Talk:Tamils/Archive 2

message: Arvind, in this section, you seem to have added "Indian Tamils were stripped of their nationality and were forcibly repatriated to India" which is confusing. Where did this happen? Shall I presume in Sri Lanka? --  04:34, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
:I've copyedited that section. Can you check if that version is OK? -- Sundar 08:44, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
::Take a look at .  I've reworded the section a bit more - it was a little too strong. Arvind 11:24, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Indian Tamils were stripped of their nationality?

message: 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)
thread_title:  Cuisine 

message: 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? =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:18, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New revisions

message: 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. =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:31, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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). --- Arvindcurrently on extended wikileave 14:44, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: What?  No serious mention of the politics of caste and class? Of separatism?

message: 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)
replies: text: Have you tried using another browser. Its hard to say where the problem lies. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:01, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

text: 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. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:29, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Tamil fonts 

message: 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  (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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Tamil language 'Crisis' 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text:  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 , 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)
thread_title:  Tamil Population Figures - References??? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Tamil Cultural Differences in Sri Lanka 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Sri Lankan Tamil cuisine 

message: 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)
replies: text: Which among the numbers shall we retain? -- Sundar \talk \contribs 11:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I vote for India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, and Singapore (Canada, South Africa: optional). - Cribananda 01:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: As a first step, I've removed the entries except those mentioned above. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 12:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population numbers proposal 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: Natkeeran, the issue is a dead one now. :) -- Sundar \talk \contribs 06:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Myths surrounding the Tamil people 

message: 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)
thread_title:  "Tamils" and "Tamilians" 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Flag and interwikis 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Martial arts 

message: 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)
thread_title: Language, Ethnicity, and Tamil

message: 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.”  
: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.  Pay close attention to the section on "The African Presence in Asia." deeceevoice 04:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  REMOVE THE AFROCENTRICS QUOTES IN TAMILS PAGES-VANDALISM 

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

message: "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)
replies: text: 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|=ДPaul| 19:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation Needed

message: 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)
replies: text: What part of Jaffna are you from? Wiki Raja 00:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  famous Tamil people 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Special mention of Irulas Only 

message: How come the discrepancy? Trondtr 06:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  70 mill. (body text) or 100 mill (infobox??) 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  What is wrong with Sarvagnya!! 

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

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

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

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

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: This looks excellent.  Thanks, Sundar. -- Arvind 10:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Sikhs ethnically related to Tamils? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Portraits of notable Tamil people on top right corner 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text:  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)
thread_title:  Removal of material and citations

message: 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)
replies: text: I did it myself today. It would be great if someone can provide a picture of the urn burials in TN Taprobanus (talk) 03:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: 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)
thread_title:  Famous Tamilians (or Famous Tamils) 

message: I feel that the image in the infobox should be replaced with a "common man" kind of image for the following reasons:
# Like the question raised in the previous section, there'll be demands to include one person or another.
# A collage is a made-up image and hence stands out as odd instead of being natural.
# The individual pictures used to create might have had various copyright statuses. Not sure of the copyright status of this composite image.
# A gallery of notable people really belongs in List of Tamil people or some such article. In this article the individual images may find a place in a relevant section. Even in sections like arts etc., I favour images of unpopular people so that the focus remains on the subject of the section and not the person.
# Pictures should only be used to illustrate the subject. Of course, if a single big icon is popular, like the Taj Mahal for India, it can be considered. Even inclusion of such icons have been disputed earlier.
If nobody has any objections, I'll replace it with the original 'pair of girls' picture until a better picture can be found. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 11:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it ok to have the picture on the right side in the infobox? -- Sundar \talk \contribs 11:29, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not necessary Sundar.  Other articles contain notable individuals of their community as well.  Also, there are common people images in the article as well.  Perhaps with the exception of one picture in the composite, all are free images.  --Natkeeran (talk) 14:18, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Except the top four, we dont know who the rest are ? Can you give us some names please ? Taprobanus (talk) 15:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Even in the first four images whose names we know 2 of the pictures are not free/ Person #1 and person #4. Because of that the whole collage is in violation. If that is true ofthe first collage what about the second two rows whose names we dont know. This is a featured article, we cannot knowingly violate rules and Wikipedia sa an organization get's in trouble if we use non free images. They should be removed untill we determine the status and replace them with truely free images. For example see Sri Lankan Tamil people, German people & English people. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 16:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

text: I will rollback . Taprobanus (talk) 19:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox image 

message: I'm not very read on the Tamil people, but I met a Sri Lankan Tamil in college who said she left a couple of decades ago in fear for her life, because another ethnic group were hunting down the Tamils. Is there any recorded instance of this? If there is, it should be on this page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.78.247.1 (talk) 20:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Killings

message: Most of this section presents speculation as fact. It needs minimizing or a cleanup. Trips (talk) 09:13, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The section looks like it is well cited and backed by reference. If you have specific concerns, then please point it out explicitly so that we can take a closer look at the reference as well as the claim made. Watchdogb (talk) 12:55, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Going through references, the statements classified as synthesis, and largely concerned material suitable to the Dravidian peoples and languages pages, rather than the Tamil people page. Kumari Kandam was also removed as unsuitable for the prehistory section, as it is only used by the pseudo-historical Tamil nationalist/Dravidian parties as an explanation for the origins of Tamil people. Trips (talk) 07:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You may have a point but better off trying to get consensus befor embarking on such major edits on a Featured article. Taprobanus (talk) 16:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a look at the previous version, and check the citations, the entire content was probably written by a single editor trying to push a viewpoint. Trips (talk) 01:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You have to assume good faith WP:AGF and calm down, no need to get into unnecessary assumptions and get worked up. I added the paragraph on Tamil language speakers not arriving from outside that is to counter balance the argument that previous editors had added as to the outside origin of Tamil speakers. In Wikipedia we provide all points of view provided it is from WP:RS sources and is not WP:FRINGE. The section on Kumari Kandam to me is Fringe but sections on outside origins, indigenous origins and about the burial practices are not. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 12:13, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The prehistoric period section, 

message: A edit-war has erupted over ethnicity of Tamils. For instance, are Iyers and Pallars from the same race? They speak the same tongue. But the similarity ends there. They do not even look alike. Their customs reflect the earlier pre-Tamil baggage. Why is it difficult to understand that the Tamil world is multi-ethnic. Periyar made the same mistake. The Oriental Cham people of Vietnam speak Tamil. Are they Dravidians too? All Tamils are not Dravidians and vice versa. Anwar (talk) 12:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Tamil is an ethno linguistic identity and is fraught with beliefs versus facts. I have tried to diffuse the situation with a different write up. Most Tamils including Iyers, Muslims, Parayars believe that they are Tamils ireepective of their origins, so that has to be the primary sentence about Tamils. Taprobanus (talk) 12:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Unlike other Indian tongues, Tamil spread out of the historical South Asian genepool. It is probably the only Indian tongue spoken (at home) by South East Asian races. For instance, most of the Urdu speakers also tend to be Pathans. Most of the German speakers also tend to be Caucasian. Most of the Chinese speakers also tend to be Han. Most of the Punjabi speakers (in India and Pakistan) also tend to be Indo-Aryans. The article must note this distinguishing trait. Anwar (talk) 17:30, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a non-issue. If you believe Tamil people are multi-ethnic, so is every defined ethnicity in the world. Anwar please stop editing the article, you obviously do not have anything valuable to contribute. Trips (talk) 13:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree Tamil ethinicity in itself is an ethnic identity, multi ethinicity comes after wards when people dig further into it. I know many Muslims and Iyers who have no iota of doubut about their ethnic origin which is Tamil. So we should read artices such as German people which is written from an inclusive point of view. Germans are an ethnic group and that is their primary identity then it follows further below that Germans may have multiple origins Taprobanus (talk) 13:44, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Anwar you had mentioned that Cham Malays speak in Tamil in Vietnam, where did get that information from ?Taprobanus (talk) 22:16, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am a Cham. Anwar (talk) 12:36, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Tamil is an ethnicity of one of many Dravidian aboriginal groups in South Asia. As for different looks of Tamils, just like African Americans, there are those whom are mixed with British, Portuguese, and even Persian and/or Indo-Aryan (for the Iyers, Brahmins etc.) It was stated earlier that even Malay Chams of Vietnam spoke Tamil. Well, between the 2nd and 4th century CE Tamils have travelled as far as Vietnam bringing with them the Tamil language and script which can be seen in early Cham writing. A lot of Malay words in Malaysia consist of Tamil too. Nothing too complicated. The French having colonized Haiti brought forth French speakers of Afro-Haitians. Does that make them French? No. Also, another thing, there is no such thing as a language called Chinese. It is the same as saying that there is a language called Indian. By the way, Anwar, can you say something in Indian? How do you say "How are you" in Indian. lol... Even the word "Indian" cannot be found in any ancient literature be it Sanskrit, Tamil, Gujurati, Pali, etc. India is a British derivation of the generic Greek word Indica for the Persian name of the Indus river of the Northern part of the Indian sub-continent. Anyways, no hard feelings. It would be better if you backed up your sources with references provided. Regards. Wiki Raja (talk) 06:09, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Indian Union was a Mughal imperial concept like "Napoleon's Europe". Anwar (talk) 12:36, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Oriental" Cham people? I see your choice of words such as "Oriental" is not only outdated, but a derogatory term for East Asians. Wiki Raja (talk) 09:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Anwar do Cham's consider them Tamils or Chams ? what is their primary identity ? Because we have Hindu Chams who cliam to be Brahmins and Muslim Chams in Hainan, Vietnam and Cambodia. Do only the Vietnam Chams speak Tamil at home ?Taprobanus (talk) 13:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

