Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:12, 24 March 2013

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ezhava article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 3 months

India: Kerala C‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia C This article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Kerala (assessed as Mid-importance).

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Archives

Archive 1 (till Feb 15, 2007) Archive 2 (April 2007 - June 2007) Archive 3 (June 2007 - Dec 2007) Archive 4 (Jan 2008 – June 2011) Archive 5 (June 2011 – )

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

WHY SHOULD WE USE THE VULGAR PRONUNCIATION- WHEN THE PROUD TONE EXISTS

The evolution of the name "Ezhavar" was from the word from the place "EEzham". And they were called in the past as " Ezhavar". But it was by the British, " the Malayalam Illiterate People" who were incapable for normal pronunciation that word, started telling it as "Ezhava" instead of "Ezhavar". But it is a vulgar pronunciation of that word, and it is not the responsibility of Ezhavar to vulgarity of their pronunciation. We can see that, we are not calling the cast "Nayar" as " Naya OR Nayas", and we don't call the cast "Pattar" as "Patta OR Pattas ". Means the word "Ezhavar" also should be pronounced in the same manner as "EZHAVAR"instead of pronouncing "Ezhava". If the Government documents are the inspiring support to tell the word like that, what we should do is to change first the Government Usage - what was created by the Malayalam illiterate British, and blindly following monkeys .And now a days we can see that, So many families started using their name as word " Ezhavar" with their name.And so many started naming their new born babies also as the same using the word "Ezhavar". Like.... Sajeesh Ezhavar, Unnikrishnan Ezhavar, ramnarain Ezhavar..etc. In Malayalam, there you can find out a meaning for the word of " Ezhavar". But You can not explain the meaning of the word " Ezhava" / "Ezhavas" using the Malayalam Language.

/* Social and religious divergence */

Unlike other places in India the Caste system in Kerala was very complex and rigid. It is mainly divided in to two groups, the caste hindus or Savarna(Nambudiri and Nair) and Avarna. The higher caste hindus (Nambudiri and Nair) and Syrian Christians treated Ezhavas as untouchables.. A Nair had the right to behead polluting lower castes including Ezhavas immediately..

It will be great if you can read the first reference and page 12 to 14 of the second reference. And I think the matter is very relevant in the context. Dakshinsamudram (talk) 02:19, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

THIYYAR / THIYYA Thiyyar / Thiyya not a subcaste under Ezhava. it has its own identity and it is a caste itself not a subcaste. The culture, tradition even physical appearance, skin colour completely different from Ezhavas. They are Other Backward Communities thats all one thing common among them. Please delete Theyyam, Izhathu mannanar, and also delete the part which referring people from Malabar, they are thiyyas not Ezhavas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.18.3 (talk) 02:07, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 February 2013

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Tiyyas, Thiyyas and Theeyas in Malabar have to be removed from the article. the said community is a unique and different community and have very little connection with ezhavas. article have to remove all the references regarding the thiyya community. 122.174.195.192 (talk) 18:46, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Not done.Please provide a reliable source.--2.219.218.79 (talk) 20:01, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

PLEASE REMOVE ALL REFERENCES ABOUT THIYYA, THIYYAR, THIYA FROM THIS ARTICLE.

This article written for misleading readers, please understand that thiyya is not a sub caste of any caste. Its independent cast and they have their own culture, tradition and history. Its just like Nair, Menon, Nambiar, Ezhava etc. If you look nair[REDACTED] article, they mention about menon caste that doesnt mean menon is sub caste of Nair, You can mention about thiyya in your article but dont mislead people by making thiyya as subcaste This article deceiving readers, written for political gain or something, please remove all above said references immediately.

Izhathu_Mannanars

Izhathu_Mannanars is a Thiyya Dynasty and you have mentioned in your article that he belongs to Ezhava which is wrong, please correct it.

Please Edit this article ASAP

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Thiyya, Thiyyar, Tiya, Thiyya are a different caste in Malabar area of Kerala and the only link with Ezhava is they both belong to Other Backward Communities in Kerala. Please do not mention that Thiyya is a sub caste of Ezhava in the Article, None of your citation links say that Thiyya is a subcaste of Ezhava therefore you need to either remove all the references about Thiyya, Thiyyar, Tiya or Thiya from this article or describe Thiyya caste in detail in the article. Ezhathu Mannanars was not Ezhava Dynasti, Misplaced Pages has got a page for Ezhathu Mannanars and it has got valid reference which says Ezhathu Mannanars a Thiyya Dynasty. Please do not ignore this edit request.Irajeevwiki (talk) 04:08, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

 Not done Please give a reliable source to back up your claim. - Camyoung54 talk 14:53, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

None of your citation reference links showing that Ezhava and Thiyya are same.. They are two different castes thats is why they got two different caste names. You cannot change the history by deceiving[REDACTED] administrators. Misplaced Pages articles should be written in a neutral point of view not for political gain or anything like that. Look up the talk history page and many people from around the world requesting to amend the article and the author is just reluctant to do that.Irajeevwiki (talk) 05:54, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Ref 1, Nossiter p 30, says "The major low caste is the Ezhavas (Iravas, Ilhavas), known as Chokons (Chogons) in central Travancore and as Tiyyas (Thiyas, Theeyas), who claim a higher ritual ranking, in Malabar". -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Please look this link from Specifically referring Thiyya and Ezhava seperately, from the book we can understand Thiyya caste is distinctive , many books referring thiyya and ezhava same, the reason is they belong to Other Backward Communities in india and people from both castes were doing same jobs in the past like toddy tapping etc and also they both very active in martial arts but those books never say that Thiyya and Ezhava same castes. Thiyya people in malabar look very different from Ezhava people and their worship is completely different from Ezhava, Thiyya people go to Kavu where as Ezhava people more engaged in snake worshipping etc. Misplaced Pages should explain both castes separately. There are many books printed in the past explaining differences between Thiyya and Ezhava. Please understand and edit thoughtfully and remove those lines which explains Thiyya is a subcaste of Ezhava. Snapshot on right from book

Irajeevwiki (talk) 09:17, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

You really should not upload a scan of a copyrighted book. As far as your contention goes, it is one that has been repeated time and again here. Original research has always been required to make the leap from what a source says (on the rare occasion that one was provided) and what the person citing it claims. You appear to be falling into the same trap, although I'll try to find Kurup online and see if there is anything more to it. I have seen stuff about a campaign outside Misplaced Pages for Thiyya to be considered as a completely separate community from the Ezhava: that is the way of castes, which come and go depending on the whims of fission and division, politics, economics etc. In a sense, castes seem to be made up and disposed of "on the hoof", although I realise that this trivialises the significance for those who are intimately involved.

Until independent reliable academic sources recognise the complete distinction between Ezhava and Thiyya, we have a problem here. Please also note that in the event that such sources are found, we would show both sets of opinions. That is, that some academics consider them to be Ezhava and others consider them to be distinct. - Sitush (talk) 17:36, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Edgar Thurstons book clearly mentions the difference between Ezhava and Thiyya .. ( vineeth ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.226.13 (talk) 03:57, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Edgar Thurston would likely not have recognised an Ezhava/Thiyya if he met one. He is a hopelessly unreliable source for this sort of stuff. - Sitush (talk) 13:56, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

@Sitush .. Edgar Thurston was a well recognized gentleman who served as superintendent at Madras Government Muesuem . He has enough experience in India to write about caste and tribes . And do you think you have any credibility to disapprove of him . what is your qualification to question him . "He was assisted in the writing of Castes and Tribes by a colleague from the museum, K. Rangachari, who had also assisted him in a 1906 ethnographic study, Ethnographic Notes in Southern India. Rangachari had supplied most of the forty photographs used in this earlier study. The September 1910 edition of Nature described the work as a monumental record of the varied phases of south Indian tribal life, the traditions, manners and customs of people. Though in some respects it may be corrected or supplemented by future research it will long retain its value as an example of out-door investigation, and will remain a veritable mine of information, which will be of value Thurston was awarded the Kaisar-i-Hind, first class, on 26 June 1902." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.229.241.171 (talk) 07:55, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

the writer never said that Thiyya is a sub caste of ezhava in the book. Thiyya is a separate caste from Malabar and ezhava is from travancore. On the same page. :Ref 1, Nossiter p 30, second para explains about the differences of both castes. Majority of the Ezhavas were agricultural labours whereas thiyyar were toddy tappers. Irajeevwiki (talk) 19:24, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea why so many people (or perhaps one person using umpteen identities) have so much trouble reading sources for this Ezhava/Thiyya stuff. Re-read Nossiter again, please. He says - from the very bit that you mention - "The major low caste is the Ezhava (Iravas, Ilhavas), known as Chokons (Chogons) in central Travancore and as Tiyyas (Thiyas, Theeyas), who claim a higher ritual ranking, in Malabar." Later, on the same page, he says "Marriage customs have varied considerably among the Ezhavas. In northern Malabar, the Tiyyas were matrilineal (but patrilocal) ..." and so on. Nossiter is clearly treating these two groups as being the same, although acknowledging that they have regional differences.

