User talk:Sangeethaa Theivendran

Welcome!

Hello, Sangeethaa Theivendran, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Kallar (caste). I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Sitush (talk) 09:03, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kallar

Hi, I have reverted you at Kallar (caste) because it looks like you are inserting your own opinion with that of sources. Some of those sources are a bit dubious anyway (Athelstane Baines, for example). If you are not in fact doing that then please could you provide citations at least for each paragraph. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 09:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the page regarding Kallar (caste) mainly based on the book by Louis Dumont, "Piramalai kallar, A south Indian sub caste". I also took excerpts from published theses under Department of Historical studies and tourism development. I wouldn't have tried to edit the page if certain details were not available; rather the details about the caste in the present wikipedia page are distorted and derogatory. So tried to bring the truth with proper references.Sangeethaa Theivendran (talk) 09:27, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not actually deal with "truth" but just with what is verifiable using reliable sources - see WP:VNT. I thought you hade just added a bunch of stuff that relies on ancient texts for verifiability and I'm afraid that those are never suitable. So, I reverted you again.

Wikipedia is also not censored. Aside from erring on the side of caution when it relates to living people, we say things as they appear in reliable sources, regardless of whether that might cause offence. Our role is not to judge but to reflect what reliable sources say, hence WP:NPOV.

That said, Louis Dumont was an academic and might have a place in the article. The problem is that I rather think his opinion has been rejected by more modern academics, which means we have to be careful about how much weight we give to his views. I'll see if I can find a copy of the book. Hope this helps. - Sitush (talk) 16:36, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The editing i made to etymology was based on Louis Dumont's views and government gazette sources. I wonder why you have accepted Louis Dumont's reference in the present wikipedia page. You just reject the source if your personal opinion differs from the source I have cited.

The editing I made to Origin is completely based on current genographic research. I is a well established fact. It is against the brahminical ideology. I find that must be the reason for rejecting that claim. Thank you for dominating wikipedia with your personal views.