text: I only include those Chams who speak Tamil at home. There are still some Chams left on earth who still speak the original Cham language. Most of the Cham have moved on to Tamil Saivite Hinduism and Tamil Sufi Islam. It is not unusual for a race to adopt a new tongue. Examples - Walloons, Macedonians. The problem is not source but lack of English-source. There are plenty of vernacular sources available in Connemara Library archives for anybody to walk in and check for themselves. As I said earlier, Tamil World is larger than the Dravidian World. Also, Malay historians have a curious trait. A single drop of Malay blood is sufficient for a person to be included within their fold. They still think Parameswara was a Malay Hindu and Munshi Abdullah was the first Malay Muslim journalist. Both were Tamil Muslims. Anwar (talk) 08:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find anything on these Tamil speaking Cham people. Only if they natively speak Tamil are they of Tamil ethnicity. Trips (talk) 14:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You can speak any language you want at home but what you consider yourself is what is your identity. Sri Lankan Muslims speak Tamil and are ethnically related Tamil Muslims but consider them to be a different ethnic group. We have many mixed situations like that. Most second generation Tamil Canadians speak Canadian English/French as their primary language but may consider them as ethnic Tamils. This is the reverse of the situation. Language si just one component of ones ethnic identity.Taprobanus (talk) 17:05, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

text: That's my point. A majority of the Sonagar speak Tamil at home (like the Cham). They have changed their tongue from Arwi to Tamil in the past millennium. Still they are mistakenly considered a separate community due to high miscegenation with Semitic races of West Asia. They bring Moorish rituals to the ceremonies of births, marriages and deaths. The Mamak of Malaysia or the Chulia of Singapore refer to the same Tamil Muslim pantheon though they bring Oriental rituals to their ceremonies. Each comes from a different genepool but speak the same tongue. If a cat is told repeatedly that it is a dog, then sooner or later, it starts behaving like a dog hijacking all its habits. This is the essence of nationalism. Infact, Sonagar alone are living proof of the multi-ethnic nature of the Tamil World. Anwar (talk) 13:47, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's true, though native language is the most important factor, the rest need citations. Trips (talk) 06:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Your definition of Tamil is a limited view of Tamils of Dravidian race only. As I said earlier, all Tamils are not Dravidians and all Dravidians are not Tamils. Pondicherry Tamils do not speak French at home to their kith and kin. English and French are used out of economic necessity. Austria, for instance, is a separate nation from Germany though both belong to the wider German World. Belgium, is a separate nation as well as separate race from France but both belong to the wider French World. This is undeniable reality. Whether Sonagars consider themselves Tamil or not is a political issue and irrelevant to this discussion. Miscegeneation is ongoing still. 
As regards the Haitians, I can only quote Napoleon's deinition of who is French: France is not the hills, rivers, mountains and borderlines but wherever there there are Frenchmen and women. It means Africans who speak French at home to their kith and kin are French indeed. This is because they have lost their original identity. Anwar (talk) 10:50, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

