group but grew up in the USA. He is a researcher and staunch Pan Africanist who has written extensively about African descendants in the Indian subcontinent. Asked whether Dalits are aware of their African heritage, he told Black Britain: “I do believe that they are starting to understand that the upper caste function from the paradigm of the Indo Europeans and that the Dalits and the tribals themselves are indigenous and that the proto Australoids are African'[emphasis added].”

But aside from the Dalits, India’s tribal groups make up another 84 million of its population. Tudu told Black Britain: “When you come to the tribals there is absolutely no controversy regarding the race of these people. They are clearly, physically, Africoid, they are linguistically distinct, religiously distinct; you can connect their spiritual systems to the spiritual systems in Africa – there is no ambiguity there.” [5]

I've provided a link to the web page, which includes information from Rashidi and Bangladeshi Horen Tudu -- and also a commentary on how Indians, Bangladeshis, and others have internalized, since ancient times, the virulent anti-black hatred of the Aryans, codified in the Brahmin caste system (and sensibly repudiated by the Tamil people because they are black peoples at the receiving end of the harsh injustices of caste and color discrimination), and who in modern times have continued to internalize white supremacist lies and values as self-loathing and color bias -- using bleaching creams and rejecting and discriminating in every way against those who are darker-skinned and less European-looking (the Bollywood syndrome), not unlike other people of color the world over. Read on -- if you dare.

Here's another link.[6] Pay close attention to the section on "The African Presence in Asia." deeceevoice 04:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] To whom it may concern

To the anonymous user: This is not a place for personal abuse of other people's cultures. Please refrain from attacks and intolerant POVs towards other users and other users ethnic, religous, and/or national backgrounds. Thank you. Wiki Raja 23:33, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Am not attacking anyone but I feel I being a tamil is been attacked!.

Whats the point in quoting Afrocentric quotes here!.It is sure the work of some Afrocentrics.If you dont want me to remove :those then can some of you pls remove them.Dont we tamils have anything to say about ourselves??? Why quote some controverisal quotes????

--Vandh 01:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

In the first place there are no quotes which are "Arocentric". I am not saying that Tamils are directly African, or European, or Asian, or what not. Just like the people of Northern India are not considered Iranians from Iran, but they are related to the people of Iran. Likewise with the Tamils and other Dravidians, there are a lot of similarities between us(including myself who is also an ethnic Tamil) and the people of East Africa and Australia in certain physical features, customs, and religion.

As an educational pointer, before Hinduism was introduced to the early Dravidians our ancestors practiced Animism which was a form of nature worship by the early Nagas and Yakshas. Animism is also practiced amongst the aboriginals of Australia and in some parts of Africa. In southern India there have been found many types of weapons excavated called Valaris [[7]] which resemble the boomerangs used in Australia. Also in certain parts of Kerala and Sri Lanka you will find aboriginal Veddas [[8]] [[9]].

These are facts that we cannot run away from, even if some of us are ashamed of it or not. As for putting sources in regards to the similarities the Dravidians share with the groups from Africa and Australia, there is nothing controversial about that. It almost sounds like in your messages that African culture is bad, negative, and perhaps inferior. Live and let live. We are all created equal even though we may all be of different ethnicities. Therefore, in my quotes, we are all one race, and that is the human race.

Lastly, Please refrain from attacks and intolerant POVs towards other users of different ethnic, religous, and/or national backgrounds. Thank you.

Wiki Raja 02:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Animisim is the primitive form of all religion in all parts of the world.All Ancient cultures still have some form of this. Hinduhism still have animism even today with Pantheon of gods.We all know that humans originated in Africa and moved to all parts of the world.So to say something like animisim and so say there is a link then there is a link to every other culture in the world.I am certainly not attacking anyone but to have Diops quote is totally Unnecessary here.I know that Veddas are similar to Aborigines but are Veddas tamils?.You have also mentioned that there are similar physical features,customs and religion. I cant find any customs that the tamils have in similarity with the Australian aborigines or the africans.Even the Jews have a similar culture like the tamils like the 'Poo punitha neerattu vila'.Puberty cerimony like the tamils.So are they similar to us?.You want to relate the valari with the boomerang but boomarang comes back to its owner but the valari doesnt only the shapes are simlilar.Even the greeks/romans had similar weapon like that(shape).I totally accept that all are one race that is the human race but in an article about tamils then it should be about tamils not how humans came to be tamils,english or Irish. --Vandh 04:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

