User talk:Vivwiki

Indo Scythian

I see you made edits about Nairs possibly being of Indo-Scythian origin. Is there any proof of that?Hijjins (talk) 02:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi hijjins, dont remember having edited anything, may be by mistake.... however remember FOR ANY COMMUNITY IN INDIA TO CLAIM INDO SCYTHIAN DESCENT is mere speculation, nothing has been proved- there are two documents- scythian origin of the nairs by raman menon and a MODERN review ARTICLE which put forward a claim of scythian origin of the nairs,

                                  bye for nowVivwiki (talk) 09:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:My.php?image=attach5aq0.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:My.php?image=attach5aq0.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sdrtirs (talk) 09:01, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editing advice

Please do not use talk pages for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. PhilKnight (talk) 23:03, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vivwiki. You have new messages at Talk:Nair#population_of_nairs.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Vivwiki. You have new messages at Talk:Nair#A_neutral_solution_for_dispute_resolution.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Courtesy

Can you avoid being rude to Sitush? There's no need to be jibing people, accusing them of being unemployed, throwing around the term "vandalism", etc. Further, please have the courtesy to sign your posts, something one would reckon you would have figured out over the course of three years. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:07, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

well....i am sorry !..by the way , fight your own battles , man....!i did not accuse sitush of being "unemployed"... i only suggested he may be having a lot more free time to muck up these articles!.....both of you seem to be in cahoots especially over the rewriting of the entire ' nair' article..your hostile reception to my posts justify that!Vivwiki (talk) 19:52, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"hostile reception"? You come into an article doing nothing but complain for three years, you mock a user who's done outstanding work (agreed to be such by every uninvolved admin who's been asked to look at the article), throw around accusations of "vandalism" (which is a very specific and strong charge), and then haven't bothered to learn how to type ~~~~ in three years of being here. In any case, I have constructive things to do on WP, so I suppose letting you rant on Talk doesn't really change much of anything. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:06, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If I might respond to the "fight your own battles" comment - if that's the way you think things work around here, Vivwiki, then you have badly misunderstood the ethos of this project. It's not a battleground, and people do not fight things out individually - it's a collegial and cooperative project, where we work together to build a better encyclopedia. There are many people here working together with a shared commitment to that goal, and if you choose to ignore that goal and instead launch personal attacks on such people, then other editors (including admins, of which I am one) will come together to support them and their efforts. Please be warned that repeated disruptive or abusive editing quickly leads to accounts being blocked. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:26, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nair haplogroups

I have seen one comment by you on Nair talk page. I am very much interested to know more about the scientific researches that proved Nairs have European haplogroups. Can you dig a little on this issue? If it means something, this is a scientific proof that dismisses the notorious "Sudra" theory. Thanks. - G O V I N D S H A R M A 05:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hi , mr sharma.... sorry for such a late reply!...well the european haplogroups was uncovered by a study et al by banerjee et al in the journal - TISSUE ANTIGENS sept 2006.....according to them nair haplogps are similar to western european populations( scots, germans, belgians)..... i will send you the article if possible .... it is available on the internet!....the sudra theory is an unfortunate fabrication of the caste system, why even the caucasoid jatts are considered as sudras in the chaturvarna!

Govindsharma: How do you reckon that European blood might contradict this "notorious" Shudra theory? Do you have any substantiation for "Aryan" heritage eliminating any possibility of being designated Shudra? I think Vivwiki agrees with me (if I read him right) that Shudra is, unfortunately, just one of those labels that's been applied to keep people down, but it does indeed exist as a social designation over many centuries, and thus is worth noting in history. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:49, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hi mathew..... yes you have read me right!... in the ancient epics like the mahabharat, mlecchas ( barbarians) were considered to be out of the pale of the caste system.... but in all probability they were tribes of the north west frontier who were more caucasoid than any brahmin population in india.Vivwiki (talk) 20:02, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, right, and then as new communities entered Hinduism, they were placed into various varna for political reasons. That's why it's less useful to say "X caste is Shudra" and more useful to explain "X caste was labeled Shudra by the Brahmins, who attempted to label all newly-incorporated groups in X area as Shudras in order maintain dominance, but in the 1800s re-labeled the X caste Kshatriya in order to raise a standing army of them" etc. Complicated topic, so just quoting the Puranas and "calling it a day" is unlikely to really inform a reader. In the same way, unqualified Kshatriya claims likewise gloss over a lot of vital political history, and it's a disservice to a community to not be honest about these ebbs and flows. Glad to be on the same page! MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

you could go on till the cows come back home.... but the kshatriya debate/ sudra debate will never cease!.... nairs need not hanker after kshatriya status , they have their own place in history!Vivwiki (talk) 20:16, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi please share your knowledge and help draft a better article.

I had referred to the wikipedia article long ago, which was very well written at that time. This however has been changed now and all the sentences have been taken out of context, mainly I suspect with intention of vengence or some kind of enimity that I found with the editors. I dont want claim more about the caste system. I'm however more interested in the etymology sections for which, I have a really valid reference. Also Kalaripayattu which is a very strong point peculiar to the Nair caste. Also the wars fought and won. Encyclopedia references have been discarded by the editors.

Can we please discuss so that we can add proper reference and dreaft a very well writted article ? Please do reply when you see this message.

Greetings, Vineet Nayar1

vinnnnn@gmail.com