Talk:Carnatic music/Archive 4

message: Often some editors claim that they are experts in a particular topic. Those editors should fully disclose the verifiable proof of their expertise on their users page as done by many Wikipedia's highly respected editors and admns. Otherwise only their comments supported by authentic, verifiable  and non-weasel references can be considered.  Also just a seniority in editing a particular article is not a proof of expertise on new valid issues. 
Naadapriya (talk) 17:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authority claims by some editors 

message: Please read all existing discussions in detail before you make comments so that editors already contributed with supporting evidences do not have to repeat the information again and againNaadapriya (talk) 19:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  SINCERE REQUEST TO NEWCOMERS TO THIS DISCUSSION 

message: Need to add to article: etymology of "Carnatic"/"karṇāṭaka". Most Tamil Carnatic musicians claim the term is not derived from Karnataka but is an indigenous Tamil word meaning "homeland" or something similar. Badagnani (talk) 21:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep your arguements in lower case. Its against wiki policy to write in uppercase because thats equivalent to "shouting".Dineshkannambadi (talk) 12:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I fully agree with the usage of "carnatic" as a region covering southern India, because perhaps thats how the British saw it. What I meant was, claiming that the term Karnataka in Karnataka Sangeeta Shastra comes from a Tamil word may be pure conjecture and needs to be proven with historical, literary and epigraphal evidence. Just pulling up a Tamil dictionary, finding a few words in it that resemble Karnataka and claiming that Karnataka comes from that is unacceptable. Musicians are not history experts, nor do they have indepth knowledge of epigraphy. Its a different story if historians like K.A.N. Sastri or epigraphists like I Mahadevan make that claim based on field studies and are backed by various other researchers to satisfy WP:UNDUE. Dineshkannambadi (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But such evidence isn't always enough. The WP:UNDUE principle would work in many instances (especially where things can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, like the Earth example). Epigraphy can be much more complex, and much less certain - especially in this instance where researchers could probably just as easily rebutt one's research with their own. There is no absolute certainty on this topic, and it is little wonder why no truely reliable and verifiable source on this genre of music, goes into the topic of etymology. Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Historians dont make it a habit to rebut research of others for they have to worry about their own repuation also, which is why the concept of "popular theory exists".Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ...yet, research in very obscure areas, like the one that is being discussed, often results in conflicting theories and one cannot be ascertained (with certainty) as the popular one. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very important -- etymology 