If it would make you any happier, did you know that apart from the Tamils who have aboriginal or East African features, there are a few Tamils who were mixed with Marathi during the brief Maratha rule of parts of Northern Tamil Nadu? There are Black Tamils, Brown Tamils, Light Brown Tamils, Olive complection Tamils, I have even seen some Tamils with freckles (Anglo-Indian or Anglo-Tamils). There are also some Tamils with fair skin, features and light colored eyes due to intermarriage with other ethnic groups from Central and Northern India. Did you know that intermarriage has been practiced for over thousands of years? Also, that certain primitive customs tend to vanish over time when introduced to newer more advanced cultures? This not only happened in South India, but in various other parts of the world.

As for animism, there were different kinds around the world. The Hinduism we see today practiced by Tamils is a combination of the indigenous Animism beliefs and North Indian pantheon of gods. Also, Murugan worship and the body piercing rituals of Thai Pusam are primarily practiced by Tamils in India, Sri Lanka, and elsewhere. If you have any further issues, please notify Wikipedia Administration. Thank you. Wiki Raja 05:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This site is about Tamil People

If u have a problem that Indians use skin lightening creme or Dalits get treated worst by "High" Cast Indians, it's your thing. This is not a place where you can moan about the worlds problems. This page isnt about Bollywood either. Pages which contains Tamil People allways get vandalised, something I noticed long time ago. Much respect to everyone but WE TAMILS ARE INDIANS and not Black or White. Get off your Black/White scheme and see the world in colours. Asian2duracell

Exactly Iseebias

Please work the following text (from Races of craniofacial anthropology) into the article.

Genetecist Cavalli-Sforza argues on page 119 of The Great Human Diasporas: "The Caucasoids are mainly fair-skinned peoples, but this group also includes the southern Indians (Dravidians), who live in tropical areas and show signs of a marked darkening in skin pigmentation, however their facial and body traits are Caucasoid rather than African or Australoid.

--BostonMA ^talk 21:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Good addition -- but it must be counterbalanced by the fact that Cavalli-Sforza's findings are contested. These are word games. First, "Caucasoid" is not synonymous with "Caucasian," which means "white" -- a point seemingly lost on some of the contributors to the article. Indigenous, sometimes blue-black black Africans of North Africa, including Nubia, Somalia, Sudan and Abysinnia (the Oromo of Ethiopia and Eritrea), have been classified as "Caucasoid" because of certain craniofacial characteristics -- notably longer, more slender faces; thinner lips; and the absence of, or limited, alveolar prognathism; and because of, in some cases, finer, straighter hair than is the norm for so-called "Negroid", or sub-Saharan, populations.[10][11] Such characteristics are the result of naturally occurring biodiversity among African peoples and -- except, to my knowledge, those related to hair texture -- can be found in populations in sub-Saharan Africa, as well. It is these populations who are thought by some scholars to have been the founders of the ancient Indian civilizations of Harappa, Mohenjo-Daro and others. These are the non- Afro-Australoid "Tamils" (or "Dravidians"; the Tamils are not one people) of today.

The name "Caucasoid" when applied to these ancient North African populations refers to the fact that it is surmised that their ancestors -- indigenous blacks of the continent -- migrated out of Africa, through the Middle East and the Levant and eventually mutated over time into populations now termed "Caucasians," or whites. Some scholars have opted for the term "proto-Caucasoids" to describe these "seed" black populations. Others, like Blumenbach, have referred to them as the "brown race" or "Mediterranean race," when, in fact, they are none other than indigenous, black African peoples. They are responsible, in part, for the still very noticeable "Negroid" strain in the Levant/Middle East, in nations like Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Other scholars -- Afrocentrists -- have chosen another word, one that encompasses the full range of phenotypes of black, African peoples, including Capoid, Australoid, Negroid, Veddoid, Sudroid, etc.: Africoid, arguing that a word which contains a geographic referrent to Europe is wholly inappropriate when describing indigenous African peoples, and is at odds with the longstanding tradition of naming peoples after their geographic points of origin (e.g. Mongoloids for Asians and Caucasoids for Europeans). deeceevoice 12:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Finally, it should be noted that such variations in phenotype commonly occur within family groupings -- among siblings of identical parentage, even -- given the fact that among all the indigenous North African populations of the nations, noted Caucasoid as well as Negroid traits can be found. See the following links, for example, of old photographs of Nubian peoples: First, what would be termed a "Caucasoid" black woman, or a "Dravidian" type[12] (note the straight hair, the relatively narrow nose and longer, narrower facial proportions); second, a "Negroid" or sub-Saharan type[13] (note the broader features, alveolar prognathism and woolly hair); and the, finally, a Nubian woman who displays both Negroid and Caucasoid characteristics[14]. All are indigenous, black African peoples. All are Nubians. All are Africoid peoples. deeceevoice 12:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