Doubtless, it is the regional differences and the possible socio-economic gains to be made that are driving the present-day Thiyya desire to be seen as entirely distinct but until reliable sources say this, there is nothing we can do to change it here. What we need is some decent, neutral stuff discussing any present claims to the difference. ... and I do not mean agitative Thiyya-based sources as I am pretty sure this campaign both on- and off-Misplaced Pages is driven by some ulterior motive. Find someone like Christophe Jaffrelot who specialises in the politics of caste and is an active academic with no axe to grind. - Sitush (talk) 20:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry ,I repeat my question. . Which reference link says Thiyya is a sub caste of Ezhava. Irajeevwiki (talk) 08:41, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

None that I can see. But neither does the article. - Sitush (talk) 16:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

You have removed my comment telling that I am making personal attack. By your act, this is a community attack. You are attacking an entire community. Its clearly evident that we are separate from ezhavas. ezhavas were once untouchable in our area. I guess you are weak in History. Pnranjith (talk) 18:37, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Sitush Please do not remove any comments left by other wikipedians as we need all the comments posted here to resolve this issue. Dont take it personally. We are just having a discussion here on whether you need to take all Thiyya references off from your article or not. Irajeevwiki (talk) 01:58, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Provide some reliable sources and we'll deal with it. So far, in a dispute that has gone on for many months across numerous venues, no-one has done so. Neither I nor anyone else here can just take your word for it, and the situation is not helped when people such as Irajeewiki make significant misreadings of what actually is said in this article. If you are still unhappy then you should try dispute resolution. - Sitush (talk) 19:22, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

You have taken whole sub caste section off from the article which is good. You are actually manipulating fact here by claiming some word references from books. Ezhavas always wanted to merge with thiyaas, that's just for political gain. Since Thiyya and ezhava got completely different culture and history, we can't merge them here on the wiki. Also Thiyya caste needs to be explained more in wiki, about culture, worship, wedding etc. better you please write only about Ezhavas. Your article nicely explains ezhava caste . But If somebody wants to know more about Thiyya, there nothing here in wiki. Irajeevwiki (talk) 19:51, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Did you read where Sitush said "Provide some reliable sources and we'll deal with it"? Please try to understand that we cannot change the article just on your say-so - you must provide reliable sources (click on that link to learn about what they are) which support what you are saying. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:55, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

The subcaste section that I removed yesterday was not added by me in the first place (I do not add unsourced info, ever) and is unrelated to the primary focus of this dispute, which is an ongoing campaign by members of the Thiyya community to be recognised as a completely distinct entity from Ezhava. That campsign is taking place on- and off-wiki. I suggest you go win that battle in the "real world" and then we can reflect it here. Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox for your campaign. - Sitush (talk) 20:41, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Zebedee|Boing! I think you have not noticed the valid reference link and a snapshot of the page i have included in my previous message here. Please see above, it explains castes are different. Sitush, Please do not personally attack somebody, which is against[REDACTED] rules. We are trying for a public consensus here by discussion. I am not using[REDACTED] as a soapbox. If you want more reference links i can produce in couple of days. I have read many books published in the past which explains the difeence between these two castes. Irajeevwiki (talk) 21:18, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Don't bother if all those books show is that there were variations in ritual/culture etc. To succeed with the point of your original edit request here, you need a source that explicitly says that they are a different caste. Nothing else will do. The article already points out that there were variances and, yes, we could expand on those with reliable sources (not Thurston etc) but it will not advance your cause of having a separate article for Thiyya. - Sitush (talk) 22:00, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, now let us know who you make out an ezhava is different from a paniyan? Both looks alike. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pnranjith (talk • contribs) 07:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

And, the pair of you, this and this need to stop as well. You are doing yourself no favours. I'm going to drop you a note about the sanctions in place for stuff such as this. - Sitush (talk) 22:07, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Reliable source links have been provided in the reference section of this article. Hope you have read it. Irajeevwiki (talk) 04:16, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Thiyya legal action against state govt

Ezhava#Dispute_between_Thiyya_and_Ezhava refers to a threat by a Thiyya organisation to mount a legal challenge against the state government. The source is very poorly worded but, if I'e read it correctly, it was indeed just a threat. Since that report is from January 2012, I'd expect that there would be an update by now, even allowing for the legendary slowness of the judicial process in India. However, the section was only added a few days ago and if that source is the best that we can do then I think we might be in WP:CRYSTAL territory because there is a distinct possibility that posturing was going on. - Sitush (talk) 22:22, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Not that i know of. Give more details. Please do not try to publish something here by deceiving[REDACTED] admins. We have a public consensus here, wait for more people see this discussion and let them say their opinions. Why do you want to come to a conclusion. This debate is on and we have just to wait.Irajeevwiki (talk) 22:47, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Irajeevwiki, your comment makes little sense, and doesn't at all address the concerns Sitush has raised. Just because some group somewhere made a legal claim, that does not mean that we report it in Misplaced Pages. If the claim was never filed, or was filed and dismissed, then it simply isn't important enough to include per WP:UNDUE. Please note also that Misplaced Pages admins don't make any decisions on article content; all editors are "equal" with regards to content, though that equality extends only so far as editors follow policies and guidelines. It seems that this info should probably removed until such time as we can find evidence in reliable sources that verify that this challenge was actually filed and is proceeding. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:02, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

i am not involved in any political organisation or party. I got nothing to do with it. I have leaned indian history and i have my say on this subject with genuine source references. I am not even indian citizen to gain something by working in politics. I can show government issued documents which clearly shows caste differences. Only Sitush says here these castes are same, by manipulating word references from books. Irajeevwiki (talk) 23:09, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Irajeevwiki, nobody said you were. And you're still not addressing the issue, which I'm guessing is because your English competence is a little low. The question addressed in this section is whether or not the supposed legal challenge info should be included in this article. Myself and Sitush believe it is not, and we also believe that this is supported by Wikipdia policy. You have not addressed this issue at all. This section is not for discussing the broader issue of whether or not these are one or two castes. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry User:Qwyrxian, you dont know the whole story., Sitush giving me a warning on my talk page go and have a look . He just giving me a threat i think. so, nothing to do with my English competency or ability to comprehend by reading english comments Below given link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Irajeevwiki#Sanctions — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irajeevwiki (talk • contribs) 23:23, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

The warning is completely legitimate, and, again, has nothing to do with this section. Sitush is warning you that this article, and all caste articles, are under sanctions, and that anything other than very high quality behavior can result in topic bans and/or blocks. As long as you abide by Misplaced Pages policies, you have nothing to worry about. Now, could we please go back to the original question? Is there any justification for including information about this alleged legal challenge? Qwyrxian (talk) 23:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Irajeevwiki, I am asking for more information. I've done my best to reflect what I think the existing source says but I have some doubts regarding whether the content merits inclusion per our policies. I am more than happy to see a section in this article about the dispute and any resolution of it but we do not report every little detail about every little thing. In particular, with regard to caste articles, we have to be aware of the posturing that indubitably does go on. M. N. Srinivas even came up with a name for a broad swathe of this - Sanskritisation - although I'm not sure that it applies in this particular instance. Castes come and go by a process of both fission and fusion, as has been well documented by numerous anthropologists, but here at Misplaced Pages we have to work off our own policies. Until something concrete happens that is accepted by reliable sources, we have a potential problem. Please note that I have not removed the section but have raised a query here. We work on consensus and I am trying to develop the article based on that. Please also note that consensus is not a vote - read the link that I have just provided. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 23:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Qwyrxian I will be uploading some documents to back up my claims. Also will give reference links, give me couple of days please. Irajeevwiki (talk) 01:49, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Please do not upload copyrighted documents to Misplaced Pages, as such files will generally be rapidly deleted for legal reasons. Instead, it's actually more efficient to first give the full publication info (i.e., the author, title, publisher, and page number) and a short quote. If we really need it, we can ask you for copies later (and probably do it by email or something similar so it's off WP). This can be faster because a very large number of "sources" that people often site on caste-related articles don't actually meet WP:RS (which, of course, you'll want to read if you haven't done so yet). While there's a lot of subtlety, your goal should be to get relatively recent texts by experts in their field published by academic publishers, along with some newspaper articles; what you want to avoid are texts over about 50-70 years old (especially ignoring any ancient religious texts), documents from random websites, or primary sources like court filings. Looking forward to seeing the documents you can provide. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:21, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Why someone is removing my comments without discussing? This is a talk page. Right?Pnranjith (talk) 06:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

No one has removed any of your comments. Look at the talk page's history, and you'll see that there hasn't been any deletion or removal. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I removed a personal attack but that was not a comment about the article. See the very first few lines at the top of this page, contained in a coloured box. - Sitush (talk) 07:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi I am pasting a relevant piece of information from Edagr Thurston Book Caste and Tribes of Southern India TIYAN-39

Vineeth (vineethsat@gmail.com) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.226.13 (talk) 06:11, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I've collapsed the Thurston quotation. Firstly, it has nothing to do with the legal action being discussed in this section. Secondly, as I've only recently said on this page, Thurston is not a reliable source, as per numerous discussions across numerous venues on Misplaced Pages over at least the last couple of years. - Sitush (talk) 06:59, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I do not understand how you decide what is reliable source. Edger Thurston is a famous British writer who wrote many famous books about Indian history. What is a criteria of selecting a valid source. Is this only one which a particular wiki admin decides? 198.175.68.37 (talk) 07:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

This is the reason why I posted the blog link in my talk page. If an ISBN referenced book which is published decades back is not taken into consideration, what about the genetic studies conducted by Dr. Shyamalan, A very famous physician in the US? Pnranjith (talk) 07:26, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

IP, this has been explained to you here and at User talk:Irajeevwiki, and not just by me. Put simply, Raj sources are almost never acceptable here for statements of fact and, indeed, you'll struggle to find decent modern academic sources that cite them (the "states series" of The People of India is not a "decent modern academic source" but rather 90% plagiarism). Take a read of Herbert Hope Risley, James Tod and, yes, Edgar Thurston for some background on why these people are so obviously not reliable.

Shyalaman has also been brought up in previous discussions about this subject. He commissioned a private study of his own genetic structure that somehow proved he came from Kyrgystan. Or something along those lines - I forget the detail. He was deemed to be a complete aberration on this issue and - yet again- none of this is relevant to the purpose of this section. You've been advised by several experienced contributors regarding what is required. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 07:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

What about the book published by T Damu, A famous writer from North Kerala? Is he also wrong in his studies?Pnranjith (talk) 10:48, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Does Damu write about the legal action? - Sitush (talk) 20:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Dubious source

As we have a few eyes on this article at the moment, I would welcome comments on the following statements that have been tagged as dubiously sourced since June 2011:

In 1896, a petition with more than 13,000 signatories was submitted to the government asking for the recognition of the right of the Ezhavas to enter government service; the upper caste Hindus of the state prevailed upon the Maharajah not to concede the request. The outcome not looking to be promising, the Ezhava leadership threatened that they would convert from Hinduism en masse, rather than stay as helots of Hindu society. Diwan, Sir C. P. Ramaswamy Iyer, realizing the imminent danger, prompted the Maharajah to issue the Temple Entry Proclamation, which abolished the ban on lower-caste people from entering Hindu temples in the state of Travancore.

