Talk:Madurai Nayak dynasty

message: Telugu speaking editors are poking their nose into every South India related articles. It has become a tendency of their editors. Every Kannada related articles have unnecessary mention of Telugu. Same things are happening with the articles related to Tamil and Malayalam. This is a nuisance. 
Vijayanagara empire was started on the advice of Guru Vidyaranya Theertha of Sringeri to unite all the small Hindu rulers to forma a greater alliance to fight the invasion. It included all the small rulers of Kannada, Tamil, Telugu and Malayalam speaking areas. People came together for a common cause in spite of the language barrier. Kannada, Tamil, Telugu and Malayalam were all the official languages in the respective areas.
Nayakas in question in this article are the tributaries of Vijayanagara empire. Nayaka community is found in all the southern states, they have nothing to do with Telugu, Kannada, Tamil or Malayalam origin. They were the native rulers and tributaries of the respective territory. They spoke native languages. There is a caste called Nayakas in Karnataka, it does not mean that Nayakas are Kannada origin alone. 
Vijaya Nagara empire was called Karnata empire, it represented the entire Southern India. They promoted all the languages equally. This is the reason, the music which originated in that empire is called Karnatak Music (or Carnatic Music).
Raghu-prdl (talk) 20:49, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Telugu Vandalism

message: The user 124.123.128.162 / 124.123.44.147 has been frequently making changes to various articles even though references have been provided. 
The user 124.123.128.162 / 124.123.44.147 is hereby warned that I will get his IP address banned if his vandalism continues.
--= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 11:08, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: Someone please clarify for me the distinction between the terms "Madurai" and "Madura"? 
Does the first refer only to the city and the second to the entire region? Or is the first the more modern term and the second the more ancient? Or are they co-extensive, and used interchangeably?
--Kessler 23:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Madurai is the correct usage for the town of Madurai and the district. Madura is the anglisized name and should not be used to refer to the current town in Tamil Nadu as it is confused with the north Indian town of the same name of the Javanese territory of Madura - Parthi 01:59, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Madurai" vs. "Madura" ? 

message: Madurai Naickers were Tamils. The evidences showing them as Telugu guys were all fabricated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.94.200.29 (talk) 08:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tamil Naickers

message: In your enthusiasm to establish Madurai Naickers as Telugus you have gone to the extent of attaching caste lebels to them. It seems you are more interested in the caste of Naicker kings rather than their role in Tamil Nadu history. Restrain your casteist attitude. For your information, Periyar was a Kannada speaking Naicker. He himself said so in many meetings. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.94.200.182 (talk) 17:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Misplaced enthusiasm

message: If someone is arguing that Nayak kings  were of Tamil origin( which is far from truth) what is wrong in mentioning the caste name and family names of Nayak kings to give authenticity to the fact that they  were of Telugu origin . Mentioning  Telugu  caste names such as  Balija Naidu and some Telugu family names  would  give credence to prove that  Nayak kings   were  not of Tamil  origin.For this smearing with caste color is highly unwarranted.By the way EV Ramaswami Naicker was Balija Naidu and could speak Tamil,Kannada and Telugu.
==Telugu Nayaks==
Madurai Nayaks were Telugu Balija Nayaks. See the evidence on talk page of Kapu (caste). This fact should be mentioned in the text in a subtle manner citing references. I would appreciate if Users with proper Login ID do this exercise.Kumarrao 13:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Truth

message: Madurai Nayaks were Telugu Balija Nayaks. See the evidence on talk page of Kapu (caste). This fact should be mentioned in the text in a subtle manner citing references. I would appreciate if Users with proper Login ID do this exercise.Kumarrao 13:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Telugu Nayaks

message: I have been seeing some peculiar phenomenon in Madurai Nayak article recently. Few times I  saw reference numbers  with arrows  near Balija name and other times not as they  were removed by some people.  I believe some contributors did good job  in  digging  out the information on Madurai Nayaks and putting  the reference numbers with arrows to make it easy for the readers to look for the information on Madurai Nayaks . Numbers with arrows would facilitate the people to go over some  information in  the books  "Mughal State" by Muzaffar Alam,"Tidings of the King " by Phillip Wagoner and "Vijayanagar history" by K.A.Nilakanta Sastry.  But by curtly removing  these numbers with arrows on the grounds of speculative caste claims and caste crap  is not going to help the reader.More over keeping these numbers and arrows intact would not only help looking for the information  with ease but also would clear the speculations  or doubts anybody would have on the subject matter.
== Possible Vandalism ==
There seems to be a case of possible vandalism. I think that in future it is best to leave out the caste factor of the people in question, as it is very much disputed. Thank You. --AltruismTo talk 12:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why to remove the reference numbers?