message: While "Carnatic music" is the most common rendering of the name of this tradition in English, "Karnatak music" and "Karnatik music" are also seen. Badagnani (talk) 08:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. Feel free to add it right away. Ncmvocalist (talk) 12:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Just because it was made common by a specific group it can not change the fact that the original name is 'Karnataka Music'. It is in continous use since its birth by all music scholars, even as of Feb 10, 2008 by the scholars of presigious Mysore University while confeering a honorary doctorate degree to a famous Karnataka musician Dr Bala Murali Krisna. This issue is smilar to the fact that no one wants to call the city Chennai as Madras anymore though it was most commonly used wrong name for a long time. The original names if got changed due to wrong reasons should be brought back on sites such as Wikipedia whose purpose is to state accurate facts.Naadapriya (talk) 19:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I Think you would find this interesting. Actually, I am more used to the term Karnataka music than Karnatak music, even in scholarly books on music. , , , , . This are just a few examples. Many more are available with a simple google search and I dont think the authors are discussing "Music in Karnataka" but rather Carnatic music.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Lets go one link at at a time,
*Link #1 -->talks about Kuchipudi, a dance form in Kerela state and is not written by Kannadigas
*Link #2 -->starts the paragraph with Bharata Muni, the sage accredited with writing the early treatises but the content is too complex for me. You would find Bharata muni writen about both on Carnatic music and Bharatanatyam pages.
*Link 3--> All the music forms discussed (pg 157-159) are from Carnatic music and are on the current article (Kriti, Pallavi etc)
*Link 4--> Discusses interactions between Karnataka music with Kuchipudi (from Kerela)
*Link 5--->Is a tribute by Dr. Rajendra Prasad (1st. President of India) who calls Tyagaraja (from Tamil Nadu, who composed in Telugu language) as one among the great composers of Karnataka music.  On the curren aticle, Tyagaraja is listed as one among the Trinity of Carnatic music.
Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your great expertise. I see now that this terminology seems to be used by at least some Indians writing in the English language. I suggest an "Etymology" section presenting various sources to show which terms have been used--where and when (i.e., which terms have been used in the Western world, and by whom, and when the shift began from "Carnatic" to "Karnatak," as well as which terms have been used in India). Badagnani (talk) 21:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ""Karnataka music" is not commonly used (and in fact I have never seen this spelling) in the English-speaking world." - No.  "Karnataka music" is quite commonly used by academia and scholars in the English-speaking world.  R. Satyanarayana and N Ramanathan (of TamilNadu and Dean/Principal (former?) of the Madras Music College) are just two of many scholars who use "Karnataka music" in their works (english works).  Several universities in India offer diplomas in "Karnataka music".  Sarvagnya 22:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text: As stated above, "I see now that this terminology seems to be used by at least some Indians writing in the English language." The term isn't widely used in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, or South Africa. Badagnani (talk) 22:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I appreciate knowing that. The question is, however, which Latinized form has been used where, when, and by whom (especially notable scholars). This should be addressed, with sources, in an "Etymology" section of the article. Badagnani (talk) 00:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Can Sarvagnya help in writing an etymology section here with solid citations for each variant name and perhaps an explanation how and why the names have changed and when? Better yet, the content of the section should be a combined effort. But first we need critical citations, as Badagnani said, which are the important sources and persons who use different names for the same music.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 12:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Do not remove Karnatak. This discussion page is used for a reason. We laboriously found that "Karnatak" is used by most Wetsern scholars of Carnatic music using the English language. Blanking it was wrong. Badagnani (talk) 21:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Badagnani that "Karnatak" is used very commonly, but so is "Karnataka". I am mystified myself why Badagnani seems to be hesitant with this etymology. Why should only western scholars matter? As a matter of fact, I have provided several western scholars who use the term "Karnataka music". But my concern is that Badagnani, unintentionally, may have made up his mind that "Karnataka music" refers to "music in modern Karnataka state" though I  given various examples to the contrary. I really think we need to conclude on this simple issue. I however, appreciate Badagnani's timely and sincere appraoch to this whole mess.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Badagnani - If you want "Karnatak".. keep it.  That however is no reason to remove "Karnataka".  While on that, you may also want to add "Karnatic" as a variant (spelling).  That however, still doesnt take care of why you removed the part about anglicisation.  Whatever may be the etymology, "Carnatic music" (term) is an anglicisation of "Karnataka Sangeetha(m)"(term) where Karnataka transforms to "Carnatic" (by way of anglicisation) and Sangeetha(m) transforms (by way of simple translation) to "music".  The etymology section when it comes up will clear up the issue about what the "Karnataka" in "Karnataka Sangeetha(m)" refers to - the state of Karnataka or something else.  Sarvagnya 22:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

text: "Karnataka music," as our evidence shows, has been used in English by scholars in India (mostly) to refer to the tradition of South Indian classical music, as well as a handful of Europeans. It can be added. But not at the expense of blanking the more widely used "Karnatak," which is used by most of the primary Western scholars of this music writing in English. Badagnani (talk) 22:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

text: We still need an "Etymology" section, presenting the origin of the term (and debunking the claim that "Karnataka music" refers only to music from the modern state of Karnataka). Although we know this claim to be incorrect, many people may believe it, as it seems intuitive that this would be the case. Badagnani (talk) 22:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I really dont think  anywhere in literature we are going to find a claim "debunking" as you expect. It just takes more familiarity with the subject thats all. And Yes, Carnatic music is an English version of the original name "Karnataka Sangeeta". I dont think anyone will disagree on that.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Precisely.  The notion that "Carnatic" = all four states of southern India" is a product of the British period.  And in all the reading that I've done about this subject, I havent come across anything that would suggest that the art has been known by other names or what those other names were.  In fact, if memory serves me right, I've even read somewhere that "Karnataka sangeetha" has been a term that has been in use since Vidyaranya's Sangita Sara (13th century).  I am not sure and I will need to look it up and reconfirm it before I can add it to the article.  "Karnataka" itself is a term that goes much much further back than the 13th CE.   That said, the line that we'll find a ref to "debunk" the claim comes across to me as a bit uninformed. Sarvagnya 22:57, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternate spellings 