Whether reliable or not, the source is difficult to track down because of the incompleteness of the citation. I suspect that the statements might be broadly accurate but surely we can improve on the sourcing? And, if not, then it probably needs to be removed. - Sitush (talk) 01:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

This also clearly shows Thiyya are different than ezhavas. Thiyya were in govt Job well before this petition.Pnranjith (talk) 01:50, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Edgar Thurston is not reliable? Why

Hi sitush, you said Edgar Thurston was not reliable, would you please explain why. You have got a list of writers and you only agree references from those books sounds bit childish ! Doesnt it ? Edgar Thurston CIE was a superintendent at the Madras Government Museum who contributed to studies in the zoology, ethnology and botany of India and published works related to his work at the museum If you say that he is not reliable then who would you trust ?. Irajeevwiki (talk) 10:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Sitush, as you said before the documents which we submit are not a reliable source; i would like to understand from you; which reliable source you had drawn the conclusion that both Ezhava and Thiyya are same? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keepwalkingji (talk • contribs) 11:01, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Also the given reference link in the article to backup your claim that Thiyya and Ezhava same is "Nossiter, Thomas Johnson (1982). "Kerala's identity: unity and diversity". Communism in Kerala: a study in political adaptation. . ISBN 978-0-520-04667-2" Which published in 1982. I would say it was written for political gain. You cant actually use that as a valid reference here in wikipedia. Irajeevwiki (talk) 11:12, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

That is a valid point Irajeevwiki, I have never thought in that line. Was that really published in 1982.!!! Pnranjith (talk) 11:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Thurston, like basically all of the other British colonialists, are not reliable sources for most information on Misplaced Pages. This is not something Sitush decided, but rather that has been decided at numerous discussions in the past. The reasons are fairly simple. First, Thurston (et al) were not trained anthropologists/sociologists/whatever. Second, they didn't actually conduct very good research; mostly, they just asked the people who happened to be friendly to the local British occupation forces. Not too surprisingly, what they heard tended to boost up the image of those particular people and show other groups negatively. They didn't do any work to try to get independent verification, and thus their work does not meet the standards of modern historical research. Third, the results that they drew tended to "confirm" British racial theories (I forget the term, I'm sure Sitush can remind us), which often tended to be closely related to skin color, stature, etc., perceived similarity to European-ness. The work was clearly not a neutral inquiry. Fourth, and most importantly, Thurston (et al) are not cited by serious modern historians. Oh, sure, the groups that Thurston praised have their own "historians" who then cite him, but neutral, high quality researchers generally do not, unless their researching British attitudes. In other words, Thurston is reliable if what we want to know is how British colonialists thought about some of the people of India, but he's not reliable in establishing what was actually true about people of India. This is not actually different than many other colonialists in other parts of the world--no serious scholar would take the words of white "historians" writing about Native Americans in the 17th through 19th centuries as literally true, either. I imagine Sitush has links to previous discussions on Thurston, but I can assure you that this has been discussed before. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:57, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Same is the case with Thomas Nossiter whose book you refers to say both ezhava and Thiyya are same. Or at-least tell us how did you make into a conclusion that both are same? Nossiter is also a British. If you cant trust Thurston, who lived here in Malabar for more than 30 years, how do you trust another British who was here only for few months? What study he might have conducted to derive the conclusion that both caste are same? Nossiter is basically an economist and he was studying about communism in Kerala in recent years not about castes and tribes of Kerala.Pnranjith (talk) 16:49, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Scientific racism is the term that Qwyrxian could not remember. Pmramjith, not for the first time, you have misread what has been said. The problem is not that Thurston was British but that he was one of the British colonial administrators and not an academic - the rest as per Qwyrxian's explanation. Nossiter was a notable academic, was subject to much more scrutiny and modern peer review, is widely cited today, used modern methods of analysis, and so on. And, by the way, you have also misread the Nossiter article: he was not an economist. Honestly, the number of misunderstandings going on here is quite remarkable and I'm beginning to wonder whether you might find it more congenial to contribute to one of the version of Misplaced Pages that exist in other languages. - Sitush (talk) 17:32, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Could you please explain Sitush why did you cite his books in this article, citation no. 3 is from Edgar and Thurstons book (11 March 2013) if his books are not reliable then please take it off from the article please.
' Nossiter completed his higher education at the University of Oxford, as an undergraduate at Exeter College and a graduate at Nuffield. He took the degrees of Bachelor of Arts, Master of Arts, and Doctor of Philosophy. His thesis, completed under the auspices of the Faculty of Modern History and submitted in 1968, was entitled, Elections and political behaviour in County Durham and Newcastle, 1832-74.
For the rest of his life Nossiter studied and lectured in political sociology.
In 1999 he was elected a Councillor on Leeds City Council for the Liberal Democrats, although he resigned after only six months in office.

This is what Misplaced Pages says about Nossiter. He is a politician and a political writer. It is not clear which political party he biased towards, but one thing is clear he is a politician and writer. I wouldn't cite his books here. He might have written this books for popliteal gain. Irajeevwiki (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

You have misread it, or did not see the "sociology" part. Or the history background. Or his reputation in India. He was a local councillor for 6 months for a British political party, which has no bearing at all on India and at the time was really not a party with much influence even in the UK. Honestly, this is clutching at straws. As for the Thurston cite (which is , not ), well, I didn't add it and, yes, it is unnecessary. I am finding it odd that only hours after you said this article did a good job of depicting the Ezhavas, you are now trying to tear holes in it. I, on the other hand, am well aware of its weaknesses and always have been. If I didn't spend so long dealing with interminable discussions such as this then I might have more time to actually improve content that is viable. - Sitush (talk) 19:58, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I have replaced the Thurston citation referred to above. - Sitush (talk) 00:03, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to make sure everyone is on same page. we are discussing here for a consensus to remove all Thiyya references from this article and Sitush is still not convinced that both castes are separate castes. He doesn't trust Edgar and Thurston books because it is dodgy in his words. But he reckons Nositter is trustworthy.

I have done a research on Nositter, He is biased towards Communist (Marxism) and communism is not limited to a small area or country. Since Kerala state where Ezhavas and thiyyas living was the first Communist State in India, we have to see this seriously. This book was published in 1981 not very long ago and i strongly believe that this author of this book wanted to merge ezhava and thiyya and portray them being downtrodden by ruling congress party. It was written for political gain and I think Sitush removed the reference.

Sitush has been making changes to Ezhava page many times since we started this discussion, I appreciate him for making changes. But he reverted some changes back to previous.

Since this article title is Ezhava, I am again requesting Sitush to remove all Thiyya references from this article. Thiyya is a separate caste and we need a separate[REDACTED] article page for Thiyya. I hope he will take this request into consideration. Irajeevwiki (talk) 02:00, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

No, that is not what we are discussing. You're trying to push a POV without any evidence. And your "beliefs" about an author don't mean anything. We base our decisions about what sources to use based upon WP:RS. Nothing you've said above indicates any reason to doubt the source, since it's based purely on your belief about someone's bias. To establish that bias, you'll need to show that reliable sources say it, not you. And if you want there to be a separate page about Thiyya, or even just to show that they are a separate caste, you're the one who will need to provide reliable sources. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:28, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

interesting reply Qwyrxian. When Sitush says he can't trust Edgar Thurstons you are giving full support. When we say Nossitor was a political writer with genuine and concrete evidence, you are just ignoring it. Have a look on Internet, google Nossitor and learn that Nossitor was a politician as well as a writer.Irajeevwiki (talk) 05:29, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

for your information qwyrxian we are discussing here for a consensus to remove all Thiyya references from this article. Look the edit request. This is follow up of that threadIrajeevwiki (talk) 05

35, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Nossiter was a local-level politician for the Liberal Democrats, who are not remotely a Communist party. and indeed are now one of the two parties forming the first coalition government in the UK for many years, together with the traditionally right-of-centre Conservative Party. I've had enough of this fooling around and incompetence. Take individual sources to WP:RSN or the Thiyya issue to WP:DR but be warned: whatever the outcome is on this occasion will stick for the foreseeable future - I am not prepared to go through this Thiyya POV pushing palaver yet again in six months time, so I suggest that you marshal your thoughts well and do your research beforehand. Nothing more from me here: you've had your chance and have consistently failed to follow policy. When the article comes off semi-protection on 25 March I shall not hesitate to request reinstatement of that if the POV pushers return and have not done as I suggest. - Sitush (talk) 07:08, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

In reference to the comment directed at me above, yes, I am rejecting the use of Thurston and supporting the use Nossiter. Being a politician does not make one's writing inherently unreliable. We look at the book, the type of info, the publisher, and whether or not it's used by others in the field. On all of these points, Nossiter passes, and Thurston does not. If you disagree, Sitush is right, take the matter to WP:RSN, because it seems very clear to me. And your thing about the Thiyya is just completely backwards. You're starting with the supposed "fact" that Thiyya are a separate caste, and you want to start removing sources that don't conform with that fact. That's absolutely not how you should ever edit a Misplaced Pages article. Instead, you need to look at each possible source, and then decide if it's reliable and due, and then figure out how to incorporate it. Anytime you start from the "Truth", you will always go wrong. As with Sitush, I don't think there's anything more that we can usefully say here. Sitush and I have pointed you to policies, principles, etc., and you haven't really responded to (or perhaps don't understand, or perhaps don't agree with) them. So, if you want to pursue dispute resolution, go ahead. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

SORRY QWYRXIAN YOU DIDNT UNDERSTAND WHAT I SAID. I DON'T WANT SITUSH TO TAKE ALL THE THIYYA SOURCE REFERENCE LINKS FROM HIS ARTICLE. I WANT HIM TO REMOVE ALL THE THIYYA TERMS HE HAS UED IN HIS ARTICLE. *****NOT THE CITATION LINKS*****

BECAUSE THIS ARTICLE DOESN'T EXPLAIN THIYYA CULTURE IN DETAIL. AND IT IS UNFAIR TO ALL THIYYAS LIVING AROUND THE WORLDIrajeevwiki (talk) 19:56, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

The situation is becoming more complex. When we debate something we expect the other party to understand and listen in a neutral way. This is like few admins always wanted to support each other and we are left in a difficult situation.Pnranjith (talk) 17:39, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes Pnranjith, it is very unfortunate and feeling hopeless. Above comments from admins sound like they are controlling everything. Sitush was using Thurstons books in Ezhava article and when I uploaded a page which explaining the differences of the castes he changed his stand and moved against Thurston books, unfortunately qwyrxian giving him full support withoug knowing the fact. Have you noticed that qwyrxian has been defending ezhava caste and giving backup for all baseless claims from Sitush.