message: There seems to be a case of possible vandalism. I think that in future it is best to leave out the caste factor of the people in question, as it is very much disputed. Thank You. --AltruismTo talk 12:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Vandalism 

message: Reference  numbers that appeared near Balija community in " Madurai Nayak dynasty" article are very informative  about the origin of  this  Telugu dynasty. It is not wrong to mention the  very truth  that Garikepati Viswanatha Naidu of Balija caste was the founder of Madurai Nayak dynasty as the   genuine books say. But what is wrong is  the  erasing of  the genuine information on Madurai Nayaks with genuine references  and resorting to   the distortion  of  the  sur name   "Garikepati " and insertion   of  some other name in its place . It is   hoped that one  would  respect the genuine authentic  information  of others and would not replace it with one's  agenda  driven material and blame the others  of possible vandalism.
== Response to some self-styled expert's comments ==
I see that some unqualified editors, are deeply possessive of some reference numbers, which lend support to their vested claims and self-gratification. Since, the caste here, is riddled with ambiguity, I suggested that it would be wise, in the first place, to not include it, at all. But the editor (s) in question  go on not only to create an aura of certainity around the caste, but also painstakingly add references very convenient to them. It is perhaps unknown to these users that credible sources, only could be cited, not those pieces which appease and glorify a section. Its even worse to label some of these specimens as "genuine books."
Its no doubt very easy for one to claim that, the information being added, is genuine, contrary to the claims of the majority. Agendas could be had only by vandals, who are hell-bent on driving home the point. The font size speaks volumes on that front.--AltruismTo talk 09:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Double standard

message: I see that some unqualified editors, are deeply possessive of some reference numbers, which lend support to their vested claims and self-gratification. Since, the caste here, is riddled with ambiguity, I suggested that it would be wise, in the first place, to not include it, at all. But the editor (s) in question  go on not only to create an aura of certainity around the caste, but also painstakingly add references very convenient to them. It is perhaps unknown to these users that credible sources, only could be cited, not those pieces which appease and glorify a section. Its even worse to label some of these specimens as "genuine books."
Its no doubt very easy for one to claim that, the information being added, is genuine, contrary to the claims of the majority. Agendas could be had only by vandals, who are hell-bent on driving home the point. The font size speaks volumes on that front.--AltruismTo talk 09:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Response to some self-styled expert's comments 

message: 1. I have been advising for long that 65.24.145.57 should create a Username, User page etc. and participate in Wiki.
2. Earlier, I added some references (which 65.24.145.57 copiously quotes now) which point out that the Madurai Nayaks were probably of Balija origin. 
3. Surnames quoted by 65.24.145.57 are also common to Kamma and Raju communities of A.P.,
4. The caste affiliation of Thanjavur nayaks is not clearly known. They were sworn enemies of Madurai nayaks.
5. I am not very certain about Kandy nayaks. Marital alliances with Madurai nayaks cannot be an evidence for caste affinities. 
6. Musunuri nayaks were kammas and there were ample evidences.
7. Instead of prominently talking about caste in the Introduction, a subtle mention with a citation can be made in the text that follows.
8. I ventured earlier to edit 'Kapu caste' article, which is in a terrible shape, and backed out because of abuse and slander.
9. 65.24.145.57 should focus on Wikifying 'Kapu Caste' article and make it more presentable. Kumarrao 05:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Advice

message: 1.Unqualified editors ,self-styled experts ,vandals, and users not knowing how to cite credible sources :  usage of all this against  other  contributors with sarcasm   is rather far fetched and the contributors at least deserve  minimal courtesy.
2. Whosoever are  the contributors   of the reference numbers of   Madurai nayak dynasty article  ,they should be  lauded    for enlightening  others  on the origin of Madurai Nayaks.It is rather  preposterous to ridicule the contributors of these reference   numbers as if they did not know how to  cite  credible  sources.  Though they are  disparaged as using   "specimens" to glorify a section   one can not underestimate the impeccability of these rare books.
 
