Talk:Karava

message: Deleted line about Karava being largest Dravidian group in Sri Lanka. There is no evidence that Karava are Dravidian.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.172.70.168 (talk) 15:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Dispute

message: This article is denigrating caste minorities and is a serious case of castism.  Sinhala freedom 01:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: This article is extremely biased

message: This article is seriously messed up. The editor(s) is/are trying to press the Tamil national issue even here, and make the article into something about Tamil vs Sinhala. The Sinhalese Karava caste is not Tamil. Tamils have your own equivalent Karaiyar, claiming Kuru descent. People claiming descent from the Kurus are all over the Indian sub-continent, why make an issue with only the Tamils? If you are going to have that definition, then you have to include all the groups in the sub-continent, starting from Nepal and down south,  not only Tamils. 
Some caste concious Karavas are trying to make a community, where anybody who can trace their ancestory to Kurus of North India are considered members. But, this can't be used to classify and define the Sinhala caste, Karava. The Sinhalese Karavas and the Tamil Karaiyars have completely different histories and ethnic profiles in the island. The Tamil Karaiyars came recently, after the establishment of the Jaffna Kingdom while the core group of the Sinhala Karavas have been there from ancient time. SriSuren (talk) 21:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is this article about? Tamils or Sinhalese? 

message: This is just to point out the contradictions,controversy and potential bias the article. 
The first portion of the article seems to depict a bias toward the Karava caste without any order of reference. It depicts the caste to be below that of the Govigama. There is no proof of the ordering system of which is first and second. There are also claims that the Govigama were placed as first due to British rule and their sheer numbers to be a threat. Claims of Karava to be of warrior caste are also made in the existance of the royal flags.
There is also the issue that due to colonialism, many of the castes where rearranged and their directions misinterpreted by the new governors. There are controversies regarding the ordering due to these points in history such as critisms around the Laws of Manu.
This is just to point out to the reader that there are distinct claims made by both sides as to which comes first. But ultimately it is agreed that the Govigama are traditionally proprietary owners and the Karava are of warrior caste and take upon jobs of fishermen. This is an agreed upon fact. 
If we take upon the traditional caste system of India; from which it can be agreed upon that the caste system was originally imported from, this would lead the Govigama to fall into the Vaishya caste of old, and the Karava would fall into the Kshatriya caste. 
It is for the reader to keep in mind these facts and that both sides will unfortunately interpret history differently to enshrine their own caste.
Timestep (talk) 13:50, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction,controversy and bias 

message: My recent removals demonstrate that there has been a massive amount of synthesis, source fabrication and completely irrelevant citing in this article. It is going to need checking and pruning in a big way. - Sitush (talk) 15:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing