Talk:Mukkulathor/Archive 1

message: This page requires, 3 different sub titles dealing with  Kallar, Maravar and Agamudaiyar16:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

message: The caste of Raja Raja Cholan was never mentioned by the history. 'Devar' in Tamil means divine. History doesnt cinch that it's a caste at the time of rajaraja cholan. It is believed that the mother of Raja Raja Cholan was of a low caste. If he was a Thevar, the thevars would have surely mentioned his name in functions Thevar jayanthi etc. Great kings like the
Marudhu Pandiyar brothers were thevars(Agamudayars to be exact), I agree. But at the time of Raja Raja Cholan, the caste system was not
established completely in Tamil Nadu . This is a fact. Which means that the ancient kings of pandiya nadu or chera nadu were not specifically thevars but were of a common race. Caste was actually introduced after this era. Refer any book on ancient tamil nadu. U r right the vellalars are not at all associated with the Thevars..Thirumalai nayakar 10:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Raja raja Cholan 

message: Either u should reply my questions or u should leave things to the knowledgeable people. R u trying to tell me dat the only ruling caste in tamil nadu are thevars. The thevars were a brave and mighty caste. But that doesnt mean they were the only rulers of tamil-nadu. This is reasonless. The category 'KINGS' which  childishly states that all the kings of tamil-nadu were thevars should be permanently excluded from the article. Otherwise this article can't be contemplated as a fact......Thirumalai nayakar 11:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewriting history 

message: I dunno y do u have this much of interest on this page.we are not claiming that all rulers of tamilnadu were thevars.From ur point naickers also ruled tamilnadu.From their title itself it is clear they were from naiacker community.If u suppose to read the life history of pasumpon muthuramalinga thevar,u will came to know that he is a descendant of pandiyan nedunchezhiyan.ur claim that cholas were from lower caste is a baseless one and it
shouldnt be accepted.Here are some links that u can have a look on them,which were about the
stone carvings(tamil:kalvettu) of chola kings.In that u can find the title "thevar" after the king's name.
http://www.varalaaru.com/Default.asp?articleid=113
http://www.varalaaru.com/Default.asp?articleid=124
http://www.varalaaru.com/Default.asp?articleid=93
http://www.varalaaru.com/Default.asp?articleid=154
http://www.varalaaru.com/Default.asp?articleid=252
so it is very clear that pandiya kings,chola kings were from thevar community.--Alagesandas 12:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop blabbering 

message: I never said that the thevars have nothing to do with the pandiyan empire! Did I delete the part of this article which states "Agamudayar, Kallar and Maravar formed the pandyan army!" I just don't want that line which states all the chola and pandiya kings were Thevars. Thevars are the descendants of the pandyas!! It is a perfect fact. In some places like Tirunelveli, the thevars are called as 'Pandiyar'. That is not my point. But u can't just write that all the kings of the pandya nadu were Thevars. Does that mean people like Veera-Pandiya Kattabomman and Thirumalai Nayakar were Thevars too?!! I don't think so. U must choose ur words more carefully, Mr.Alagesandas. This is something abt a caste and u can't just alter history to praise it. I am definitely not a person against the Thevars. I greatly admire the Thevars for wat they r. They were great freedom fighters and even a challenge to the Britishers!! These are impeccable facts. But don't say that kings like Nedunchezhiyan and Raja Raja Chola are Thevars. Bcoz at their time caste system was not even there. This is also a perfect fact. Refer books
instead of websites!!! The article abt the Pallars says that Raja Raja Cholan was of their caste. This is also not true. The people of Tanjore(Kallars) say that Raja Raja Cholan's mother was from a poor family. It seems dats y they keep his statue outside 
the town. Please refer books and then write. I know abt the Thevars more than u. They r like my brothers. Thirumalai nayakar 08:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who's blabbering 

message: * Stop this mud-slinging in the name of caste. Fight for some bigger cause! Caste is a stupid subject to fight upon.
* Raja Raja Cholan could have been a Thevar; I said 'could'. Please do not use Kalki's "Ponniyin Selvan" as a source of proof as it is a semi-fictional novel (that is what Kalki himself claimed, not me). He used some facts alongwith his imagination skill to write that great romantic novel (I read it some 3 times since when I was 10yrs old; the last time I read it was a couple of months ago). Hence his caste is not known for clear. And why do you bother what caste he was? He was a great ruler and that is what matters the most. By the way, the Tamil kings had many inter-caste marriages-of-alliance for political benefits and hence NONE is pure-blood of some caste!
* The celestial Gods like: Lord Indra, Agni, Vaayu, etc were also called Devars. Would that mean that the Gods were also of the caste , Thevars? Ancient Tamil Nadu did not have a proper caste system!
* Most Pandya kings were Thevars - yes. But not all Pandya kings were Thevars. Most Cholas were Thevars but not all.
Mind Swapper 01:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listen up, guys 