How easy they can say that Thurston books not acceptable and Nossitor books ok. Well, 100 + articles maby more using Thurston books as references.

Nossitor wrote three books and they all related to politics, still Sitush thinks he is writing books in a neutral point of view.

Below given list is books from Nossitor, Influence, opinion and political idioms in reformed England: case studies from the north-east, 1832-74 (Hassocks, 1975) Communism in Kerala: A Study in Political Adaptation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982) Marxist state governments in India: politics, economics and society (London: Pinter, 1988)

I wish if any other admin can come forward and say something on this ! Irajeevwiki (talk) 19:10, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Ima let you finish, but I do think maybe an RfC could help here, but it needs to be properly prepared with standpoints. I really don't understands what a caste is properly (I read through our article a few times, but I suppose one needs to get a more inate understanding). From what I gather the Tiyyar consider themselves a seperate cultural group from the Ezhava. In that regard it would be odd to say they are the same. On the other, it is probably a good idea to reflect the view that they are regarded by some (I really can't judge the reliability of sources on this issue) as an offshoot from or a subcaste of the Ezhava. So I think the open questions are: Should the Tiyyar be mentioned as a subcaste in this article? If so, in how much depth. Should views be included they are a subcaste? Should views be included they differ stronger? Should there be a separate article on the Tiyyar? If so, how should their relation to the Ezhava be described? For as far as I can see Sitush (who I see as the champion for this position in this discussion) is off the opinion that there are no reliable sources that claim anything but the Tiyyar are a caste that are historically part of the Ezhava, living in a different region with a different name, and in so far should not be anything more than a mention in this article as a different name in a different region. He indicates there are other sources that do name them as separate, but the reliability of those sources are in question, as they are sources from british imperialists, that did not do proper research, and indicates that there are no more recent scholarly sources that still hold this opinion.

Irajeevwiki on the other hand (who I see as championing this position) believes that the groups are completely separate, have nothing to do with each other apart from having some of the same professions, puts forward older sources for this and also (correct me if I'm wrong) seems to speak from experience with the Tiyyar. He believes that this article should not even mention the Tiyyar, and that a completely separate article should exist. He rejects (again, correct me if I'm wrong) that there are reliable sources that say otherwise, and if they do exist that they are wrong and written for political reasons of advancing the social position of Ezhava.

As I said before, I'm really unsure of the whole subject matter, and attempts to quickly educate me on the issue will probably fail; let's not even attempt that, as I don't think there are high chances for success, and long spun explanations will not help the issue. What I'd like to know is

• To what extent am I right on your positions?
• Are there any others with positions somewhere in between?
• Are there any modern (say, post 1970) scholarly sources that the Tiyyar are a separate caste?
• Are there any modern sources at all that put the Tiyyar as a separate caste?
• Is there any public social debate on this issue in the region?
• Do the Tiyyar themselves see themselves from different from the Ezhava? If so, are there dissenting voices from the Tiyyar? For both positions, are there any sources for that?
• To what extent can we say a group that sees themselves as a separate caste (if the above is true) is actually the same caste?
• If (and only if) they once were the same caste, does that mean they are historically the same, or are they in fact the same?
• Is everyone here willing to discuss their position, and abide by any consensus that may arise, also if that means that their current position is not going to be the outcome (it's ok to think for a moment on this one)?

apart from my questions (that go to show I know nothing about the subject matter itself), a few notes. I'd like everyone involved in the discussion to read WP:SPA, WP:TIGER, WP:SOCK and WP:MEAT. Even if you've already read them, read them again. In case you think you may be violating the letter or the spirit of any of those, stop doing that. It's ok to back down now, and I don't think anyone will come back to it to prove any past wrongdoing - it doesn't even need any mentioning at this point. If you're unsure of any off those, but think you might be violating them, in letter or spirit, or think someone may interpret them to include you, even if you think you don't, do speak out, and ask if its ok. If you have any connection outside of Misplaced Pages to any others in this discussion, it's a good idea to disclose that now (know them in real live, live in the same house, know them from a messageboard somewhere, whatever. If somewhere down the road violation of any of those (and especially sock and meat) are revealed, that will seriously harm your position. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:33, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately I can not find much valid points with Sitush here. What was the reason they were considered subgroup? Is there any book which specifically says that they are sub caste of Ezhava? From my understanding sub-caste concept itself is very weak in India. I have never heard any caste claiming them under a different caste. Even though other caste claims the other way. So obviously this document has to be parted to reflect that.Amal folsom (talk) 03:07, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

That is a valid point Amal folsom. Even I have never seen any book specifically saying that Thiyya caste is subcaste of ezhava. So what Sitush says is absolutely invalid. Sitush, can you get a quote from the book which specifically says Thiyya is subcaste of ezhava? I have digged the same book which you were referring almost for 2 hours and could not find anything specifically as a subcaste. Also, if the article was once wrongly written does not mean that it has to continue the same way always. We should be ready to modify the article to correct those mistakes.Pnranjith (talk) 03:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Martijn, I think this might overcomplicate things. The situation is simple: provide reliable sources supporting either that the two are considered to be the same or are not. In the event that there are such sources for both positions then we are bound to show the difference in position. As things stand, I have only been able to find sources for one of those positions, and the article (which is not "my" article, although the Thiyya people often seem to think so) does reflect that those same sources do note some differences whilst still treating the as the same caste. The state government appears to do the same, hence a threat of legal action by the Thiyya community last year.

I have always been open to suggestions of such sources for the "Thiyya is a separate caste" position but they have never been forthcoming and, sorry, until they are then I will continue to insist on WP:V being applied. I remain well aware that the article needs to be improved and that there are some differences between the two named groups but these have never really had the chance to happen because things have just got so bogged down by repeated discussions/article recreations etc by SPAs. Plus, sorry, an awful lot of my time being spent keeping things policy-compliant/developing previously poor caste article content elsewhere on WP.

Without going into detail, castes come and go, from the Raj period onwards they have done so mainly for socio-economic reasons and a real-life battleground mentality is quite common in India, as seems to be the desire to protest at the drop of a hat. This article suffers from the backlash of all these things but until someone comes up with reliable sources that enable us to satisfy their desire for changes within it, we are stuck. Believe me, I have no axe to grind regarding this issue and I have tried to find sources for the "separate caste" position but the best that I have found so far have been merely ambiguous, saying, for example, "Ezhava/Tiyya" and Ezhava (Thiyya)" in various contexts that really do not advance the situation, I've read widely on these issues and am aware of the numerous different spellings of the caste names. The burden is on those who want change here to justify it, which means WP:V by use of WP:RS. If there is sufficient justification (or perhaps even just development of a strand) then, yes, we fork. - Sitush (talk) 22:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Hii User:Martijn and User:Sitush.

RFC not a bad Idea. There is a book published in 2005 by T. Damu. Book is Lankaparvam. It says these two castes originated from different places. Unfortunately no online link available but I might get a hard copy of the book and will try to upload pages online. Modern sources are available. I have uploaded Kerala Government Issued Secondary School Leaving Certificate of Ezhava girl and Thiyya boy here, On the caste section tells which caste they belong to.

There is a lot of anger and resentment for being called Ezhava by some of the online sites and some Ezhava goups. I have seen a facebook page setup by thiyya youths to protest. Also many well known Thiyya people coming forward to protest. Actor Vineeth Sreenivasan said on TV program to stop calling him ezhavan because he is a Thiyyan and he is coming from Malabar. Thiyyar consider themselves different from Ezhava, because they are two different cultures. A recent study here from Dr Nelliat Shyamalan who is living in US with his wife and son (Manoj night Shyamalan) who is hollywood director This link would tell you his recent study. http://ibnlive.in.com/news/nelliatt-shyamalan-to-present-research-findings/219526-60.html.

These two castes never been the same, two different cultures but they were doing same jobs in the past such as toddy tapping and agricultural labours. Majority of the Ezhavas were Agricultural labours. The other common thing between these two group is they belong to Other Backward Communities in Kerala. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irajeevwiki (talk • contribs) 05:34, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Please have a look this link http://books.google.co.in/books?id=3IEeAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA117&dq=Thiyya&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NyBAUdeOHonMrQedy4DIDQ&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%20thiyya&f=false It is regarding Hindu law. On page 117 first paragraph clearly tells the difference between castes. It says about Thiyya marumakkathayam, Thiyya Makkathayam and also Ezhava. There were Cochin Makkathayam Thiyya Act, Travancore Ezhava Act etcc. I believe this would clear up any doubts you have. Even government issued certificates show separate caste name. Irajeevwiki (talk) 08:05, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Irajeewiki, I am pleased that someone so new to Misplaced Pages understands what a RfC is. Unfortunately, you seem not to understand what a primary source is, nor that Damu is not going to be reliable and even that review of his book says "Disputing the general belief that Ezhavas of Travancore and Thiyyas of Malabar in Kerala are the one and the same community". All of this (including Shyalaman) has been dealt with previously, eg: see Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Thiyyar and note there have been prior discussions both here and at Talk:Thiyyan, Talk:Tiyya, Talk:Theeyar, Talk:Theeyya, Talk:Theeyyar, Talk:Theeyan. No-one has ever found a reliable source, POV forks have been created and deleted/redirected since at least 2007 and on practically every occasion, the issue has been pursued by SPAs. And, Pnranjith, for the last time, the article does not say that Thiyya are a subcaste of Ezhava: it says that the community is known by different names in different areas of Kerala, which is not at all uncommon for castes and has to my knowledge not caused any issues on Misplaced Pages with any other caste. - Sitush (talk) 07:46, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Sitush, Review of Lankaparvam was done by a website which is not reliable at all. It is an opinion of that website. I think it is varnam.com or something. It is not book review site like bookpage.com or allreaders.com. It is a local site which may be running by ezhava. We dont trust it. When I cited Edgar and Thuster, there was a reason for you and many admins gave you backup. It is Damu a new writer, published book in 2005 and you are rejecting that and the reason is a review report appeared in a local website. Sorry I dont know what to say here. It is a big shame. Irajeevwiki (talk) 08:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I beg your pardon? The news story that I linked is from The Hindu, which is generally recognised as being the most reliable of Indian national newspapers and is not a "local site". It also says that this is Damu's "latest book", so you would appear to be wrong in suggesting that he is a "new writer". You are also wrong in citing Edgar and Thuster, when you mean Edgar Thurston, and in making a wild claim regarding the caste origins of the "local website" author (ie: The Hindu's writer), you conveniently ignore the potential conflict of interest that might exist with Damu and certainly does exist with Shyalaman. There is neither logic nor obvious veracity in this latest message of yours, which unfortunately seems to be par for the course. I await with interest any reliable sources that you may know of. - Sitush (talk) 14:05, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Then, here is another link from the same most trusted "Hindu" which says that Thiyya and ezhava are different? http://www.hindu.com/2004/09/03/stories/2004090310670500.htmPnranjith (talk) 17:28, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

You see, this is what I mean. You are not reading things properly. You have just provided the same news story from The Hindu that I linked to. It does not say that the newspaper thinks the two groups are different but that Damu thinks so, contrary to the general opinion. Why not read properly what others people have said here before retorting, and why not correctly read (or convey) the information that you provide when you do retort. It demonstrates a severe lack of competence and, frankly, if ever you do find a likely candidate now then I am going to have to insist on seeing it for myself in full rather than adopting WP:AGF - you have made far too many misrepresentations etc for me to assume that good faith, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 17:52, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

See, now you are doing personal attack on a mistake. Did anyone grand you for that? When I mention similar words against you, you started with a Sanction. Other admins please take appropriate action. I am new to wiki. 01:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pnranjith (talk • contribs)

Writer T Damu is not reliable? Why

You are picking up little things like minor typos, by going into irrelevant details by that way you can deviate the attention. Not criticising you but i have noticed that you keep squabbling on things and in the background you are utilising that time to fix article. Same thing happend with “SubCastes” Not ready to accept that you were wrong

Regarding Damu. He is a new writer compare to Nossitor and Edgar & Thurston. You are actually manipulating my words and using against me.

The Hindu article says Disputing the general belief that Ezhavas of Travancore and Thiyyas of Malabar in Kerala are the one and the same community, the book claims that they have no hereditary or historical link as they migrated to the State centuries ago from two different geographical regions. Mr. Damu says that Ezhavas, who are predominant in the southern part of Kerala, migrated to the State from Sri Lanka being the descendants of Sinhalese. ``Therefore, there is no link whatsoever between them. They are two different communities

This is not a review as you mentioned before but it is an article published by The Hindu, most reliable and yes, i would like to know why you can not agree with his views. But you agree with what Nossitor wrote about Ezhava and Thiyya but i would say you are conveniently ignoring the fact that they are two different castes.

You didnt say anything about SSLC Certificates which show different caste names,Irajeevwiki (talk) 02:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Thurston's primary means of classification of people into caste and tribal groups was using anthropometric techniques. These techniques are not generally accepted today and I suggest that Thurston be used very carefully. It would be better to do so indirectly, through more modern reliable sources that quote or use Thurston, rather than directly referencing his work. Treat him as a primary source. --regentspark (comment) 19:58, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

• So that's one admin; here's another (and I happen to be an academic as well). RegentsPark is absolutely correct: we generally don't accept the methods of those 19th-century ethnographers anymore. This is so well-established that it's a truism. We also don't accept phrenology anymore, for instance. As for Nossiter, there appears to be a very basic issue here: a scholar writes on politics and he is deemed to be writing non-neutrally (did I see "for political gain"?), in a political fashion? Those books by Nossiter are published by reputable presses, and this apparent confusion suggest there are basic competence issues here. Drmies (talk) 20:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Remove points without any reference.

There are many points mentioned in this article without any valid reference. The citation given is wrong and invalid. Need to cleanup this as soon as possible to remove invalid details — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pnranjith (talk • contribs) 17:20, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Fine. Give me an example, please. - Sitush (talk) 17:33, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

You know, given the subject matter this article is remarkably neutral, well-written, and clean. Semi-protection is a good thing. Drmies (talk) 20:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's been written nicely and English usage is very good. If it was a story or something I would have enjoyed reading, but is is an article about Ezhava caste and Thiyya has been dragged into this article that is not agreeable by those readers who know the caste and history. Irajeevwiki (talk) 09:33, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

That's not what the sources say, including this article, for those with JSTOR access, and this book. Drmies (talk) 19:00, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Drmies Please see my reply to sitush above, Irajeevwiki (talk) 23:37, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Muthappan is not an ezhava God. Muthappan is God of all people in North Malabar and Coorg. So remove photo of Muthappan from ezhava page198.175.68.36 (talk) 08:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

i agreeIrajeevwiki (talk) 09:36, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

You both misunderstand, sorry. The article does not say that this deity is an Ezhava. What it says it that this is a deity of the Ezhavas. I've not checked the sources yet but your point of contention is clearly misguided. - Sitush (talk) 01:19, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Sitush , what ip says is Muthappan is not deity of Ezhavas. Muthappan kavus are found in North Kerala. Ezhavas won't worship Muthappan. It's just like Pulluvan pattu, it's common among Ezhavas in TravancoreIrajeevwiki (talk) 02:43, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see. This is yet another Tiyya/Ezhava point based on location. Unfortunately, neither of the sources that are cited appear to have the relevant page numbers and in any event it turns out that I cannot see them here. I will add {{Pn}} tags now. I'm not good on deity stuff but I am loathe to remove something that appears to be sourced just because of some potentially pointy rationale. - Sitush (talk) 02:54, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry you didn't understand what I said above. It is not point based on location difference. It is because they are different castes and worshipping is different. I have given Pulluvan pattu as an example. Only ezhava people conduct Pulluvan pattu while doing kalamezhuthu pattu. A Pulluvan from different caste comes and conduct the ritual. It is among Ezhavas only. . Muthappan is a deity of THIYYAS, There are Muthappan kavus they are thiyya temples, they conduct pooja and other rituals there,. THIYYAS worship Muthappan at their homes as well, they give offerings in the form of food, toddy etc. That's what I said ezhava and Thiyya completely different Irajeevwiki (talk) 03:35, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Since Thiyya is a separate caste i strongly suggest Separate Page for Thiyya and Separate page for Ezhava. We can say "See Ezhava" on Thiyya and "See Thiyya" On Ezhava. Irajeevwiki (talk) 07:51, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

That issue is not a matter for this page. This page is only for discussing improvements to this article. Whether or not there is or should be a separate Thiyya article can be handled at AfC, or, if the article is created, on a discussion on that article's talk page. In any event, we cannot say they are a separate caste; what we can say is "Some reliable sources think they are a separate caste, and some people do not". Qwyrxian (talk) 07:59, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

While some may disagree, I don't think that AfC is at all an appropriate venue for creating a Thiyya article, not after AfD has deleted it on grounds of it being a POV fork. Since the discussion focussed on it being a POV fork of Ezhava, I do believe a discussion here is the best place, though policy wise DRV is the 'correct' place. I personally don't care much for correct places, and in this regard, since discussion on the issue has been here historically, and that one of the main issue of the AfD was that it is in fact the same group (hence POV fork) keeping the discussion in one place makes sense to me. YMMV. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Entire paragraph regardign Teyyam should be removed. THere is not even a single reference that says Theyyam is ezhava culture. Why are we accepting unsourced points?Pnranjith (talk) 19:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

There's two sourced right in the paragraph. I'm not sure why you're saying they're unsourced. It's true that we don't have page numbers, but that doesn't strictly mean they're unsourced. If we do doubt that the info is in the source, and no page numbers are forthcoming, then the info could be removed. Also, please make posts in chronological order, putting the newest ones at the bottom. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:57, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Sigh. I didn't add those statements but I have recently added the {{Pn}} tags per a discussion on this page. It seems likely that the reason there are demands for removal of this section is because, per our article on the Teyyam subject, it is a North Malabar ritual and hence - if you believe that Tiyya ≠ Ezhava - has no place here. Basically, it seems to be part of the ongoing campaign, but whittling away at the edges. I have no idea whether our Teyyam article is accurate or not, nor whether the sources in this article fit the bill, but if the request for removal is indeed based on the Ezhava/Tiyya palaver then that is certainly not a reason for removal. Yet. - Sitush (talk) 01:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Sitush, Please align with wiki principles. Wiki does not encourage to use materials without any reference. There is no reference which says that Theyyam is ezhava deity. So, it has to be taken out.Pnranjith (talk) 07:46, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Have you read the two that are mentioned? I cannot access those but I can see several other sources in snippet view that appear to mention T(h)eyyam in connection with Ezhava/Tiyya. I'll search JSTOR and see if anything is available there. - Sitush (talk) 08:19, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

It is mentioned in

• Daugherty, Diane (Autumn, 2000). "Fifty Years on: Arts Funding in Kerala Today". Asian Theatre Journal. 17 (2). University of Hawai'i Press: 240. JSTOR 1124491. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
• several places in Freeman, J. R. (May 1999). "Gods, Groves and the Culture of Nature in Kerala". Modern Asian Studies. 33 (2). Cambridge University Press: 257–302. JSTOR 313169.
• and also in Ashley, Wayne (June 1979). "The Teyyam Kettu of Northern Kerala". The Drama Review: TDR. 23 (2). The MIT Press: 99–112. JSTOR 1145219..