4.Kandy Nayaks were descendents of Madurai Nayaks. Kandy Nayak  Chinthalapuri Vijaya Bhupala Naidu's(Lakshmana Simha Vijaya Palana Raju's) sister was married to Garikepati Kumara Krishnappa Naidu(son of Garikepati Viswanatha Naidu) of Madurai dynasty.
Madurai king Garikepati Thirumala Naidu was married to one of the family members of Thanjavur king Alluri Sevappa Naidu.One of the family members of last king of Thanjavur ,Chengamala Dasu was married to the king of Kandy.
==Viswanatha Nayudu==
The name of Viswanatha's father was Adapa China Nagama Nayudu, the carrier of royal betel-bag. Adapa is a surname found in Kamma and Telaga castes of A.P., How can the surname of Viswanatha could be Garikapati (prevalent inmany castes)?
See this page: http://ia300235.us.archive.org/0/items/FurtherSourcesOfVijayanagaraHistory/HTML/00000148.htm
Seems the matter is controversial.Kumarrao 12:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RESPONSE TO TWO-PRONG ONSLAUGHT  

message: The name of Viswanatha's father was Adapa China Nagama Nayudu, the carrier of royal betel-bag. Adapa is a surname found in Kamma and Telaga castes of A.P., How can the surname of Viswanatha could be Garikapati (prevalent inmany castes)?
See this page: http://ia300235.us.archive.org/0/items/FurtherSourcesOfVijayanagaraHistory/HTML/00000148.htm
Seems the matter is controversial.Kumarrao 12:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Viswanatha Nayudu

message: In recent months some members have made pompous and bombastic claims over the Caste origins of the Madurai Nayak Kings and Queens. The Caste in question is the Nayyakar and Nayudu or Naidu title, which is used by three different Communities of Telugu speaking population.The claimants also keeps pointing out to various resources to support their theory. But they have to understand that even British records were sometimes not accurate in classification and description of various castes.Fine,if any of them wants to claim all these Kings and Queen as their long gone kin, then Wikipedia is not the page for such silly disputes, rather they put them on their own or other free servers.
The Intention of this wikipage/article is to provide a brief history of these rulers who made quite an impact on the regions they ruled and is still felt in these regions. Also their reign marked massive immigrations to their region,large lands brought under cultivation, coastal trade with European rulers and later events eventually leading to the British setting their foot in Chennai. More important happening in their reign was the re-construction and new establishment of Religious monuments, which were severely damaged by Muslim rulers.
Hence it seems totally Ludicrous, when someone keeps continually bragging in vanity, that he belongs to his or so and so caste. And the moment these claims fill the early pages, then any reader would loose interest and view the article with suspicion.
Enough said,if caste wars are not to be waged in wiki pages.
Southernstar 07:44, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Caste claims of Madurai Nayaks

message: We could always mention the controversy and mentioned existing evidence for and against. Provided we have academic sources concerning the dispute. Dimadick 09:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversial

message: Those who can follow Telugu language please see the following  Kotikam kaifiath as to the origin of Madurai dynasty founder Garikepati Viswanatha Naidu of Balija caste.
"Sreemanmahaa mandaleshwara Achyuthadeva mahaaraayalayya vaaru daivaprasaada labdavasaath chethanu karunathogoodi BALIJA VARNA GARIKEPAATI VAMSAMUNA KALGINA SREE SREE VISWANAATHA NAAYAKA gaariki Paandya mandalaadhiraju ane rendunnara koti dravya Raajyaanku  saasrokthamugaa pattaabhishekam Vijayanagaramandu cheyinchiri".
I am glad  that Kumarrao   at least agrees that Madurai king Viswanatha Naidu  belonged  to Balija caste  according to his quote in the talk page in Telugu Cholas,  which says " Nagama Nayak and his son Viswanatha Nayak were Balija merchants. The father was the royal mace-bearer and the son was betel-bearer in Vijayanagar court. Both impressed the king with their loyalty and obedience. This information is available in two well-known historical books on Vijayanagar. Every Telugu should be proud of these Nayaks. The contributions of Tirumala Nayak, descendent of Viswanatha, are simply magnificent".Kumarrao 12:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is some evidence to show that Madurai Nayaks were of Balija descent. However, that does not hold good with Thanjavur Nayaks. One has to be dispassionate in accepting the truth rather than being driven by bias.Kumarrao (talk) 04:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: TRUTH

message: Yes,they were!  If one accepts this very truth one  should not be branded as having  bias.After all truth is truth !  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.81.203.17 (talk) 00:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: LIKE MADURAI AND KANDY NAYAKS  THANJAVUR NAYAKS WERE BALIJA NAIDUS TOO

message: Lineage and surname of Viswanatha were given with supporting evidences. It is frivolous to mention the caste multiple times, hence, edited.Kumarrao (talk) 13:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Editing

message: Matla( Matli) Rajulu of Pottapi Chola  descendents (Kadapa) of Balija caste had  matrimonial alliances with  Sadasiva Raya,the  nephew  of Achyuthadevaraya of Vijayanagar dynasty.The relationships of the other dynasties are well known.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.195.193.226 (talk) 21:07, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is undisputable that Madurai Nayaks were Balijas. I incorporated this info with sources. There is no need to mention this fact again and again and spoil the academic nature of the article.Kumarrao (talk) 07:57, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  VIJAYANAGAR, THANJAVUR, MADURAI, KANDY  AND MATLA  RAJAS WERE INTERRELATED 

message: Balija is not chatrya community they where similar to chetayar in tamil
Just because experienced editors like Kumarrao and Altruism quoted sources by Telugu authors and asked for solid proofs stating that the Nayaks of Madurai and Tanjore were Balija Naidus,a few casteist minds have gone about posting multiple sources for the same without any of them being convincing for the following reasons:
1.These sources say Vijayanagar Kings are Balijas which is not true.There are enough sources saying that the Sangama dynasty were Kurubas,the Saluva dynasty were Boyars,the Tuluva dynasty were Bunts and the Aravidu dynasty were Rajus.
2.The surname of Madurai Kings is mentioned as Garikepati.Most of the sources in the Vijayanagara pages mention the surname as Kotikam.
3.It is known that Kandy Nayaks were descendants of Madurai Nayaks.The sources say the surname of Kandy Nayaks is Chintalapuri which is unlikely.
4.I read somewhere that Tanjore and Madurai kings claimed to be descendants of Kshatriyas having the Kasyapa Gotra.Here its mentioned that they claim a descent from the Banas of Kolar.
Other than the above stated reasons,I feel the article could be improved further but these casteists are more interested in going on proving that the Nayaks were Balijas than expanding the article.
Raghavan(Talk) 02:53, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kalahasthi kings were of balija origin

message: There are several evidences to point out that Madura Nayaks were of Kammavar nayakar descent. There is no need for elaborate arguments in this respect. Same thing cannot be said with certainty about Thanjavur Nayaks although cetain Users are emotional about this issue. The books they refer in this regard only contain some speculative sentences. We got to be objective while discussing history.Kumarrao (talk) 16:04, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Identity

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Madurai Nayak dynasty. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051202102715/http://historion.net/r.sewell-vijayanagar-history-india/ to http://historion.net/r.sewell-vijayanagar-history-india/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:02, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Repeated Vandalism by Durjaya vamsam, Palegar Deepak P Nayak, Tivok, SHK7, 106.76.224.153, 157.51.74.252, and 2401:4900:16bf:54c2:48c8:e963:f1bc:3dbc. Suspect sock-puppets. Request the page to be locked. --Kammanati (talk) 10:09, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: User:Koronerman User:MaterialsScientist User:Flyer22 User:Cullen328
Social origins of a dynasty is an important piece of historical information that deserves mentioning.
Take any standard work of history, whether it be works of Richard Eaton and John F Richards regarding history of south India ,  the social backgrounds of the ruling dynasty and its nobility are prominently mentioned.
However I'm at a loss to understand  @koronerman motivations to undo these particular edits :
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/977026183
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/976981989
The sentence added in these edits indicate the social origins of the Madurai nayaks and provide atleast 3 references to that effect.
I believe it's highly inappropriate to leave such information out without a proper explanation.  For instance in the second edit by @Koronerman,  the simple reason give was that it was "irrelevant". 
I propose adding of the social references back to the article and hope other editors, especially @Koronerman have strong reasons to not to do so and would hope they could provide their reasons in this thread. Psi93 (talk) 18:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Inexplicable removal of referenced statements regarding social origins of the Madurai nayaks

message: There has been a trend observed where the newly joined  has been reversing the edits of previous users with no proper explanation provided.
For instance please see these edits, where Koronerman removed statements that have been corroborated by atleast 3 references :
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/977122167
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/977034248
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/976854823
Interestingly here Koronerman removed the same content that HE regarded as irrelevant, but instead of the usual one liner that it's irrelevant he chose to use the excuse of no edit summary : 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/976532304
I'm not alone on noticing this.  Koronerman's vandalism have also been reverted by two other users with same concerns. 
The edit by  :
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/975992227
And here is the edit by  :
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/976533408
This totally against the collaborative spririt that's the foundation of the wiki project and it's requested the admins look into this and stop any edits to the information regarding social origins by Koronerman or any user unless it's thoroughly discussed on the talk page Psi93 (talk) 06:02, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inexplicable edits and suspected vandalism by Koronerman