message: Thats wat i am talking abt....Thirumalai nayakar 14:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Right u r 

message: this is not some kinda court. I am damn sure of wat iam talkin abt... I am jealous?! This page is jus full of crap n tall tales!! N must be altered or should be deleted!! Don't play 'smartass' with meThirumalai nayakar 04:28, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wat a smartass!! 

message: (Some personal attack comments removed   Chzz  ►  14:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  DAMN SURE, MR THIRUMALAI 

message: Blogspot is a place where everyone can post articles. Another false story. Gosh. I am discussin things with a bunch of LKG students who childishly come back to the square one of the discussion and make it baseless.. All i said was", the thevars were not the only people to rule the pandiya nadu", which is nothing but the truth. SNVURDAK SERVAI is jus too smart to be here. I am very impressed, Servai.(Duh!!).. The article is like some kinda Rajinikanth movie. Except dat it is aimed to shower baseless adulations on the community called thevars. For eg, "Kings: ALL THE PANDIYA KINGS,ALL THE CHOLA KINGS".. Next time try including the statement," ALL THE BRITISH KINGS,ALL THE FRENCH KINGS(Napolean) and the SPARTANS TOO!!" So that we could have another long, stupid and out of the world argument. 
(Some personal attack comments removed   Chzz  ►  14:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blogspot bluff written by some thevar 

message: Blogspot was created exclusively by me for your ignorance and the post was posted on  October 1, 2007 exclusively for you and I ve quoted authentic weblinks in my post . I ve taken my honest effort to clarify your delusions in my post.. 
AND MR . KURUTTU KABOTHI THIRUMALAI, understand pandiyar’s and nayakars are not the same. Nayakar’s ruled pandyan territories ( 100 %fact)…….they WERE pandiya nadu kings (100% fact)…nayakars controlled later pandyar kings (100% truth)….
MR THIRUMALAI check the  wiki link. You will understand more about pandiyar kings. 
“
http://ta.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%BE%E0%AE%A3%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%9F%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%AF%E0%AE%B0%E0%AF%8D”
. if u understand tamil….kindly go thru the wiki link and make an honest effort to understand the meaning of pandiyar’s before editing our pages
http://ta.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%BE%E0%AE%A3%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%9F%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%AF%E0%AE%B0%E0%AF%8D#.E0.AE.AA.E0.AE.BE.E0.AE.A3.E0.AF.8D.E0.AE.9F.E0.AE.BF.E0.AE.AF_.E0.AE.A8.E0.AE.BE.E0.AE.9F.E0.AF.8D.E0.AE.9F.E0.AE.BF.E0.AE.B2.E0.AF.8D_.E0.AE.AA.E0.AE.BF.E0.AE.B1_.E0.AE.A8.E0.AE.BE.E0.AE.9F.E0.AF.8D.E0.AE.9F.E0.AE.B5.E0.AE.B0.E0.AF.8D_.E0.AE.86.E0.AE.9F.E0.AF.8D.E0.AE.9A.E0.AE.BF
விஜய நகரப் பேரரசாட்சி
கி.பி. 1310 முதல் 1748 ஆம் ஆண்டு வரை தமிழகத்தினை விஜய நகரப் பேரரசு ஆண்டது.நாயக்க மன்னர்கள் அரசியல் அதிகாரிகளாக ஆட்சி புரிந்துள்ளனர்..சேர,சோழ,பாண்டிய போன்ற பேரரசுகள் விஜய நகரப் பேரரசு காலத்தில் வீழ்ச்சியுற்றிருந்தன. பல பாண்டிய மன்னர்கள் குறுநில மன்னர்களாக இருந்து விஜய நகரப் பேரரசிடம் திறை செலுத்தியும் உள்ளது குறிப்பிடத்தக்கது.
நாயக்க மன்னர்களின் ஆட்சியின் கீழ் இருந்த பாண்டிய மன்னர்கள்.
பரக்கிரம பாண்டியன் எனற பெயரில் நாயக்கர் காலத்தில் மூன்று மன்னர்கள் இருந்தனர் என்பது குறிப்பிடத்தக்கது.
•	கி.பி. 1387 ஆம் ஆண்டளவில் பராக்கிரம பாண்டியன் திருக்குற்றாலத்தில் திருப்பணி புரிந்தான். 
•	கி.பி. 1384-1415 வரை பாண்டிய நாட்டில் ஆட்சி புரிந்தான் பராக்கிரம பாண்டியன் என்ற பெயருடைய ஒன்னொருவன். 
•	கி.பி. 1401-1434 வரை பராக்கிரம பாண்டியன் ஒருவன் பாண்டிய நாட்டில் ஆட்சி செய்தான். 
•	சடையவர்மன் குலசேகர பாண்டியன் என்ற பெயர்கொண்ட ஒருவன் கி.பி. 1396 ஆம் ஆண்டில் பட்டம் பெற்றான் என கரிவலம் வந்த நல்லூர் கல்வெட்டு குறிப்பிடுவது குறிப்பிடத்தக்கது. 
Check out the   link below. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandiya
just ve patience to read the whole wiki article written in English..
to quote the lines
 After Madurai fell into the hands of the invading armies of the Delhi Sultanate, the Pandyas sought the help of Vijayanagar Empire. The Vijayanagar Empire replaced the Delhi Sultanate in Madurai and appointed Nayaks governors to rule from Madurai.
if u think the above article is biased ………
just go and edit the above link because they failed to publish veerapandiya kattabooman and thirumalai nayakar in that article “pandiyars.” … and start a discussion in that page
(Some personal attack comments removed   Chzz  ►  14:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  @ MR.THIRUMALAI, just make an honest effort to understand things before editing. 