message: Badagnani, it is beyond me what the problem is with "Karnataka" as opposed to Karnatik or Karnatak?  Also, would you please explain what you find offensive or inaccurate in the statement that "carnatic music" is an anglicisation of "Karnataka sangeetha" and that Karnatak, Karnatik etc., are spelling variants of "Carnatic". Sarvagnya 21:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do not remove Karnatak. This discussion page is used for a reason. We laboriously found that "Karnatak" is used by most Wetsern scholars of Carnatic music using the English language. Blanking it was wrong. Badagnani (talk) 21:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Badagnani that "Karnatak" is used very commonly, but so is "Karnataka". I am mystified myself why Badagnani seems to be hesitant with this etymology. Why should only western scholars matter? As a matter of fact, I have provided several western scholars who use the term "Karnataka music". But my concern is that Badagnani, unintentionally, may have made up his mind that "Karnataka music" refers to "music in modern Karnataka state" though I  given various examples to the contrary. I really think we need to conclude on this simple issue. I however, appreciate Badagnani's timely and sincere appraoch to this whole mess.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Badagnani - If you want "Karnatak".. keep it.  That however is no reason to remove "Karnataka".  While on that, you may also want to add "Karnatic" as a variant (spelling).  That however, still doesnt take care of why you removed the part about anglicisation.  Whatever may be the etymology, "Carnatic music" (term) is an anglicisation of "Karnataka Sangeetha(m)"(term) where Karnataka transforms to "Carnatic" (by way of anglicisation) and Sangeetha(m) transforms (by way of simple translation) to "music".  The etymology section when it comes up will clear up the issue about what the "Karnataka" in "Karnataka Sangeetha(m)" refers to - the state of Karnataka or something else.  Sarvagnya 22:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

text: "Karnataka music," as our evidence shows, has been used in English by scholars in India (mostly) to refer to the tradition of South Indian classical music, as well as a handful of Europeans. It can be added. But not at the expense of blanking the more widely used "Karnatak," which is used by most of the primary Western scholars of this music writing in English. Badagnani (talk) 22:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

text: We still need an "Etymology" section, presenting the origin of the term (and debunking the claim that "Karnataka music" refers only to music from the modern state of Karnataka). Although we know this claim to be incorrect, many people may believe it, as it seems intuitive that this would be the case. Badagnani (talk) 22:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I really dont think  anywhere in literature we are going to find a claim "debunking" as you expect. It just takes more familiarity with the subject thats all. And Yes, Carnatic music is an English version of the original name "Karnataka Sangeeta". I dont think anyone will disagree on that.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Precisely.  The notion that "Carnatic" = all four states of southern India" is a product of the British period.  And in all the reading that I've done about this subject, I havent come across anything that would suggest that the art has been known by other names or what those other names were.  In fact, if memory serves me right, I've even read somewhere that "Karnataka sangeetha" has been a term that has been in use since Vidyaranya's Sangita Sara (13th century).  I am not sure and I will need to look it up and reconfirm it before I can add it to the article.  "Karnataka" itself is a term that goes much much further back than the 13th CE.   That said, the line that we'll find a ref to "debunk" the claim comes across to me as a bit uninformed. Sarvagnya 22:57, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Redux

message: I see that this article has hit a road block due to two reasons. The first being an experienced user:Ncmvocalist who may have taken ownership of the article and is aggressively using questionable web sites to prove very important theories. The second reason is, a possible new user user:Naadapriya, who may have useful information, from reliable sources regarding the topic, but has failed (perhaps in haste and inexperience)  to generate a cohesive, well cited paragraph explaining why Carnatic music is only an English version of  "Karnataka music" (which we know is a fairly popular name used by scholars from across South India). But being a newcomer, he may still be in the process of learning how to bring data to the table, build concensus and give full citations. I really think his data should be given room for examination instead of trying to suffocate him out. All this may be frustrating the user:Naadapriya who seems to be at his wits end about it.
The need of the hour is to take the article back to where it was before the reverting started, examine each issue one by one or in conjunction, prove validity of citations, especially while claiming origins, which is naturally the most sensitive topic and hardest to prove.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need of the Hour 