In all cases, the connection is with Tiyya - I haven't read them thoroughly and so have no idea if they also refer to Ezhava under that or any variant spelling. Off out now but those three articles alone could improve our Teyyam article as well as this one. - Sitush (talk) 08:49, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

So, basically it is no where mentioned that Teyyam is ezhava diety. So, if we follow wiki "Principles" we are not supposed to keep that here.Pnranjith (talk) 14:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

No, that is not what I said and even if it was, the fact that at present the article still equates Ezhava with Tiyya makes the content valid here. You are trying to change things to suit your "let's have a separate Tiyya article" using an approach that might be described as underhand. I have several thousand pages of reading lined up at the moment, including five books that have turned up only in the last week: things do not always happen overnight here, and a full read of the articles that I've noted above now forms additional material that has been added to those several thousand pages. - Sitush (talk) 18:04, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Now, you are twisting the points as per your convenience. You only asked for references. You can not simply derive a conclusion by saying Thiyya and ezhava are same and then claim all the heritage of Thiyya under ezhava.. This is baseless. Come up with a valid reference which says Theyyam is ezhava diety and then publish that. Or else, it has to be removed.Pnranjith (talk) 18:09, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Until you or someone else can produce reliable sources that establish that they are separate, our own rules require us to treat them as the same, because that's what is said in the reliable sources that we do have. Should you produce those sources, we can revisit this issue. Until then, the sources currently provided appear to be sufficient to support the statements in the text. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

If that is the case, there can be a statement which says that Thiyya accepts dowry. How will we contradict that!!!Pnranjith (talk) 12:54, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

If you have a reliable source saying that Thiyyas favour the dowry system the it can go into this article. I'm not sure what you mean when you say "How will we contradict that" - there would be no need to, unless I am misunderstanding you and/or unless another reliable source says something different. - Sitush (talk) 16:03, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Local Government recognition of Thiyya and Ezhava as two different community

Local government has recognised Thiyya and Ezhava as two different castes. See the Matriculation certificate attached here which clearly shows one is Thiyya and Other is Ezhava. Pnranjith (talk) 02:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't prove anything. It just shows that some local government let people fill in those names on the forms. It doesn't mean that they're separate groups; a similarity in the US would be that you can write both "Asian-American" and "Chinese-American" on some forms. In any event, we have no way of verifiying the authenticity of these documents, nor do we know if the stamping agency has the authority to make decisions about group distinctions, nor whether this was a normal event or a special exception, nor even if it was anything more than the decision of a single individual. Primary sources like this will never allow you to make claims in a Misplaced Pages article. As we've told you before, please read WP:RS. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:20, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

These SSLC Certificates are issued by Kerala Government. May be you are the only one person who wont accept it. I have noticed that Qwyrxian you are giving backup to Sitush on all of his wiki pages. If you go to Nair, there are many people complaining about the way Sitush wrote the article but, you are just giving backup not even checking whether Sitush is right or wrong. Wherever Sitush is Qwyrxian is there.

Regarding Asian American and Chinese American. It is out of Context. We are talking here about Castes.

As you know that Ezhava and Thiyya has got two different tradition and culture, why cant we have a separate wiki page for Thiyya.

Also, Ezhava page has got biased or opinionated sources which is against Wiki Rules please read WP:RS Nossitor is a political writor and his books are not trustworthy.

Below given links are from reliable sources, will clear any doubt you have.

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=R5gNOdw9E_0C&pg=PT269&lpg=PT269&dq=The+blindness+of+insight:+Essays+on+caste+in+modern+India+(Chennai:+Navayana,+2006)&source=bl&ots=B2pj6tuyzg&sig=8Nk9Rgn0gzUktwXJb8_ci4qyF50&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lf9DUc3CMeuaiQe87ICAAQ&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=tiyya&f=false

Please read page number 235 last paragraph..

Book published by Duke University. Printed in USA (2009) Author Ritty A Lukose.. (IT SAYS SAME CASTE POSITION AS EZHAVA)

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=GulBDMgxcU0C&pg=PA211&dq=malabar+caste+thiyya&hl=en&sa=X&ei=2gJEUYX3JJDTkgWOx4GYAQ&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=malabar%20caste%20thiyya&f=false Encyclopaedia of Backward Castes, Volume 2 By M. L. Mathur ISBN 81-7835-069-6

This book has got all the caste’s names in India. On Page 189 You can see Ezhava, Eluva for Ezhava Caste.. Individual Caste.

Page No 211 Thiyya (Malabar District)

Also i have provided reference links in my proposed thiyyar article from T Damu (Book Lankaparvam) which says these two castes are originated from two different parts of the world. Irajeevwiki (talk) 07:16, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

The Lukose book looks like a good source, and seems to point to that author thinking the two groups are separate. We should find a way to incorporate that. On the Mathur book, are you sure that they don't list groups under multiple locations? I'm just asking, as I don't know how the book is laid out. If each individual entry absolutely refers to a separate group, then that would also be evidence that they are separate. In that case, we would probably need to make a new section in the article that says something like "Some authors believe that the Thiyya and Ezhava are the same group,(refs) while others state that they are two separate groups.(refs)". We should probably take the info out of the lead, then, too, since it's too complex to summarize there. As for me defending Sitush, it's because he's almost always correct w.r.t Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, and with proper reading of sources. As for the sources, if you don't want to read WP:RS, that's not my problem. We have rules, we've explained them to you, and if you don't like them, you either have to try to get them changed, or edit somewhere else. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:26, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

There are many books published in the past explaining differences of these two castes and they are completely different and individual castes. There was a confusion before, it was because both castes are in OBC (Other Backward Community) But culture is different. Wedding, Ritual and evan physical appearance of people from these two castes are different.

I REQUEST ADMINS TO REMOVE POV FORK OF THIYYAR, SO THAT I CAN GET MY ARTICLE PUBLISHED. HOPE ADMINS WOULD TAKE NECESSARY STEPS ASAP. Irajeevwiki (talk) 08:21, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I am not convinced by Lukose. I had already seen and discarded it when this issue blew up a few months ago: the words "same caste position" seem ambiguous to me. Mathur is just reprinting the OBC lists (and is published by Gyan, which is an unacceptable publisher - see User:Sitush/Common#Gyan). As Qwryxian points out, being called different names does not necessarily make them a different comunity.. In fact, since this entire argument appears to have its basis in the way that the Kerala government treats Tiyya as Ezhava under the reservation system (see the mahasabha legal threat mentioned in our article), the fact of this and that the government shows them separately in the OBC list is clearly either a contradiction in government policies or confirmation that they are known differently around the regions but in fact are treated as being the same. This, ultimately, is one of the reasons why we should not use primary sources such as the OBC lists and was at the heart of a recent dispute that led to the topic-banning of Doncram.

I am at present reading some stuff that RegentsPark has found but, so far, none of that appears to assist in this dispute. There is some useful info worthy of inclusion in the article but while this dispute meanders on, there seems little point in developing content relating to Tiyyas within the article. Irajeewiki, you asked for more admin input and you have got it - Martijn, RegentsPark and Drmies are all admins, as is Qwyrxian and was Boing" said Zebedee. If you accuse someone of inappropriate bias once more, I'll be taking you to the Administrators' Noticeboard for Incidents and requesting a block per our caste sanctions. It is unacceptable behaviour, especially since you have been told this on so many occasions of late. - Sitush (talk) 14:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

SORRY SITUSH. WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT RESERVATION SYSTEM IS COMPLETELY WRONG, YOU ARE INTENTIONALLY TRYING TO MISLEAD OR CONFUSE. GOVERNMENTS WOULDNT LEGISLATE LAWS AS PER[REDACTED] ARTICLES. YOU ARE COMPLETELY WRONG HERE. I DONT THINK SOMEONE CAN PRESENT A[REDACTED] ARTICLE IN COURT FOR GETTING BACKUP OF HIS/HER CLAIMS. Irajeevwiki (talk) 22:28, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure if this advances things but Jeffrey, Robin (Winter, 2004/2005). "Legacies of Matriliny: The Place of Women and the "Kerala Model"". Pacific Affairs. 77 (4). University of British Columbia: 649. JSTOR 40023536. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help) says, Low-status groups, largely composed of people known as Tiyyas in northern Kerala and Ezhavas in the south, composed 30 to 40 per cent of the population. Probably more useful is Isaac, T. M. Thomas (26 January 1985)). "From Caste Consciousness to Class Consciousness Alleppey Coir Workers during Inter-War Period". Economic and Political Weekly. 20 (4). Economic and Political Weekly: PE11. JSTOR 4374008. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help) which notes Lenin's book "Free Society" (Swatantra Samudayam) became the bible of a whole generation of Ezhava young men organised under the Akhila Kerala Thiyya Yuva Jana Sangham which was very active in the Alleppey-Shertallai area. Works by Robin Jeffrey, a professor, have been cited on many pages on Misplaced Pages. Thomas Isaac may be less reliable because of his involvement in the politics of Kerala; however, the article appears to be sourced well and (given my own knowledge from wide reading) a reasonably neutral review of the subject that he is addressing. - Sitush (talk) 17:38, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Every time i provide a genuine and valid book reference link, you just ignore it by saying ***NOT RELIABLE*** Do you know that it is 'not reliable' to YOU ONLY . I gave you book reference which published by DUKE UNIVERSITY, USA PRINTED in 2009 and you just IGNORING it by saying NOT RELIABLE......