message: Bluff. Do watever bull-shit u want to. But DONT EVEN think of intimidating me. This is a discussion page. So keep ur fuckin threats to urself. I know wat i am talkin abt. N so do u.  I don't really care if the nayaks were the rulers of the pandiya nadu o not. I am jus trying to say that it is baseless to consider all the pandian&chola kings as thevars. There is no proof to support this theory. The Ramnad n thondaiman kings were thevars. Thondaiman is a sub-caste of the kallars.This is true. I agree. Go thru this link and read it carefully. . Thirumalai nayakar 10:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh,no. I am scared 

message: Friends! Please dont use abusive language. Its a discussion forum. we have to take part in the discussions in a healthy way. Mr.Thirumalai better you quit this forum.--Alagesandas 04:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ...Dont...Dont... 

message: (Some personal attack comments removed   Chzz  ►  14:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ha  Ha  Ha 

message: As you said Kshatriyas/Brahmins castes are usually associated with Aryans, we agree but in tamil Maravar means Kshatriya in sanscrit and Warrior in english here in wikipedia we have to write in a term that everyone could understand, that’s why the term Kshatriya is used. Kallar, Maravar and Agamudaiyar's are warriors, for reference please read Book written by our Honorable Chief minister of Tamilnadu Thenpandi singam By Kalaingar.
Even many of our surnames states that we are Warriors for ex: Kallathil vendrar, Ellam Kondar,Koottai meetar, Gangai Kondar etc.
Is it possible for Thiefes to rule the country? Still now most of the temples in Tanjure, Trichy, Madurai, Theni, Pudukkottai, Karikkudi, Sivagangai are under the control of Kallars, 
Samayapuram is one of the richest temple in tamilnadu, Still the Pattayakkarar’s are Kallar with a surname Nattar. 
Most of their Temples in Tanjavur and Trichy belongs to Kallars only even  will be prayed by only 2 to 3 families, of same surname.
It is Known to everyone in tamilnadu  Kallar, Maravar and Agamudaiyar's are siblings Called as Mukkulathor and Thevar, anyway for your reference we mukkulathor as a group want you to read Thenpandi singam By Kalaingar, Kallar sarithiram by Nattar,
: Kshatriya is a sanskrit word. The meaning of the word is not as simple as "warrior". If you can prove Thevars are "warriors", then go ahead and write "warrior" in the page.
: Kshatriya castes are/were vegetarians, and wore a sacred thread. It is a Hindhu caste. The Thevars were never vegetarians, and never wore the sacred thread. And never in the history of Tamil Nadu have I ever read/seen a Brahmin perform the corronation ceremony for the Thevars. It is disgracefull to the real Kshatriya castes who have remained vegetarian and in the past given large amounts of gold to the Brahmans for their coronation ceremonies.
: Thevars were never Kshatriya. Please provide multiple valid references if you want to claim this status.--Jack.Able (talk) 05:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kshatriya 