message: I've wasted weeks pointing out the obvious nonsense in the above paragraph (and other assorted nonsense) before.  Let us do it one more time.  Here we go - 
According to some scholars,[4] ... -  classic weasel .  not to mention that [4] is non-RS.
ancient Tamil music is a source from which Carnatic music is derived as both styles of music share certain unique classical music concepts... - that is a paraphrase of what the non-RS [4] says.  Neither Sambamurthy nor any other sources go that far.
The concept of Pann is considered to be a precursor to the Raga system in Carnatic music,[9] [10] -  oh really?  Lets see what Sambamurthy says - 
Sambamurthy says (if the cherry picked sources are to be believed) -
1. The pans of the Thevaram are historically old ragas (page 91);  - the panns of the Tevaram??  The very verses dating from the 8th or 10th(or later) AD?  Or were there some Thevarams before even Bharata's natya shastra(2nd-4th BC) or even Matanga's Brhaddesi(7-8th CE) which give us the earliest descriptions of Ragas were penned?  Or the Ramayana and Mahabharata which have references to "Raga".. or the Sama Veda (Sama gana) which by common consensus is the 'precursor' to modern Indian classical music and all its technical baggage.
2. It is in the pans of the Thevaram that we first come across full-fledged bhashanga ragas" (page 91); - thevaram again!
3. "The pans of Tevaram are all jiva ragas"(page 92)”  - and again!
So what is Sambamurthy talking about when he talks of the panns of the thevaram.  I will tell you.  He's simply pointing out in passing, as academically as he can, the similarities between the two systems.  That doesnt mean the Carnatic raga owes anything to the pann!  For that matter, musicologists routinely throw in tidbits about the similarities between all the musical traditions of the world.  That doesnt mean we conclude that Indian music gave birth to the music of Timbuktu or vice-versa!  
So, can someone explain to me how one arrived at "Pann is considered to be a precursor to the Raga system in Carnatic music,.." from 1, 2 and 3 above?
And in any event, Sambamurthy's allusions to the panns belong (after careful and critical study of its meaning and context) in the Raga article.  Not here.
"...while the rhythmic meters found in several musical forms (such as the Tiruppugazh) and other ancient literature, resemble the talas that are in use today.[11][12]..."
Ohh.. now we cut to the Arunagirinathar's 15th century!!  15th century - 3 full centuries after Sharngadeva's encyclopaediac Sangita Ratnakara!...(not to mention, Vidyaranya's Sangita sara).  And we are to believe that the theory of the Tala was still waiting for its 'precursor'(?)!  And pray, what is that thing about "...and other ancient literature..."?!!  Would someone bother spelling out?
Given the amount of bad faith weaseling and the out of context twisting of cherry picked sound bites that has gone into putting that paragraph together, the authors of that para and those who are edit warring to keep it, owe us an explanation.  Mere "rv removal of cited information" is not going to fly. Sarvagnya 00:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:SYN |Synthesis]], [[WP:WEASEL |weaseling]] and what not! 

message: *The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians - "Karnatak."
*David Nelson - "Karnatak."
*David Reck - "Carnatic"
*T. Temple Tuttle - "Karnatic."
*Barbara Benary - "Karnatic."
*Matthew Allen - "Karnatak."
*Bruno Nettl - "Carnatic."
*Michael S. Kinnear - "Karnatic."
*Linda Fujie - "Carnatic."
*Daniel M. Neuman - "Karnatak."
*Philip V. Bohlman - "Karnatak."
*David P. McAllester - "Carnatic"/"Karnataka."
*Kelly Boyle - "Karnatic."
*Bonnie Wade - "Karnatak"/"Carnatic."
*Rolf Groesbeck - "Carnatic."
*Trichy Sankaran - "Karnatak."
Badagnani (talk) 03:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources: Western scholars