text: While Wiki Raja and Trips have brought sources to defend their arguments Anwar has not done so. All the books I have read state the Cham language is similar to Acehnese/Malay. Here's a source  for that.Pectoretalk 01:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Also, Sri Lankan Moors really do not self-identify as Tamil. Tamil-nation, a jingoistically proud Tamil website, illustrates this in a thought provoking article.Pectoretalk 02:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tamil ethnicity 

message: Ok, much debate has been going on as to whether or not Tamil is an ethnicity. Just like one would argue on whether Japanese is an ethnicity or not, since there are Chinese, Koreans, and Mongolians who may look like them. As idiotic as that may sound, this debate is no different. Let us define ethnicity: 
ethnicity – relating to races or groups of people with common customs"Webster’s American English Dictionary, 1995; a group of human beings whose members identify with each other, usually on the basis of preferential endogamy and/or a presumed or real common ancestry. Marcus Banks, Ethnicity: Anthropological Constructions (1996), p. 151 "'ethnic groups' invariably stress common ancestry or endogamy". Ethnic identity is further marked by the recognition from others of a group's distinctiveness and by common cultural, linguistic, behavioral/ biological traits. "Anthropology. The study of ethnicity, minority groups, and identity," Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2007.
With regards to the article, the very first sentence states:
So, who are the people from the Indian subcontinent? What ethnic group do they belong to? Do they constitute an ethnic group? If not, then are they human? If they’re not human, then from which planet did we come from? Why does media refer to Tamils from Sri Lanka as ethnic Tamils, while Tamils in India are referred to as a language group? These are legitimate questions.
The next sentence goes on to state:
First of all, that is not even a complete sentence. Secondly, this sentence does not match the provided referenced source. Thirdly, what number of ethnic communities have come to speak Tamil and assume Tamil identity? What are these ethnic communities? This sentence fails to state that. Finally, we see a referenced link which takes us down to this info:
 M. B. Emeneau (Jan-Mar 1956). "India as a Lingustic Area" (in English). Language 32 (1): 5. doi:10.2307/410649. Retrieved on 2007-05-03. “Of the four literary Dravidian languages, Tamil has voluminous records dating back at least two millennia”
But take note, if one were to click on the link, it just takes the reader to the JSTOR page showing only a page 3. Further, it does not allow the reader to have access to the whole article to verify the actual info taken. However, at the end of the provided source above it states right after the retrieved date, "Of the four literary Dravidian languages, Tamil has voluminous records dating back at least two millennia." Part of that is in the first sentence, which is legitimate, but where on earth did the second sentence come from, which is not even a complete sentence? Sneaky, but not sneaky enough. Wiki Raja (talk) 06:15, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tamil Ethnicity Reality Check

message: So far, so good. Afterall, this article is about Tamil people, and not about Tamil language, since there is a separate article on Tamil language. Anyways, here is what the first sentence now states:
Good, but not good enough. The word people is used twice in this format:
Anyways, it would be correct to state the first sentence in the following fashion:
"Tamil people (also called Tamils or Tamilians) are an ethnic group originating from the Southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu, and the Northeastern province Sri Lanka."
The second sentence could then state:
"They have a recoded history going back two millennia"
Then, after that sentence, the third one could state about Tamils in Southeast Asia such as in Malaysia/ Singapore, and possibly those who speak Tamil such as the ever much debated Chams. With regards to the Chams, perhaps there could be a special section on them and other Southeast Asian groups who have adopted Tamil language and culture into theirs. Don't forget that it was the Tamil kingdoms of the Pallavas and Cholas who embarked on their journeys into Southeast Asia from the 2nd century CE up to the 11th century CE. 
Last, but not least, we need to do something about the link provided for the "two millenia" info:
 M. B. Emeneau (Jan-Mar 1956). "India as a Lingustic Area" (in English). Language 32 (1): 5. doi:10.2307/410649. Retrieved on 3 May 2007. “Of the four literary Dravidian languages, Tamil has voluminous records dating back at least two millennia”
There is no way, whatsoever, for the reader to be able to read the actual content quoted without having to purchase the document. Even then, the web site does not allow the user to make any purchases. So, how can we provide this information to those who want to look it up? Wiki Raja (talk) 04:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: First sentence cleanup