message: I don't understand the improvisation for this article,anyways all the examples were correct with details. --Be2bi (talk) 07:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is good 

message: Do anyone believe in Hindu varna system??? If u do believe please give valid reason.--Be2bi (talk) 09:03, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This has no relevance to Wikipedia. If you want to have a general discussion please take it somewhere else. We are here to document beliefs and systems not to argue about whether they are correct or not. Doing so would not help the article. --DanielRigal (talk) 09:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Varna system 

message: In the first paragraph, I can't tell where or when these people live(d).  Vikings suggests that they aren't in business anymore, but it's all written in present tense.  The location feels east-asian, but that's about all a poor ignorant reader like myself can glean.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.123.137 (talk) 04:10, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Context 

message: There appear to be continous effort to make Mukkulathor community details look bad . As a frequent editor of Wikipedia i am proposing for semi protection . Please understand the history of Mukkulathors ( Its a Super set of small sects within ) and the only Group in India which has tried to bring different sects under 1 umbrella . We will continue to add more references and any attempts to add banners wihout reason is condemnable Rajkumarth (talk) 5:00,24 February 2011(UTC)
:See WP:RFPP. -Atmoz (talk) 18:54, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi Protection and Protecting the History 

message: People of Dry land only created vast empires in the world. Afkan, Magol, Marathi. Rajastani, And Mukkulathor..So there is no need to gofor Tamil stupidity...Tamil is not authentic language, it is never been considered by any reputed historians..And There was no paalai region,and people were not maravar.. caste name just not changed for last 2000 years? Even low caste pallans try to claim some other name which are not recognized by Tamil society..So it is Stupidity to Claim People of Palai region as per Sankam or seruppu literature..It is mostly written now.If various historian at various time accepted tamil literature as historical evidence, you can use it..Maravar also been used by King..Why not use that..And Where is Kallar been Mentioned..I think this Wikipedia edited by everybody..Please delete Mukkulathor and Kallar from Wikipedia..We can Discuss in our web and we can make wikipedia thever  page ourselves  and we will know who editing this...77.110.82.173 (talk) 11:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information about Paalai thinai 

message: The article currently spends most of the page describing the three separate components of the Mukkulathor, rather than the concept behind the confederation itself. Given that we have extensive WP article for all three, I suggest that it should be enough to simply list them out in the beginning of the lede, and then only provide such details in the body of the article as explain why/how the Kallar (for example) joined their confederacy, and their specific role therein. Right now there many details (the Kallars like boomerangs?) that do nothing to explain how the Mukkulathor organisation worked.
I also have concerns about the "Resistance to the British" section; it's unclear if these are folks who resisted the British as Mukkulathors or people who happen to be from groups that happen to fall under the Mukkulathor umbrella, who resisted the British. If the former, the role of the confederacy specifically should be highlighted; if the latter, the specifics should be put under the community to which each belonged, with maybe a summarised mention of how discrete portions of the Mukkulathor opposed the British.  Thoughts? MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:52, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  The term "Mukkulathor" in Tamil means "the three clans" (Kallar, Maravar and Agamudayar). The word is of recent origin and was probably coined by Indian nationalist leader U. Muthuramalingam Thevar who united the three clans in the early 20th century. However, anthropologists have (Edgar Thurston being the most important of them), since time immemorial, recognised that the 3 clans are closely related to one another. The three communities have plenty of similarities; in fact the words "Kallar", "Maravar" and "Agamudayar" should not be considered as groupings based on lineage but rather, desginations. There exist numerous references in Tamil literature which indicate that the groupings were flexible and a Kallar could easily become a Maravar or an Agamudayar. There is a popular saying in Tamil: "Kallar, Maravar, Agamudaiyar mella mella vanthu Vellalar ahi, Mudaliar sonnar" meaning that a Kallar adopting Brahminical practises gradually becomes a Maravar, then an Agamudayar and eventually, a Vellalar and would use the surname "Mudaliar".-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 03:30, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  As for the "Resistance to the British", contemporary British sources only mention that the Kallas and Maravas resisted them (Agamudayars are not mentioned). Though these communities are closely related, they did not have a joint social organisation till the beginning of the 20th century as I've already mentioned above.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 03:56, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