First of all stop stealing our civilisation(Indus valley) and say that it was created by you black africans.It was created by us dravidians. Original dravidian might have been dark skin but they are unrelated to africans(May be related by the single origin theory ONLY). On examining the teeth,structure of the head (of the skeletal remains found in THE iNDUS VALLEY)it has been proved that they are not africoids but resemble that of the present Indian.

  Skin pigmantaion is due to selective pressure.

Other than skin darking there is no such connection with the africans.Finally do realize that Tamils are not Dalits and No one in India treats them differently.Who the hell told you that people get discriminated based on the skin colour in India?.If you still belive that Tamils are related to africans then all the people white,yellow,red are related to you in the same way.Be happy with that and leave as to ourseleves.Dont bother us Deeecevoice with your own Stupid ideas!!!! We know our history,we know how we look ,we know about ourseleves.You dont need to tell us who we are. --Vandh 12:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm Tamil myself, and I dont think Tamils get discrimanated in social life, who told you that. Like u saidVandh, I tried to explain that deeceevoice guy that Tamils and Dalits are not the same. But he lives in his own world. If he think Africans will be something "better" if they ar related to us, then I feel sorry for him. I dont care about Nubians, Ethiopians or whatever, let them be what they are. And let us be what WE ARE. I dont care about race. This article is not suposed to be political motivated. Race should not be a matter in the Tamil People article. Its about culture.--Asian2Duracell

A little off-topic, but where did you get the idea that Oromos and Somalis are blue-black, DCV? — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 23:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Calm down bro... I said they are Africans not "Blue-Black" or whatever, Africans in term of regularly Black people.Asian2duracell 00:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm perfectly calm, re-read my question and you'll see that. Wasn't it Deeceevoice who made this comment, though?

Indigenous, sometimes blue-black black Africans of North Africa, including Nubia, Somalia, Sudan and Abysinnia (the Oromo of Ethiopia and Eritrea), have been classified as "Caucasoid" ...

Anyway, re-reading it, I see that I misunderstood her comments. Why are you only referring to Oromo Ethiopians, though DCV (they don't live at all in Eritrea, btw), and not also Semitic-speaking ones? — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 02:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

oh, I havnt seen the "DCV" in ur first post,.. my fault.Asian2duracell 22:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Style aspects

I'm showing my head here after a long time and haven't followed the discussions. So, I can't comment on the ongoing edit war yet. But, will someone change the population figures in the infobox from millions to the original notation? For South Asia related articles, the recommendation is to use Commonwealth English spellings and notations. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 14:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Sundar: I guess I used "millions" by habit while updating the infobox parameters; I didn't know, though, that doing so runs contrary to a convention. I don't mind restoring or seeing all the zeroes restored, especially if most folk find that format easier to digest. Best wishes, David Kernow (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for offering to change it, David. The convention is to use lakhs and crores as appropriate with figures in millions in brackets. I'm not too particular though. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 09:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if many English-speaking/reading folk have encountered lakhs and crores! Yours, David (talk) 18:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

It depends on what part of the world you come from and how you group English-speaking/reading folks. Cheers, --Blacksun 11:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citation Needed