Regarding Gyan... I wont worry about that, If you want to ignore, Ignore it. Its just OBC List. Just put that link here only to show you OBC List in KERALA which Shows Ezhava and Thiyya Separately.

Now this is the 4th book you are saying not reliable. You are legislating your own wiki laws. Irajeevwiki (talk) 21:44, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

using caps doesn't (ever) help your case. I suggest you refactor. Feel free to remove this message if you decide to do so. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:27, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

As said above " It just shows that some local government let people fill in those names on the forms" it is government of Kerala which issues this certificate and this certificate is not filled just like that by the people' it is filled in reference to the caste certificate issued by the panchayath or municipal office and if you find the documents provided by Government is NOT RELIABLE...and the documents provided some writer as RELIABLE..I feel it is time to re-look at the definition of "RELIABLE and NOT RELIABLE"- Sitush- Would like to understand the classification of what can be called as a " Reliable source" ( I am new to wiki)Keepwalkingji (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:51, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

As you're new, you'll want to review some of our policies. Specifically, here, the issue is WP:RS. Documents like these are primary sources. They are reliable for only exactly what they say (though they may never be used for info about living people). So, here, the only thing those docs verify is that one person was labeled as "Ezhava" and one person was labeled as "Thiyya". Taking that info and then saying that the Government of Kerala recognizes them as two completely different groups is pure original research. They could have simply used two different names because two different employees preferred one term over the other. Or it could be that they consider them separate groups. We have no idea. And, in any event, even if you could get a reliable 'secondary source that said that the Government of Kerala considered them the two different groups, that would not suddenly mean that we would treat them that way--all it would mean is that we include that information in our article in addition to the other info we have. If you want to consider changing how Misplaced Pages uses primary sources, the place to do that is WT:RS; however, it's not really worth your time as this is a very longstanding set of rules with very very wide consensus based on very sound reasons. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:04, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

"They could have simply used two different names because two different employees preferred one term over the other. Or it could be that they consider them separate groups"- as you said, if they are using two different names there could some basic logic behind this segregation? or you think our government is doing all this just for fun? and do you think two groups prefer to keep terms of their choice and government recognize that need and approve it? there has to be some logical classification with proper evidence and study and my question is still not answered about what we can called a RELIABLE SOURCE and WHAT CANNOT? BE, I have lots of evidence to prove Keepwalkingji (talk) 18:28, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

As I said, please read WP:RS—those are Misplaced Pages's guidelines for what is or is not a reliable source. Of particular interest here is the difference between primary and secondary sources. As for these documents, my hypotheses were just that--hypotheses. Misplaced Pages editors are not allowed to drawn conclusions, to interpret things; we call that original research, and it's forbidden per WP:OR. If you have other sources, and they do meet WP:RS, please start a new section on this page and provide them. I recommend that you read the rest of the discussions first, as other editors have tried to introduce a number of "sources" that, in fact, do not meet WP:RS or don't say unambiguously what they claim. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:38, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Ritty A Lukose Book Published by Duke University. Printed in USA (2009) NOT RELIABLE...... WHY

Please tell me Sitush Why this book not reliable to you. It is published by Duke University USA. Why you believe this book is not reliable.Irajeevwiki (talk) 21:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I have not said that it is unreliable. I said that the bit you mention, which is a footnote, is ambiguous. - Sitush (talk) 22:29, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Far out !!!! When you read somewhere that they are different castes then it is ambiguous. Irajeevwiki (talk) 03:15, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

No, your logic is skewed. I didn't read that "they are different castes", precisely because I cannot determine what is meant. The text says, "Focusing on Tiyya (the same caste position as Ezhava) writers of the Malabar region of northern Kerala, ..." I cannot for the life of me determine what the writer means by "caste position". It is an unusual choice of words. I can agree that it does not say "same caste" but I still have doubts. Although I did not say it at the time, when compared to the opinions of anthropologists and others who have a good reason to study caste - Keralite politics is caste-based politics, and Kerala has in the past been described as a "lunatic asylum of castes" - yes, this footnote in a book about something completely different is not massively persuasive. You see, reliability can be an issue: a source can be of impeccable academic origin but still lack weight when used in a particular context. But, I stress, that was not and is not my primary problem with it. - Sitush (talk) 03:42, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I think I can explain to you. Because members from Thiyya and ezhava were doing same jobs in the past like toddy tapping, farming etc they got almost same social status in Kerala. Also they were Other Backward Communities in Kerala. Writer says That they are two different castes with same social status. Hope this helps. Irajeevwiki (talk) 04:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I understood that to be your interpretation. But it relies on synthesis and original research. The statement is vague and we cannot read the author's mind. - Sitush (talk) 04:06, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I am inclined to accept use of the Lukose book as possibly implying that they are separate castes. Given the thin-ness of the evidence, perhaps a compromise approach would be to put a note in the lead, that lead to a footnote, that said something like "There is some dispute in Kerala about whether or not Thiyya is a different name for the Ezhava caste or are a separate group. For instance, Lukose described the Ezhava and Thiyya as having the "same caste position". + ref". If more RS were found, we could move the info out of a footnote and into a separate section. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:30, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not, given the "thickness" of the evidence to the contrary, the tangential nature of the Lukose source, and the ambiguity that causes us to be discussing a possible implication. Plus, it is not even what Irajeewiki wants: they want a separate article. - Sitush (talk) 04:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, like I said above, I'm not discussing the separate article issue here, as this is the wrong forum. But I know that my approach wrt this way of using sources is a little different than yours. See, my feeling is that there is a fair amount of "evidence" that at least some people think that the two groups are "different", even though most of that evidence does not meet RS. For me, if non-reliable sources do seem to indicate something may be a controversy in the real world, and then we do get one source that's probably reliable (even if, as here, not off topic), I'm sometimes willing to take that one RS and somehow include it in the article. Obviously, I would never do that for cruft, or for contentious BLP info, but here, I don't see those coming into play. I'm kind of hoping that it might help show to those hellbent on inclusion what we really do need if the info is to be expanded. Of course, I'm making a judgment call here, but I guess what I'm saying is that the "Thiyya is separate from Ezhava" viewpoint is probably not WP:FRINGE, and thus probably deserves at least a small mention somewhere in the article, assuming we can hook at least one RS up to that position, and I think that this source does that enough to justify a very small mention. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:07, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hm. Well, myself, Drmies, RegentsPark and (IIRC) some others have not been able to find reliable support, other than this single item, which I saw months ago. Even those favouring the idea have not been able to find reliable support other than this single item in all the years that they have tried here, which means since at least 2007. The situation is a mess, I admit, but I've lost count of the number of potential sources I have looked at with the specific desire to find something that clearly says, for example, that those who believe Tiyya = Ezhava are wrong.

It seems that I was wrong to discount the background of Lukose, who does in fact fit the bill, but it is very poor wording and seems practically to be a throw-away remark in a book that consists primarily of individual case studies. I cannot understand why she choose to do this when, surely, she was aware of the issues. I might even email her, just to satisfy my own curiosity, because there are at least 32 references to Ezhava in that book but only a footnote for Tiyya. See pages 10, 16, 30, 32, 34, 41, 47, etc. Even the Tiyya footnote relates to a paragraph about the Ezhava, per pages 179-180. The source whom she is citing there appears to be Menon, Dilip M. Caste, Nationalism and Communism in South India: Malabar, 1900-1948. Cambridge University Press., which has been republished on several occasions (she says page 292 of the 1997 edition, which oddly enough is not one that I can find at WorldCat although there is a 1997 review). RegentsPark has borrowed a copy of that from a library but is currently travelling, per this message

Curiously, Menon's book concerns Malabar and apparently speaks only of Tiyyas, yet I have just begun to create Travancore Labour Association and there are numerous sources in that which say political activists from Malabar got involved with the TLA, which they say was an Ezhava organisation. And others who cite him, eg: this, call them Ezhava even when citing. They are not of use for this article due to synthesis but it exemplifies just how messy this situation is! I could speed things up by buying a copy - £25 or so - but I'm not inclined to spend money just to confirm/deny a single point. - Sitush (talk) 15:40, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I checked for public libraries near me, but unfortunately, no copies nearby. Is there any chance you have access to any of the Cambridge libraries? It is available in quite a few of them, including online, including online. Possibly another public library? If not, we could see if WP:LIBRARY could help us out. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 17:21, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

The Menon book does not mention Ezhava. I picked it up from the library and looked through it and it is definitely not in the index. The edition I have is the 1994 one and I can ask my spouse to take a look at page 292 and see if there is any mention of Ezhavas though the edition is different. (I could also email Ritty Lukose and ask her to verify the specific citation.) --regentspark (comment) 17:29, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I have already emailed Lukose. The fact that Ezhava is not indexed yet another CUP publication cites Menon while referring to Ezhavas is odd. FWIW, that publication is citing p. 107. Sorry, Martijn, but I am several hundred miles away from Cambridge; the GBooks view gives me nothing in this instance. I see no need to bother WP:RX when RegentsPark has a copy of the book. - Sitush (talk) 17:37, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I looked through every indexed reference to Tiyyas as well in the Menon book and there was no unindexed mention of Ezhavas. (It happens that I know Ritty Lukose, though not professionally, and would be happy to follow up if you don't get a response.) --regentspark (comment) 17:43, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

OK. Spouse checked. No mention of Ezhava in index. None on page 107. Book ends on page 209 (though, I guess, Sitush already clarified that). --regentspark (comment) 17:52, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Ah, well the implication regarding page 107 must then be that Steven I. Wilkinson (Nilekani Professor of India and South Asia and Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at Yale University) considers the two to be the same. He says, citing Menon's 1994 edition, "Even before independence Hindu nationalists found it extremely difficult to gain a foothold in Kerala, and Dilip Menon reports that Ezhavas, who 'continued to see themselves as a community apart, rather than as Hindus', jeered the leader of the Hindu Mahasabha when he came south to address an SNDP meeting in 1930." Alternatively, he has misrepresented Menon.