text: I just removed There is also a small community in Chattisgarh where they migrated to during British rule. Couldn't find any RS on this, mostly Wiki mirrors. I realise Chattisgarh is a new province, but I paired "Mukkulathor" with Chattisgarh, its alternate spelling, Madhya itself, and the five current divisions of Chattisgarh (Raipur, etc) and just not finding any verification. Does someone have verification of this in an onffline book? MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:20, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I had added the sentence based on the listing in the glossary of the "Tribes and Castes of Central Provinces of India Volume-I" by R. V. Russell published by Macmillan & Co in 1916. The Agamudayars mentioned here are one of the three Mukkulathor communities.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 02:57, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

text: Further removals: none of the "See also"s had any clear link to the Mukkulathor. I'm not seeing any RS citing them as Kshatriya, nor Martial Race, nor of the Thondaiman; so any reason to "also see" these articles is quite vague. The Religion section also only covered the Thevar, and I couldn't gBook up any connection between the Mukkulathor (as a unit) and Saiva Siddhanta. Similarly, I did not note any relevancy to the Mukkulathor in the Inscription section, so removed it. Again, I submit all material on the page must be germane to the Mukkulathor as a confederacy, and not just to individual components, the region, etc. If all three of the confederacy share a trait (religion, language, etc) maybe we could discuss whether "A, B, and C share the X language" might be a more accurate phrase than "the Mukkulathor speak X", but at the moment we haven't even that. Hope other folks agree about the lack of relevancy for the deleted.  I'm continuing to add cited material, and next need to tackle the whole British section. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:37, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

text: It is a fairly common thing in caste/gotra/tribe articles to see assignation of uncited superlatives to the group.  Of course they may well be true, but should in the usual way be treated with more scepticism than more neutral attributes (such as being involved mainly in agriculture).  I would pretty much support not just everything you have suggested, but a fairly tight interpretation of removing un-cited material, since these areas seem to be prone to the same type of NPOV as ethnic disputes, so that even cited statements need to be very clearly attributed. Rich Farmbrough, 16:44, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good deal, moving forward!  The Enforcer, you didn't say so explicitly, but am I right in thinking you support having the specific details about individual groups ("the Kallar use boomerangs") within their specific articles, and use this article to instead cover the overall Mukkulathor group? If I read that right, I'm going to go ahead and "be bold" and remove the sections on the three, since their articles are clearly linked right at the start of the lede. I'm also going to remove the British section, unless folks want to make an argument that we should say "2 out of 3 of the Mukkulathor fought the Brits", without it being OR.  TE, the part you mention about mobility between the three is extremely interesting, and would be great for the article; do you have any RSs on hand that we can use as evidence? For the Chattisgarh issue, for the moment I'm going to just add "and one branch, the Agamudiyar, are also found in Chattisgarh " or suchlike just to avoid losing that fact, but again not sure if that's the best way to present it. Going back in now for a major trim, but anyone with a good reason feel free to revert if I overshoot and we can talk it out here. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:26, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggest major reorganisation of the article 

message: The article lists that the Mukkulathors are most numerous in Pandiya Nadu. But then, they are plenty of Kallars in the  Thanjavur, Tiruchirappalli and Pudukkottai districts of the Chola Nadu region.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 03:56, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it says "They are also numerically strong in..." which does not at all mean "mostly found in". The point of that sentence is that a goodly number of Mukkulathors (though not necessarily a majority of them) are in Pandiya Nadu (though not necessarily the majority of the population in that area). So far as the other places they're found: do we have some sort of cite for that? The problem with trying to figure out distribution based on personal experience, without citations, is that everybody wants to dive in saying "Oh, there's also a lot of them in Foo district, I've been there" or "are found in large number in Birmingham UK (where I live)". So I don't thinkthe Pandiya bit is misleading, but if you can find a cite about where the majority do live that'd be great too, or even just a general cite saying what parts of the country they traditionally live in. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:22, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Nope, I am not saying that the Mukkulathors are not strong in Pandiya Nadu. Nor am I making any new claim of my own. The article, itself, says that the Mukkulathors are strong in Tiruchirappalli and Pudukkottai districts. All I am saying is that these two districts are in the Chola Nadu region and not Pandiya Nadu.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 17:21, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