message: I took the liberty of fixing the Sanskrit of YjS 3.115, but I'm curious where the original mangled version came from, because the English translation seems unsourced too: the reference given has something else (besides lacking the Sanskrit).  This google search shows only one site that doesn't show a clear dependency on this WP article, and it too has a different English version (which is wrong because the verb niyacchati is 3rd person singular - the nominatives all apply to the same person, not three different ones).  Anyway, here is a literal analysis in case a translation can't be properly sourced:
; vīṇā-vādana-tattva-jñaḥ
veena-musician-essence-knowing (= one who knows the essence of being a veena player)
; śruti-jāti-viśāradaḥ 
sruti-jati-skilled/experienced (= one who is skilled in sruti and jati)
; tāla-jñaḥ ca aprayās(ena) 
tala-knowing also no-effort(by) (= and one who knows tala, effortlessly)
; mokṣa-mārgaṃ niyacchati
moksha-way/path binds/rules/controls (= ?)
The point here is that the verb niyacchati has the same root as the noun niyama (rule, restriction, discipline), so words to the effect of "effortlessly attains bliss" aren't as close to the meaning as something like "effortlessly masters the path of bliss". rudra (talk) 02:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  YajnavalkyaSmriti quote 

message: The N in Carnatic has been represented as retroflex in some scripts, and as non-retroflex in other scripts. It is actually not retroflex. --Masatran (talk) 12:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is retroflex in Sanskrit, where you almost never see -karn-, only -karṇ-.  Malayalam also uses a retroflex (actually, a doubled retroflex karṇṇāṭaka). It isn't retroflex in Kannada, Tamil or Telugu. -- Arvind (talk) 21:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The N in Carnatic is not retroflex 

message: Please review this new section and add your corrections/comments say within 2 weeks before it can be sent to Admn to include in the article. Please support your comments with valid references.
----
Ugaabogas 
Is integral part of Karnataka  Music concert where the artist elaborates the treatment of raga characteristics through lyric based freestyle 'Ugaabogas'. .
It is item of Krithi that Sri Purandara Daasa introduced in 15th Century CE when he laid out the format for Carnatic music. Later it led to lyric less freestyle rendering of raga known as allapane (discussed later). Ugaabogas are common in popular concerts attended both by connoisseurs and non- connoisseurs of music. Most of the Ugaabogas are composed in Kannada by Purandara Daasa and Kanaka Dasa. Recently in 19th century CE similar concepts are also introduced in Tamil  by Papanasam Sivan . Ugaabogas are attractive for those who may not understand the nuances of raga as they pay attention to meaningful lyrics. Lyrics of Ugaabogas contain either devotional or philosophical topics.  They are rendered sometimes with rhythm (tala)  similar to allap with Tala in Hindustani music. In modern days it was made popular in concerts by Karnataka music doyens such as M. L. Vasanthakumari.  Artists such as Sudha Ragunathan, Vidhyabhusana  Shri Vidyabhushana Archived Lecture Devotional Kritis in Kannada of Haridasa  Tradition, KZSU Stanford University 90.1 FM radio show, http://www.itsdiff.com/Kannada.html  continuing this important aspect of Carnatic music. 
----
Thanks in advance for your constructive feed backNaadapriya (talk) 00:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This book I have often referred to may be useful to you (pages 190-200). It has some basic definitions of the types of Kirtanes etc. invented by Purandaradasa and Kanakadasa. It does mention the Ugabhogas. You can do a google search for this book and access these pages.
*
thanks, Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:07, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the information on useful reference. I will extract the information and include it in the revised text along with reference.Naadapriya (talk) 08:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Naadapriya, while you are at this topic, please seriously consider cleaning, building up the individual pages on Purandara Dasa and Kanaka Dasa, with citations and references. These two pages are in dire need of cleanup and polish.ThanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 11:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the suggestion. Yes I will give a try. Currently I am trying to work on fixing major errors that I observed in articles that Karnataka Music and Bhratanatya are REDIRECTED toNaadapriya (talk) 06:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New section on Ugaabogas needed for the article 

message: Mallari (some type of rhythmic composition played by nagaswaram). Badagnani (talk) 06:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New page needed 