message: I'm not much familiar with this. Please help. Thanks. --Ultramegasuperstar (talk) 21:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not that easy, see English people, German people, Berbers and even Sri Lankan Tamil people as an example. Taprobanus (talk) 16:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please review the new picture. AFAIK there is no copyright problem anymore. --Ultramegasuperstar (talk) 13:53, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Beautiful attempt, only that someone may say that MGR is not Tamil and that he is Malayalee by ancestry. May bewe can replace that with an uncontroversal Tamil persons pic ? Just a suggestion. Taprobanus (talk) 14:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Very reasonable thoughts. I replaced him with Annadurai. --Ultramegasuperstar (talk) 14:40, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: But the pic is stil MGR ? Taprobanus (talk) 15:24, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm viewing Annadurai. Maybe you have to refresh or delete cache in your browser? --Ultramegasuperstar (talk) 15:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could anyone build a picture without copyright issues? 

message: It doesn't show the video properly. Thanks, --Ultramegasuperstar (talk) 22:20, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone had changed the filename to point to a nonexistent file.  Thanks for spotting it. -- Arvind (talk) 21:54, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't be the article semi-protected? Seems to be alot of problems evolved in the past few weeks, especially the picture issue. --Ultramegasuperstar (talk) 22:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Someone please fix this code: 

message: If religion is to be mentioned in the introduction, then a statement about atheism or atheism movement in the Tamil society should be also noted.  Particularly in Tamil society, where atheism played an important role in the Dravida and Rationalist philosophy.  At least two chief ministers of Tamilnadu are from this root.  If Janis can be mentioned (another small minority) in the introduction, surely atheism can be noted as well. Ex: A notable portion of the Tamil population adheres to strict rationalist and atheist irreligious framework.  --Natkeeran (talk) 18:16, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure religion belongs in the lead.  I'd be in favour of removing it altogether.  A sentence along the lines you've suggested should definitely be inserted into the section on "religion", though. -- Arvind (talk) 19:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree.  Religion need not be in the lead.  But, if mentioed then a note about Atheism should be there as well.  --Natkeeran (talk) 22:10, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do go ahead and change the article.  My preference is to remove religion from the introduction, and to add a sentence on atheism / rationalism in the "Religion" section, but either option is fine by me. -- Arvind (talk) 00:01, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

text:  Hindus, Christians and Muslims account for 99.5% of the population. There is no need to have a 2nd and 3rd sentence in the introduction talking about the religious persuasions of 0.5% of the population. This should go into the section on religion and should also be kept out of the top right religion panel. Conciseness and materiality need to be considered.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.96.91 (talk) 09:22, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

text:  What are the sources for the data.  Did it take into account the Tamil populate across the world.  This article has religious bias.  --70.50.143.205 (talk) 17:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