"While Adiperukku is celebrated with more pomp in the Cauvery region than in others, the Ayyavazhi Festival, Ayya Vaikunda Avataram, is predominantly celebrated in the southern districts of Kanyakumari, Tirunelveli, and Thoothukudi."
The citation provided is just an entry in Hindu about that day being celeberated as a holiday. How does that citation support the part of the sentence that states it is predominantly celeberated? Furthermore, status of AV as a religion is being debated on its talk page. Till this issue is not cleared it is not right to have AV being drummed up as a seperate religion on this page. Not to mention all the additions regarding it are done in a crude manner clearly affecting the quality of an otherwise good article. They should be rolled back till issues on it being religion and its significance are resolved. --Blacksun 02:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Celebrated predominantly means 'celebrated mainly'(than the other parts of the state) in the southern dists. If not, are you telling that a festival with holiday for three dists is something celebrated by one or two peoples as some Tom's and Jack's birth days? The other festivals which are toned much up than this Ayyavazhi festival was not declared as a holiday even. Then, mentioning a relatively major (regional as per citations) festival in an article, affects it from being good?! Also, the seperate nature of Ayyavazhi is stated with different citations there in the article.

I very well know that you people don't even care me and instead call as my views and citations (including University papers) as POVs, and so no use of discussing here. If there is some one else, move forward; otherwise remove all Ayyavazhi related notes here, and pave the way for the article as remain as a good one, as User:Blacksun told. Thanks ==> _Д =|Ω|=_Д_Paul| 19:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] famous Tamil people

Why aren't here any famous people mentioned ( at least pics) like it is on other ethnicity based articles. And I dont only talk about actors. People who contributed to the evolution of Tamil culture and identity.Asian2duracell 21:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

What part of Jaffna are you from? Wiki Raja 00:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Special mention of Irulas

Irulas are not one person, thy are a community-I was talking about people like Barathi or Kamal Haasan or what who ever...Asian2duracell 17:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Special mention of Irulas Only

Why there is special mention of Irulas only in the Indian tamils section.It looks like there are no other communities other than them.Whats the need for that?. Any special reson?

Yes why? Irulas are the native people on the place where Tamils in India live. So why should they be mentioned? They're a small minority of hunters. Most Tamils arent. And most Indan Tamils dont work on tea plantations. Rewrite that section.Asian2duracell 17:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Irula's original language was not tamil.they have adopted it according to the regional habitat.Special mention of Irulas in this section seems to be totally unecassary.Can someone pls do the necessary amedments.--Sria 11:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 70 mill. (body text) or 100 mill (infobox??)

How come the discrepancy? Trondtr 06:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Lot of untruths and speculations 1.which evidence shows migration to india around 6000BC 2.Elamite connection to Iran and they are related to tamil show evidence 3.Adichannallur pots contains skeletons of mongoliod origin. The writings are not conformed to be tamil brahmi 4.silapathikaram does not make reference to kumarikandam it refers to tsunami 5.embassies sent to roman emperors from pandyan kings. show evidence. 6.Kalabhras theory is false there is not evidence to show kalabhras rule. 7.Western region or kerala was always distinct, they were refered as malayans in both tamil and sinhala literary works. there are more untruths , which i will discuss later. meghamitra 06:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What is wrong with Sarvagnya!!

Ok, the quality of this article has gone down the drain. I never seen another Wikipeida article that needed so much citations. This is so ridiculous. Someone please fix this up. And Sarvagnya, its so obvious that you have some serious issues to deal with and i suggest you go take care of that first before contributing anymore to this article. The_Real_Wiki_Mania

I must say that I too find his behaviour disruptive. I do not think that that many references are needed (see Wikipedia:Citing_sources#When_to_cite_sources). Most of the stuff is not controversial (at least from my point of view) and can be found in any scientific book on Sri Lankan history. I spent two hours on putting in the references anyway so that Sarvagnya can see they exist. Maybe we should at a later point in time get an outsider, preferably an admin, to delete those references that are objectively unnecessary. Cheers, Krankman 15:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Kranskman for your work in removing the tags. Now most of the content is cited (with third party journal citations unlike some articles where every single POV sentence is pushed by citing a local vested author) Praveen 14:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 17:19, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

meghamitra 13:37, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Population figures

The entire population of Tamil Nadu is only 62.4 million[15]. How can there be 63 million "Tamils" in India? Sarvagnya 03:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Because, unlike some other languages, Tamil happens to be an official language not just in its own state... there are a couple of Union Territories thrown into the mix. I presume that should add a non-trivial number to the speakers of the language. Lotlil 03:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

What is the linguistic composition of Tamil Nadu, I know 10% of tamil nadu is telugu people and there are significant number of Malayalees and Kannada people ,so we have to check the figures.meghamitra 07:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Lotlil 19:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The figures from ethnologue quoted are broadly correct. The 2001 Indian census quotes 60,793,814 as the Tamil population of the country, with, in particularly 55,798,916 in TN, 1,874,959 in Karnataka, 861,502 in Pondicherry, 769,685 in Andhra Pradesh, 596,971 in Kerala and 527,995 in Maharashtra and smaller numbers in other states. I have changed the number quoted in the article to the number in the Census, as the census (though likely an underestimate) is a more accurate source than Ethnologue, notwithstanding that the Tamil population will have risen significantly in the time since 2001. Inbetweener (talk) 21:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Srilanka page [16] Gives the number of srilankans to be 20,743,000 out of which 5.1% are Srilankan tamils who have been living since ages and another 4.3% who went to srilanka during british times as plantation workers. So the total number of srilankan's who are tamils is 1,949,842 , how come some many numbers where added. I want to change this any objectionsmeghamitra 13:37, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, if you can add reliable citations (not another wiki page), please go ahead and fix the numbers. Lotlil 14:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Also note that the figure of 4.3% are based on "Sri Lankan Tamils in government-controlled areas, not accounting for those in rebel-held territories". 4.3% is way too low. The Real Wiki Mania 10:29, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I've revised the figures per the Ethnologue. I've also trimmed the countries included to four - the three where Tamil has some form of official status, plus Malaysia, where Tamils are a significant percent of the population (just under 10%). Canada, the UK, etc. do not have a significant Tamil population. Even if the figures cited were correct, Tamils are less than one percent of the population of those countries. That's not a significant number. -- Arvind 21:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

According to popular media reports, there are around 250 000 to 300 000 Tamils in Canada. One has to look at the actual numbers, not just the percentage. If you take only percentage into account, Tamil population in India is not that significant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.41.96 (talk • contribs)

A little over 60 million Tamils in a country of a little over 1 billion people comes to around 6%. That is significant in comparison with Canada. But feel free to add figures for Canada to Tamil diaspora. -- Arvind 18:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

The size of a community, and the propensity for cultural interchange, is defined by its population size and its proximity to each other and not by its percentage of the total population. Thus the significance of 300,000 Tamils is dependent on the denominator so that the Tamil community is, for example, a very small percentage in Canada as a whole but a relatively large community within the Toronto metropolitan area. Because they are largely concentrated in certain regions they form a community much more easily than if distributed randomly across Canada. A clearer example is that quoting Tamils as "only" 6% of India's population massively underestimates the sociopolitical effect of having that 6% constituting the overwhelming majority of the population of a significant geographical area, such as Tamil Nadu state. Although firm data on population figures for expatriate communities are not, and likely will never be, available I think it is significantly misleading not to represent list significant Tamil populations in the USA, Canada, UK, etc. Wikipedia pages on almost all other ethnic groups use this criterion - see the Wikipedia pages on Tajiks, Hmong people, Sinhalese people and pretty much any other population group for examples. Inbetweener (talk) 21:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] image

we do not need one men representig a population of about 70 milions....Asian2duracell 22:55, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Flag icons in infobox

Why is there a flag for Dubai — shouldn't it be the flag of the UAE? Nyttend 12:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Multi-ethnic

Tamils belong to Dravidian, Aryan, Moorish, Malay and other Oriental races. Anwar 20:21, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Video

Feel free to use the Video given below in place of a photo shot of the same. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 05:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Folk artists playing percussion instruments

A video clip of Tamil folk artists performing in honour of the deceased and to help people observe a wake.

That's quite a good video. I can't seem to find a way to add the template to the article in a box in the side - do you think you could add it yourself? -- Arvind 18:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Below are some possible ways. Feel free to refine them and choose one for adding to the article. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 01:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Click to view video clip	Tamil folk artists performing at a funeral Video clip (file info) — Watch in browser (media help)

I've tentatively chosen the second one and added to the article. However, the code needs to be parametrised and moved to a template. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 02:28, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

This looks excellent. Thanks, Sundar. -- Arvind 10:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sikhs ethnically related to Tamils?