text: Okay, the reason I had them there is because this page lists them as being part of the historical Pandiya region. Are you quite sure that those districts were never part of Pandiya Nadu? Do you believe the book is incorrect on this detail? MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  How about this and this?-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 17:49, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

text:  You can also add Thanjavur district to the list. This source claims that according to the 1931 census, Kallars and Agamudayars jointly made up 14.4% of the total population of Thanjavur district.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 17:49, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distribution 

message: I was looking at holidays for October 30, and came here because of a link there referring to a holiday celebrated by the "Thevar community". Thevar automaticalled redirects here, but there is nothing to explain the meaning of that term. I know no Tamil (not even the alphabet), hence cannot turn to that Wikipedia for further information. Something here about the term "Thevar" would, thus, be useful; either that or a separate article on the Thevar Community, whatever that is. --Haruo (talk) 02:05, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thevar? 

message: Kallar means thief. Also they were considered criminal tribes.
http://books.google.com/books?id=aqKSTs4ajsAC&pg=PA193&dq=Thevar+criminal+tribes+of+india+cambridge&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gUobT-nRKqr9iQL5y5jgCA&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=criminal&f=false  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharma007007 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  kallar means thieves. The article needs correction 

message: This is only section that have deleted edited too many a times ....I guess this "Thevar" is not well received by alot of people  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.73.237.50 (talk) 20:09, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: Meaning of thevar seems to be caste pushing. Please provide more links for meaning.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Desty cn (talk • contribs) 03:14, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of thevar seems to be caste pushing  

message: The practise of female infanticide is stated in the source provided, between pages 11-13. Please do not remove the statement again unless you can demonstrate that the source is not reliable. - Sitush (talk) 22:53, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infanticide 

message: Population of mukkulathor/Thevar is 1.4 crores by Times of India news agency. Check this 
http://m.timesofindia.com/city/chennai/Rice-scheme-has-hit-their-income/articleshow/7938033.cms VikiAT (talk) 08:17, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population  

message: 72.92.79.59 (talk) 22:50, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Datbubblegumdoe[talk – contribs] 01:28, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2016 

message: Copypaste of entire article removed182.65.70.55 (talk) 17:54, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: As it clearly states in the instructions to submit an edit request:- "Please don't copy the entire article into the request. Only copy the part you're changing. If you copy the entire article into the request, you'll break navigation on the talk page, and another editor may remove your entire request." This is not a "spot the difference competition" If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 18:09, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 11 February 2016 

message: Please change the page back to original, the earlier reliable contents have been removed and false information has been added.
120.61.38.149 (talk) 04:54, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Sorry, but you need to be more specific. Which revision of the page? What false information? Please explain your reasoning. st170etalk 12:58, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2016 