text: can change heading to == worldviews == or  == beliefs ==. Atheism is not a religion, but nevertheless, it is  a religious stance (the rejection of higher beings)Jasy jatere (talk) 05:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a whole different kettle of fish. You'd then need to add stuff about all kinds of beliefs unrelated to religion. You might as well add communism or ecologism! I'd suggest leaving the section as Religion, and if you can find sources to cite about the numbers of atheists etc, then add them, but not in the context of a list of religions. Likewise, leave it off the infobox. --ascorbic (talk) 05:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  that is a non-sequitur. Inclusion of philosophical worldview does not entail inclusion of political worldview. Religion_in_X articles furthemore often have a section on secularism/atheism/agnosticism, but rarely sections on communism or ecologism. I am not familiar with this aspect of Tamil culture, so I have no stakes in the factual accuracy of the claims, I just wanted to point out the logical possibility. Jasy jatere (talk) 07:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I equally have no stake or particular interest in the accuracy of the claims. The point I was making was that you were suggesting arbitrarily widening the scope of the section to include those "world views" when there are as yet no sources to indicate how important or relevant they are. --ascorbic (talk) 13:18, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a reference, which I hope is good enough to put this issue to rest. -- Arvind (talk) 22:45, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Arvind. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 06:50, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A pleasure.  That article has a lot of fairly interesting information about "folk Hinduism" amongst Tamils, a good bit of which was news to me.  -- Arvind (talk) 14:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Was that about the religion that exists among the rural folks post syncretisation? I've had some exposure to ongoing subsumption of this into "mainstream Hinduism". For example, the gods in the picture used to be characteristically idolised in a flat posture. These days, when such temples are renovated, they're being made into erect stone-made idols sculpted per Agama instructions. Typically, this change is accompanied by installing a Vinayagar idol and Navagraha idols. Citing their presence, animal sacrifices are also stopped much to the chagrin of non-veg eaters looking forward to the amman kodai. :-) -- Sundar \talk \contribs 16:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is from before Sanskritisation of popular Hinduism really got underway in rural Tamil Nadu, actually.  If you still use your Yahoo address, I'll send it on to you next week.  Fascinating about the agamisation of village gods.  There used to be a couple of standing stones not too far from my mother's village, which I suspect were originally nadukkals.  When the neighbouring Siva temple was being renovated, these stones were basically "co-opted" into the temple's Agamic rites as sivalingams. -- Arvind (talk) 21:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atheist Movement 

message: Hi,I am an overseas tamilian from singapore.Thank you for the inclusion of mia in the list of famous people.I just feel that the inclusion of a famous tamil from parts of malaysia,singapore or reunion would be nice to give the artice a broader outlook.Thank you.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kumaran59 (talk • contribs) 06:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of overseas tamils from singapore,malaysia or reunion 

message: Brahmins are not Tamils right. The Iyers and Iyengars are only Tamil-speakers. Why then is M.S. Subbulakshmi mentioned on this page?
Enlighten me.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.164.41.221 (talk) 17:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Tamils as a full functioning ethnicity in India are composed of all varnas. The Brahmins are Tamil, and this is only disputed by Dravidian nationalist lunatics. Even in Sri Lanka (where arguably Tamil culture is purer than Tamil Nadu), Brahmins are part and parcel of the Tamil race.Pectoretalk 05:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What makes this comment particularly ironic is that MS herself was from a vellala family (as were many leading female musicians of her generation). She may have married a Brahmin, but she wasn't one herself. So our anonymous friend's comment should tell you something about just how much those who go about spouting casteist rubbish actually know. -- Arvind (talk) 18:53, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's quite funny, Arvind. I did not know that either, but its evident ignorant people certainly lack attention to detail and a sense of irony, among other things.Pectoretalk 00:18, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Arvind, I didn't know that. So much for stereotyping. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 02:37, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: 50 years from one may question why A R Rahman is a Tamil but he too was born in a Vellala family would lost on their mind as well:)))Taprobanus (talk)
Brahmins are not Tamils.Tamils went to Malaysia 2 centuries ago.Now many of them speak English at home.They speak Malay too.But does that make them Malays?Brahmins may speak Tamil at home.But the language they respect the most is sanskrit.Moreover  their version of hinduism is very different from the versions of Tamils.They try to project their sanskrit verions,veda,gita as the solre version of hinduism (arun1paladin117.193.193.217 (talk) 07:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

text: We cannot remove any person from any community from the infobox just because you have some grudge against the community. Find more strong reasons to support your stand. Else, your demand will be brushed aside as just another instance of xenophobia and anti-Brahmin propaganda.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 14:20, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Sigh, every so often this has to come up. -SpacemanSpiff 08:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Every sub-group of every other sub-group considers itself "distinct". So how distinct are they really that they need to be specially mentioned in the lead of this article? Get real! And about your complaint about who should and should not be included in the image gallery, everyone would like to include people they admire. That is just not done on Wikipedia. A well established practice on ethnicity related articles is to include people whom global audience can easily relate to. A.R Rehman may not be more important than Ilayaraja to most Tamils, but globaly he is more well know. --Deepak D'Souza (talk) 08:53, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brahmins 

message: No one has so far been able to prove the origin of pallavas.  There is a high possibility that pallavas are tamilians. The pallavas were just sanskritized since they served as vassals of mauryas ( maurya empire extended till present day andhra ). The pallavas had a standing army of 150, 000 and it would have been hard to create such a huge army if they were not tamilians. saying the pallavas as not tamilians is an attempt by people to hide the glorious past of the tamilians as well as south indians. It is a well know fact that south indians are a great warrior race. Pallavs would be either the thevars, nadars, maravars, vanniyars, konars or nairs. The descendants of the pallavsa are still living in tamilnadu and every one speaks tamil in tamilnadu. I kindly request to mention that pallavas were tamilians.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.69.52 (talk) 05:47, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pallavas are tamilians 

message: The picture has too many brahamins in it with Ramanujam, Viswantha Anand, MS Subulakshmi. As per the achivements Viswanatha Anand or MS subulakshmi cannot be considered a reat human achievement compared to Mayalsami Annadurai achievement as Chandrayan project director or Dhanraj Pillay achivement in representing the country for Hockey as captain.
:Sigh! rather than allocating space by caste, the pics have been chosen for various fields and popularity. scientific contributions are represented by ramanujam and kalam(who imo are > dr annadurai) and v. anand (again who is a better rep for TN sports than pillay) for sports. By your count, the picture has too many muslims in it also. There are 3 music related people in the 9 pictures. we could do with one more literature figure instead (a writer perhaps. Bharathi?). --Sodabottle (talk) 21:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Technically speaking, this is always going to be difficult to fit in the infobox, nine images is a bit much already. I think we probably need to have a few images on rotation. No one from  (don't know why Venkatraman Ramakrishnan isn't included in that) is under-represented, literature is sorely under-represented, not just Tamil writers like Bharati and Bharatidasan but also English writers including the likes of R. K. Narayan etc. As for sportspersons, Anand is the best representative followed by Muralitharan. -SpacemanSpiff 01:45, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, IMO the images should include majorly (not solely) Tamils who contributed to mankind as such and not just people who contributed to Tamils or Tamil languages alone. No offence meant here. But if this is an article for non-Tamils to read on Tamils, then what more is better than making sure the pictures grab attention. May be we can have prominent figures but with a bit of Tamilistic (like that’s a word!) touch in it. For example on aram (eg. philosopher like Thiruvalluvar), and on porul (Shiv Nadar/Kalanithi Maran)  [I can’t think of anything related to inbam - but great minds here can surely think of one]. Then move on to Iyal (Science-Kalam/Ramanujam), Isai (Illayaraja/Rahman) and Naadakam (Kamal Hassan may be). Something in this line might help. Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 12:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is why I preferred a non-iconic common people image. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 12:59, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: Why has the image of Ervadi mosque has got URDU/ARABIC trst and not  Tamild or English texts on it?What has Urdu or Arabic got to do with is article about Tamils in English  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.193.198.88 (talk) 10:19, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I see no urdu/arabic script in the ervadi image. what are you talking about?--Sodabottle (talk) 13:03, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Mosque image

message: this section has many problems. I endeavor to enlist them just as well I could.
0. the funeral 'folk' art video is misleading to say the least. probably the reader would think death is where the tamil folk art is . if that indeed the case, provide citations. please remove it or add media from more "common" folks forms with citations..
1. why bring the carnatic/hindustani music into tamil music article? that carnatic music has talas or ragams has no place in tamil music article _unless_ you establish that tamil music also has these or similar notions and one could _possibly_ have been derived from other. so, please include only those statements that compare carnatic/hindustani _against_ tamil music, not statements comparing them between.
2. there are good many of uncited claims. I am trying to flag them. please try findings citations or remove them.
3. constant reverts without explicit/proper citations.
will add as I read further..  
117.254.170.175 (talk) 13:32, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: For point no 1, nowhere it is claimed tamil folk art is exclusively funeral art. It is more a case of image/media availability. If you have properly licenced videos/photos of karakattam/oyil kummi/poikal kudhirai please upload them, we can replace this video. Until then, any image/video is better than no video/image. (Oppari and thappattam are popular tamil folk forms, why deny their place?)--Sodabottle (talk) 14:09, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  performing arts 

message: M.I.A represents the real  Eelam Tamils  and their political cause but why has her photo been replace with Muthaiyah  Muralitharan ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.214.155 (talk) 10:23, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Why Murali and not M.I.A