This is the first time I read this. I'm tentatively reverting it until a citation is provided. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 05:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

In regards to a few Tamils being Sikh, Sikihism is a faith and not an ethnicity. It is like saying that because the Haitians (of African origins) are Roman Catholic, they are also ethnically related to Caucasians of Europe. Also, if China and Japan shared the same country, it would be like saying that Chinese are ethnically related to Japanese. There are some instances that Tamils may marry with Punjabis, that does not make them related ethnically. If a German were to marry a Chinese, would that mean Germans are ethnically related to Chinese. I would really like to say more, but would like to maintain civility on Wikipedia. Yes, I support you to revert that back. Regards. Wiki Raja 08:25, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

As a faith, it can be practiced by anyone, yes. So, a Sikh can be technically be of any ethnicity. But, are even the people who are from the Punjab region and practice Sikhism for several generations ethnically related to Tamil people? That would be news to me if it were to be true. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 14:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Portraits of notable Tamil people on top right corner

I think it would be appropriate since Wikipedia articles about other ethnic groups have such pictures. I personally suggest including portraits of Chandrasekhar and Abdul Kalam (if pictures that don't fall under copyright rules can be found). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zombiedroid (talk • contribs) 00:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of material and citations

I have removed some material and citations because it is hardly relevant to the topic at hand. It deviates from the article, Tamil people, and goes into the so called "Banned organizations". Unless there is citations that say that most Tamils accept LTTE as a organization that they wish to be identified with, this part it irrelevant to the topic. There is no citation that draws connection between LTTE as a organization that represents all Tamils even thought this might be true. Watchdogb (talk) 16:11, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Your definition of "hardly relevant" is pretty stretched. The article does not make any claim that the LTTE represents all Tamils ... just that it is an organization of Tamils. Just as an article about Americans could mention the Democrats and Republicans, while not making any claim that either party represented all people (or that all people were represented by one or the other). The material you removed is relevant, and is cited.Kww (talk) 16:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

What ? How is my definition stretched ? LTTE is not a organization of only Tamils. It also included Sinhalese so I am not even sure how this can be put here. LTTE is a organization sure. LTTE is headed by Tamils Sure but LTTE is not a organization of only Tamils. Furthermore, there is very little relevance to the topic of Tamil People and LTTE. There are Tamils even in Sri Lanka, like Douglas Devananda, Karuna and so on who oppose LTTE being called a organization of Tamils. Even the Sri Lankan Government claims that LTTE does not represent Tamils, so then why is LTTE included in an article about Tamil people ? Another problem is that even if it were true that LTTE, as an organization, should be represented here it is totally off topic to give their proscribed part. Any such addition is POV and I will have to NPOV that addition by adding all the things that LTTE has done to Save Tamil from State Terrorism in Sri Lanka. This will further deviate this article to Sri Lankan Civil War from Tamil people. Watchdogb (talk) 16:56, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

(unindent) I agree with Watchdogb - this is an article about the Tamils as a people, not the Sri Lankan conflict. Read the sentence together with the one above - the idea is to give a sense in a couple of sentences about the main institutions that relate to Tamils. Details about the institutions - plaudits, criticisms - belong in the articles about them, not this one. Thus, for example, the (many) controversies about Periyar's Self-respect movement are dealt with in the article about him and the article about the movement. The same should be the case for the LTTE - this article simply isn't the place to go into details about the outfit. As far as Watchdogb's request for citations goes, the sentence about the GoSL's contributions to the development of Tamil technical vocabulary was added at the request of a (Tamil) Sri Lankan editor when the article first went through the FA process. That was a long time ago, when the requirements for citation weren't as rigorous as they now are. I think it probably was Mayooranathan, who was the only Tamil editor from Jaffna here at that time. I'll trawl through the archives and see what I can find. -- Arvind (talk) 13:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures

The order of pictures in thsi article does not demonstrate chrolnology. The fisrt picture should be associate with pre historic urn burials not the Bragdeeswara temple in Tanjore. Someone should look into the chronolgy of the pictures Taprobanus (talk) 15:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting Pictres - User:Theowne has deleted them without any explanation.

I have added pictures from Tamil Wikipedia. User:Theowne has deleted them without any explanation. The only four pictures are not representative. --Natkeeran (talk) 18:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Famous Tamilians

Why are C. N Annadurai, R.K Narayanan and MGR (M.G Ramachandran) not included in pictures of famous Tamilians. These three people are the most famous Tamilians of the 20th century. They are much more famous than anynone shown here —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arunsel (talk • contribs) 22:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)