message: The following new subsection was posted on discussion page as of March 16th 2008. To date it has received positive response and no oppositions. Please include this in the article after subsection after '# 6.4 Tala system'. 
----
Ugaabogas 
Is integral part of Karnataka  Music concert where the artist elaborates the treatment of raga characteristics through lyric based freestyle verses. .
It is item of Krithi that Sri Purandara Daasa introduced in 15th Century CE when he laid out the complete format for pretsent Carnatic music. Later it led to lyric less freestyle rendering of raga known as allapane (discussed later). Ugaabogas are common in popular concerts attended both by connoisseurs and non- connoisseurs of music. Most of the earlier Ugaabogas are composed in Kannada by Purandara Daasa and Kanaka Daasa. Recently in 19th century CE similar concepts are also introduced in Tamil  by Papanasam Sivan . Ugaabogas are attractive for those who may not understand the nuances of raga as they pay attention to meaningful lyrics. Lyrics of Ugaabogas contain either devotional or philosophical topics.  They are rendered sometimes with rhythm (tala)  similar to allap with Tala in Hindustani music. In modern days it was made popular in concerts by Karnataka music doyens such as M. L. Vasanthakumari.  Artists such as Sudha Ragunathan, Vidhyabhushana  Shri Vidyabhushana Archived Lecture Devotional Kritis in Kannada of Haridasa  Tradition, KZSU Stanford University 90.1 FM radio show, http://www.itsdiff.com/Kannada.html  continuing this important aspect of Carnatic music. 
----
ThanksNaadapriya (talk)
:I'm going to unprotect the page; hopefully the disputes over the image have had enough time to settle down. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request to include new section on Ugaabogas

message: What the article needs is a paragraph on the development of carnatic (Karnataka) music in Tamil speaking regions during the time of the "Trinity" in the 18th and 19th century, on the same lines as Mysore court. Just mentioning the Trinity somewhere in the Prominent musicians section does not fully cover the developments. Naadapriya mentioned sometime back about influence of modern Tamil folk music on Carnatic music. This could also be included. Are there any variants from the Telugu and Malayalam speaking regions? If there are, they should be mentioned too. Preferably, the early development from The Vedas should have its own sub-section called "Early development". Starting 12th century perhaps should be sectioned as "Medieval developments" and similarly 17th century onwards could be called "Modern developments".Dineshkannambadi (talk) 18:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: These are good ideas, but there is a separate article entitled Origins and history of Carnatic music, to cover historical issues in detail. Badagnani (talk) 19:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional info needed- A thought 

message: This article has seen edit wars for over an year .Hence feel we should get a neutral person to mediate and solve this.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:12, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Language is not issue for this article. There is no effort to suppress contributions of any language or state. The article does not even emphasize on Kannada language based on which Sri Purandara Dasa founded todays Carnatic Music that the article is addressing. The article is moving towards information based on documented evidences by getting rid of weasels. New editors should read all past discussions.Naadapriya (talk) 05:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I truly support the view of Aadal. All references to the Tamil Carnatic Tradition were completely ignored. Silapattikaram was not even mentioned one time in this article. This is absolutley inacceptable. Here are definitley Anti-Tamil POV pushers on work. Stop this. --Thirusivaperur (talk) 10:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about Carnatic Music of South India not about music of any specific state. There are dedicated articles about how music evolved in each state. No need to burden this article which is already too long with unnecessary information. The article is not ignoring contributions from any state or language. The great human beings who founded and nourished this beautiful art were beyond the barriers of state and language.  Sri Purandara Daasa, the father of Carnatic Music, founded this music for all languages not just for Kannada. Sri Thyagaraja from Tamil Nadu composed music mostly in Telugu.  M. L. Vasanthakumari of Tamilnadu revived Kannada compositions in modern concerts. M S Subbulakshmi of Kannada family promoted Tamil compositions with no bias. Please do not stall the progress of this article by injecting unnecessary language issues. All languages are great. Naadapriya (talk) 15:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: The first three paragraphs (from 'Like all art forms' to 'relevant to Carnatic music today')is based on prehistoric information and may not be of help  to a reader. Therefore it is proposed to replace them with following short paragraph. 
----
Carnatic music has a long history. Some aspects of the beginning of Carnatic music was influenced  by Dravidian, Aryan and possibly Persian musics existed before 15th Century C.E. Vedas also played a role in the development of Carnatic music just like it has influenced all aspects of Indian culture.  
----
Depending on the responses it will be implemented with the help of Admn. Just 'reject' is not a valid answer. Please give reasons. ThanksNaadapriya (talk) 08:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is oversimplified and the English is not good. Badagnani (talk) 08:07, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Consensus is not reached through lack of input. To date, there has been a concern by Badagani, that the sentences you propose are over-simplified. I suggest that you speak to a few editors active with this article (before it was fully protected) and reach an agreement, but at the moment, this request is . Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 12:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