message: Please add the following content in Notable Person
Rani Velu Nachiyar was an 18th-century Indian queen from Sivaganga. She was the first queen to fight against the British in India. [6][11]
The Marudhu Pandiyar brothers (Periya Marudhu Chinna Marudhu) ruled Sivagangai, Tamil Nadu towards the end of the 18th century. The Marudhu brothers were the first to issue a proclamation of independence from the colonial British rule from Trichy Thiruvarangam Temple, Tamil Nadu on 10 June 1801, more than 56 years before what is generally said to be the First War of Indian Independence which broke out mainly in Northern India in the year. [10]
Pandithurai Thevar, The founder of the fourth Tamil Sangam was formed on the 14th of September, 1901. [7][8][9]
Bhaskara Sethupathy (1873 to1895) was a Raja of Ramnad and regarded as a pious, brilliant and generous ruler by his supporters. In 1892, Swami Vivekananda stayed with Bhaskara when he visited Madurai and he sponsored Vivekananda's visit to Parliament of the World's Religions held in Chicago.[5] During his stay, Swami Vivekananda had extensive discussions on Hindu philosophy with eminent scholars like Mahavidwan R. Raghava Iyengar. [5]
Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar, Freedom Fighter, Social Reformer, Political Leader, Parliamentarian, known for his relationship with Nethaji, leader of the All India Forward Bloc (AIFB) in Tamil Nadu, and was national deputy chairman of the party from 1952 onwards. He was elected thrice to parliament
Pudukkottai Ulaganathan Pillai Chinnappa (5 May 1916 – 23 September 1951), also popularly known as P. U. Chinnappa, was a popular singer and Tamil movie actor during the 1930s and from Pudukottai, Tamil Nadu, India. He is also credited to be one of the first major influential actors of South Cinema.[13] 
"Sandow" Marudur Marudachalamurthy Ayyavoo Chinnappa Devar (Tamil:மருதூர் மருதாச்சலமூர்த்தி அய்யாவு சின்னப்ப தேவர்) (28 June 1915 - 8 September 1978) was an eminent producer of Tamil films in the mid 1950s through the 1960s and 1970s. He is best known for his films featuring animals, and has produced numerous movies with M. G. Ramachandran as lead actor (16 movies with under his famous banner: Devar Films).
He launched all his movies under the Devar Films banner, which also produced the Rajesh Khanna's Bollywood hit Haathi Mere Saathi (1971) in which he achieved national fame.[12]
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhaskara_Sethupathi
[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velu_Nachiyar
[7] http://maduraitamilsangam.com/founder.html
[8] http://gksadagoban.blogspot.com/2008/01/founder-of-fourth-tamilsangam.html
[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palavanatham
[10] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maruthu_Pandiyar
[11] http://www.tamilhindu.com/2010/07/great-women-warriors-of-sivagangai/
[12] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandow_M._M._A._Chinnappa_Thevar
[13] http://thevarhistory.webs.com/vip.htm  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thanjaipvr (talk • contribs) 16:37, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please add the following content in Notable Person 

message: Please change Most Backward Class (MBC) to Backward Class (BC) 
Because as per you reference in  
see BC Communities List 
Serial no 1. Agamudayar 
Serial No 58. Kallar 
Serial no 100. Maravar. 
Hope this changes would be done ASAP. Since you have given false information and it is very sensitive info.
May I know on what basis you given MBC since your existing reference is wrong.
Thanjaipvr (talk) 12:16, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: It appears to me that the regions in which this group of people lives are listed as exceptions in the BC list in the source provided. However, I am far from an expert in this area, so I will leave this open in hopes that a more knowledgeable editor might be able to help. Topher385 (talk) 12:29, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

text: All three peoples in this group are in the source's BC list.  Some exceptions are noted; however, the list doesn't not expand to whether or not they are exceptionally more or less backward.  Since none are in the MBC list, the logical conclusion is that to mention them as MBC probably means that their status has improved a bit over the years.  In any case, it is clear to me that the source categorizes them as "backward class" rather than as "most backward class".  Rules of engagement Paine  23:12, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2016 

message: The Hollow Crown: Ethnohistory of an Indian Kingdom By Nicholas B. Dirks,  University of Michigan Press.. Please use this book to expand this article. The current article speaks very little about their military past. I dont have complete access to this book. If you have access to this book, please try to expand this article. Thank you.Mayan302 (talk) 10:06, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Past as rulers

message: P.k.mokkiah thevar , pulithevan Kavin manoharan (talk) 16:49, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: No source and no article = no mention. - Sitush (talk) 17:03, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

text: Did you mean :P.K. Mookiah Thevar? That article doesn't seem to have a source for him being a Mukkulathor. - Sitush (talk) 17:05, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add another notable peoples  

message: MUKKULATHOR also called as a THEVAR Kavin manoharan (talk) 16:19, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Last name is not verification of caste - see User:Sitush/Common#Castelists. - Sitush (talk) 16:42, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sitush you first understand about the community  

message: Many of the unrefernced date here.so remove the unreferenced data in article Jkalaiarasan86 (talk) 15:03, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:08, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 March 2019 

message: I'm requesting the removal of the last paragraph in Politics section: "The Mukkulathor-Dalit antagonism was not one-sided. Dalits, too, committed violent acts."
The paragraph doesn't seem to be justified by the citation. Retaliation is being wrongly termed as antagonism here. Srini1999 (talk) 07:27, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Done The sentence objected to failed WP:VERIFY.  The cite given did not state what the article claimed it stated.   Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 23:10, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 October 2019 

message: 121.200.48.66 (talk) 11:44, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. To reply, copy and paste this: (Talk) 22:56, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 March 2020 

message: Which caste is king of tamilnadu? AdKaran (talk) 14:57, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paraiyar