text: I oppose the change.  The change you're suggesting will produce a section which lacks balance, and does not reflect the manner in which the history of Carnatic music is treated in scholarly treatises.  The history of Carnatic music does not begin with the Vijayanagara empire, and no serious scholars treat it as if it does.  Continuing the discussion we started at the end of February under the heading The history section still probably represents the best chance of arriving at any kind of sensible coverage.  -- Arvind (talk) 13:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Let's start with trying to work out a wording for the pre-Vijayanagara period, then move on to the Vijayanagara period, and end with the post-Vijayanagara period.  Even if it's not going to be perfect, let's at least aim for something that'll be better than what we have now.  Is Dinesh still watching this article, and does he have time for this now? -- Arvind (talk) 08:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modification of section on Origins and History

message: Hi, please update the article with the text of Talk:Carnatic music/DOI improvements, in which citations have been tidied by a bot. Smith609 Talk 20:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  DOIs 

message: #Dr. Piero Scaruffi (international author on music books) in the article A Summary on Indian Music: 'The founder of Karnataka style is considered  to be Purandara Daasa'. : 
#Prof VSS Rao- 'Shri Puradara Daasa is known as the pra-pithamaha (founder) of modern Carnatic classical music.' 
#Shri P.N.Krishnamoorthy – Director.  The Sangeetha Vidyalaya 'Purandara Dasa (1484 - 1584) can be said to be the principal founder of the Carnatic system as we know it today.'
#Kamat Research Database : 'The Father of Carnatic Music Composer Purandaradasa (15/16th Century) was a great literary and musical genius. 
#Independent group: 'Shri Purandara Daasa is known as the pra-pithamaha (founder) of modern Carnatic classical music.'   
#In the book 'MS – A Life in Music' by TJS George. New Delhi: HarperCollins, 2005 (4th Impression).-. '... the development of Carnatic music from the times of Purandara Dasa (1480-1564), considered to be the father of the genre' Naadapriya (talk) 07:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's insufficient and mere synthesis - there needs to be supporting evidence and discussion for such a claim. Exceptional claims require exceptional sources, and they are not, nor are most of them reliable. Purandaradasar is indeed known as the father of Carnatic music as far as his formulation of how to teach Carnatic music. However, he did not lay the complete fundamental principles today - several were discovered much later and much earlier. For example, Carnatic music in today's form has been undisputedly most commonly performed through krithis - a form that wasn't even discovered during Purandaradasar's life. Until there's reliable sourcing, it's already been questioned by several users as a red flag. Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Previous comment  is mute since it is pure Original Research statements. Naadapriya (talk) 15:11, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations that state that Sri Purandara Daasa is either father and/or founder of Todays Carnatic Music 

message: As indicated in sections above this, there was no consensus for a variety of edits and proposals made by User:Naadapriya. If such users (who continue to insert these disputed claims) have no intention of bringing this up to a respectable quality in accordance with Wikipedia's core policies, then I will ask for intervention and this article will need to be protected again - please respect the policies of Wikipedia and do not violate them, so that such intervention will not be necessary. 
In particular, Wikipedia has a policy called neutral point of view and certain edits continue to violate this policy, trying to give undue weight. The sourcing continues to be unreliable for this section, with some from devotional singers who have no qualifications in this field. Further, it advances an erroneous notion about ughabhoga being integral. Ughabhoga (a form that Kannada persons assert as being uniquely Kannada) is in fact not integral to a concert, in the same way raga alapana, niraval, kalpana swaram, and ragam thanam pallavi have been. Significant literature supports mentions of the latter 4 forms of improvization, but does not mention a form that is limited to one part of India. This is the same as Viruttams and Slokas which existed even prior to Ughabhogas, and have been acknowledged by other devotional singers too. 
In other words, there are 2 problems. (1) is unreliable sourcing - sourcing is needed from very reliable sources. (2) is undue weight which is why the section has been removed completely, (there's no dispute over raga alapana, niraval, kalpana swaram and ragam tanam pallavi, and the weight it has in Carnatic music and Carnatic concerts). If users continue to insert this contentious material without resolving these issues, intervention will be required. Neutral point of view policy, which entails the section about undue weight on Wikipedia, is of utmost importance as the policy states. Ncmvocalist (talk) 05:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To address the issue of NPOV, and to give it the appropriate amount of weight, these forms have been mentioned in the compositions section. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please do not delete valid information. Music legends such as MLV who made Ugabhoga more popular in  'kacheri' and 'sabas'  of recent years is from TamilNadu. Carnatic music is independent of language. Above POV comments are mute compared to the statements made by scholars in RS given for Ugabhoga. Ugabhoga was well discussed before it was introduced. Please read earlier discussions and avoid going round and round again. Thanks.Naadapriya (talk) 05:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, please respect NPOV. This is undue weight and views need to be represented accordingly. NPOV is a non-negotiable policy - if you have no intention of discussing and continue to violate the policy, I will ask for intervention. Ncmvocalist (talk) 06:44, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Please stop deleting valid edits already well discussed. Added material a  while ago was NPOV based on RS. Please stop making assumptions about your POV as NPOV. Please carefully read RS and earlier discussions.Naadapriya (talk) 07:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Concerns have repeatedly been expressed over your edits - they are not valid and they are not from reliable sources - i.e. peer reviewed journal articles. I am not pushing for a POV whereby undue weight is given to one particular form that is more commonly associated with Devotional music - that's separate to Carnatic music. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Naadapriya, there is no consensus for your edits, period. Again, there is NPOV concerns regarding the undue weight you are putting and addressing this is of utmost importance. There are distinct features that separate the genres of music, which is why many reliable sources (scholarly peer-reviewed journals) identify one as Devotional music, and the other as Carnatic music. It is not called Carnatic devotional music, nor is this an issue of compositions merely being dedicated to God. It is requested you do not continue to violate NPOV and consensus until this is resolved - if you continue to violate this policy, you will be subject to dispute resolution for failing to respect our policies.   Ncmvocalist (talk) 10:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Above POV statements are based on just original research also assuming the ownership of article. Based on it valid a section that included RS (published book with ISBN #) is deleted which is a vandalism.  Naadapriya (talk) 15:06, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually no, very reliable sources (i.e. journal articles) support what I'm saying, otherwise I would not have removed the NPOV vios. With that sort of tendentious argument, I have little choice but to pursue dispute resolution. Are you willing to go through mediation to resolve this? Ncmvocalist (talk) 05:31, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits violating NPOV 

message: Just a warning that you guys are flirting with 3 RR and should consider seeking a third opinion or some other consensus seeking mechanism. --Regents Park (count the magpies) 06:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I second RegentsPark's opinion Mspraveen (talk) 06:24, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've asked Naadapriya if he's willing to try mediation - no response. I guess the next step is just to go straight to RFC? Ncmvocalist (talk) 06:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you believe that there isn't (hasn't been) any response from the contending editor, then RfC is the next step. Mspraveen (talk) 06:32, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree with Regents Park comment. Section on Ugabhoga was introduced a while ago after discussions, help and corrections of many editors. Please read the earlier discussions. Majority of music scholars as per citations accept Sri Purandara Dasa (see section in that article) is the father (founder) of today's Carnatic Music. Published books are RS. Ncmvocalist should have first discussed before deleting a valid section and citations that was already present in the article with consent of many editors. (see past discussions). Therefore it is requested from Ncmvocalist to discuss before making any changes to the valid/edited section and agreed citations.Naadapriya (talk) 06:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Naadapriya, NPOV is one of our most critical policies like BLP policy and you need to stop continually reinserting contentious material which violates these and is particularly against consensus. There is in fact no consent by many editors - several editors have disagreed with its inclusion per those discussions. I'm opening an RFC. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit war warning