RegentsPark, one should not name-drop, as Her Majesty the Queen said to me only the other day. Feel free to ask Prof Lukose regardless of my email: you'll more likely get a response. - Sitush (talk) 18:17, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I have had a response from Ritty Lukose and have passed it on to RegentsPark and Qwyrxian via email. I am not prepared to post it here without her permission, sorry. I'll let RP and Q determine what to do with it. - Sitush (talk) 02:52, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I'm going to summarize what Lukose said in her email to Sitush. Basically, she says that it is pretty well established that the two names refer to the same group. However, she does recognize that the group members held somewhat different social positions in the different areas at some times. As such, she deliberately chose to use a slightly moderating phrase ("caste position" rather than "caste"). As such, I don't think this is sufficient evidence that the two groups are actually separate. I do think that the Lukose can go into the article though. I still think a footnote is the best way, but different than I suggested before. I think that we could put a line after either the first or second sentence that says, "Anthropologist Ritty Lukose describes the Ezhava and Thiyya and having the same "caste position".+ref" Qwyrxian (talk) 10:45, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

So, she says that group members held different social positions. Its based on the same thing caste system prevailed in India. Can you share her complete mail. You infer something and let me infer something more out of that. As far as I know there was a study done by famous historian Mrs. Abraham. She had sent a reply to my mail clarifying that both are completely different. Let me check with her if it is sharable publicly.Pnranjith (talk) 14:21, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Wait, what? That doesn't make sense to me. If she believed "this is the same caste, but they hold slightly different social status per region and name", then why would she say that they have the same caste position? From your explanation I make out that their social status (which I think is meant with "caste position") only thing they differed in, even if slightly so. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:06, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

The neutrality of this article is disputed

There is a serious issues of balance with in this article there fore i have placed POV Check.

This article is violating wiki policy by creating Thiyya caste a fork of Ezhava, it is bad forking therefore i request the admins to remove forking of Thiyya to this article. Many contributors have been trying to convince the admin of the article to take necessary actions to fix the article's NPOV issues and produced many reputed publishings houses book references and Government Issued certificates but the writer is ignoring those valid and genuine supplied references and reluctant to make any changes to his stand. There are some admins ganged up with this article's admin and refusing to the other contributors request to change articles controversial subject.

Article Ezhava is exclusively for ezhava but intentionally merging Thiyyar caste with Ezhava while Thiyyar caste is completely distinct from ezhava. The writer ganged up with other admins and deceived a senior admin called Bwilkins in 2012 April (http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Thiyyar) and created Thiyyar Caste as a POV Fork of Ezhava which was a clear bad forking, there fore i humbly request to review the decision of forking of Thiyya Caste. I am requesting other senior admins to view the talk page of ezhava where many times Article writer threatens other contributors with block. A "Thiyyar" search in[REDACTED] should not redirect to Ezhava.

A POV fork is an attempt to evade the neutrality policy by creating a new article about a subject that is already treated in an article, often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts. POV forks are not permitted in Misplaced Pages.

Misplaced Pages policy is as per above mentioned, but a few admins just challenging wiki rules here and we are helpless and desperate here.

The latest reference link I have provided is valid and genuine reference from a book published by Duke University and Author is Professor Ritty A Lukose. The book says on page 235 Last Paragraph that Thiyya is a same caste position as Ezhava. http://books.google.com.au/books?id=R5gNOdw9E_0C&pg=PT269&lpg=PT269&dq=The+blindness+of+insight:+Essays+on+caste+in+modern+India+(Chennai:+Navayana,+2006)&source=bl&ots=B2pj6tuyzg&sig=8Nk9Rgn0gzUktwXJb8_ci4qyF50&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lf9DUc3CMeuaiQe87ICAAQ&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=tiyya&f=false

Below mentioned Section is wrong. Its been cited with very old and non reliable book. I have provided valid reference book above, please refer the book and correct the article. Also the article's Theyyam section is wrong. Theyyam doesn't relate to Ezhava so kindly remove or edit it. The Ezhavas are a community with origins in the region of India presently known as Kerala. They are also known as Ilhava, Irava, Izhava and Erava in the south of the region; as Chovas, Chokons and Chogons in Central Travancore; and as Tiyyas, Thiyyas and Theeyas in Malabar. The Malabar Tiyya group have claimed a higher ranking in the Hindu caste system than do the others, although from the perspective of the colonial and subsequent administrations they were treated as being of similar rank. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irajeevwiki (talk • contribs) 10:09, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Three things, first: 1) please strike out your personal attacks above (do this by putting <s> before and </s> after the offensive cmoments No one is trying to deceive anyone here, and if you do not retract such comments you may be blocked. 2) You're using some terms wrong. A "fork" is when a second article is created that covers the same basic topic as an article already in existence. In this case, if there were a separate article on Thiyya, that article would be a fork. As to whether or not it would be an acceptable fork is one we're still talking about. 3) There is no "admin" for this page. All editors work together, as long as they follow policies and guidelines.

Okay, on to the details of your complaint. You have asserted, over and over again, that these two castes are different. However, you've never addressed the fact that this article has several reliable sources that state that they are, in fact, the same. You've introduced some "evidence", but it either hasn't been clear, or hasn't been in reliable sources. So while I do sympathize and think that there should probably be some more info added about subtle differences between the two terms, you haven't yet provided sources that meet WP:RS that clearly state the two groups are different.

The other two points you raise are just a repeat of what was listed above, so it will be easier to discuss them there.

I don't object to your addition of the POV check tag. It's fine for the moment, but unless you can produce sources that start to verify your claims soon, we're going to have to remove it eventually. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

No way. You have never shown any proof which specifically says both are same. Which is the citation which says both Thiyya and Ezhava are same!!! I assume Qwyrxian is another account used by Sitush to justify his claims.122.172.210.22 (talk) 14:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Put up or shut up. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:59, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

To answer the query: the first two citations in the article, for starters. - Sitush (talk) 15:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

My reply to above comment. I have provided two book references before. 1. T.Damu (Lankaparvam) 2. Prof. Ritty Lukose, Duke University. Both books are new compare to authors citation books in the article. Above mentioned books say castes are different. The article title is Ezhava but it mixes two castes here which is wrong.. As I said above please refer supplied new book references and take necessary steps to end this dispute

There are many reasons to put a POV Checkbtag, the article says something that other people would want to disagree with, As per wiki rule. An editor should not remove the tag merely because he or she feels the article does comply with NPOV: The tag should be removed only when there is a consensus that the disputes have indeed been resolved.. Irajeevwiki (talk) 18:54, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I am about to lose my temper. Have you ever heard a broken record, endlessly and irritatingly repeating itself? - Sitush (talk) 19:03, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

However, 2 people just ranting that the article is POV without any sources or policy backed complaints doesn't mean that consensus hasn't been met. Unless you can produce a legitimate reason to show that the article is POV in the next 3 days, I'm taking the tag down. I don't mind a little conversation, but you aren't raising any points that have legitimacy within our rules. Basically, you're claiming it's POV because it doesn't match your personal beliefs, but that holds no weight. As I explained above, the Lukose article doesn't mean they are separate castes. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:24, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

A research report published by Farooq College of Calicut University by prof. T. Muhammadali.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/54685053/Colonial-Knowledge-Nationalism-and-Representations-Readings-from-Malabar

Page no. 4 Beginning of the page. Colonizers in Malabar recognised the different existence of Nayars and Tiyyas as Jatis. (Jati means Caste)

Page no. 4 End of first para.

"Tiyyas primarily concerned about acquiring education beyond everything else. The beginning of twentieth century witnessed mounting proclivity towards reform among Ezhavas though it was mainly concentrated in Travancore"

Also. Read CASTE, NATIONALISM AND COMMUNISM IN SOUTH INDIA: MALABAR 1900-1948. By Dilip M. Menon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 199 which tells you the difference of Ezhava and Tiyya.

I have bought another book from Amazon hope i will receive in couple of days. I can upload pages to my server and provide link for you. Please do not remove tag from article. Irajeevwiki (talk) 10:56, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

All that Asst. Prof. Muhammedali really confirms - in this self-published, non-peer-reviewed internal workpaper - is that there was a community known as Tiyya in 19th-century Malabar and one known as Ezhava in Travancore. We already know that the community had different names in different places, as is quite common among castes, and he neither says that the Ezhava/Tiyya are the same group nor that they are different groups. Given the extent of academic reference to this point of alleged equality, not clarifying that one way or another when mentioning both is quite a striking omission.

I'll have to wait for you or RegentsPark to provide the info given on page 199 of Menon. RegentsPark was under the impression that Ezhavas were not referred to at all in that book.

What is the book that you have bought from Amazon? - Sitush (talk) 18:46, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Does this mean that Sitush supports only those books and publications which goes inline with his/her thoughts? Basically all the points claimed by the other party seems contradicted by Sitush by claiming that all the sources as invalid or unacceptable!!!Pnranjith (talk) 14:06, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

No, it means that SItush understands Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, while you apparently do not (or you choose not to attempt to follow them), and also that Sitush is better at analyzing what texts say than you are. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:34, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Completely agree with Pnranjith. Another book which says " Thiyyas consider themselves as a caste superior to Ezhavas" Link below http://books.google.com.au/books?id=Pd8aAAAAMAAJ&q=tiyya++and+ezhava&dq=tiyya++and+ezhava&hl=en&sa=X&ei=T4pOUbSlLsTRkwXskIFI&ved=0CFYQ6AEwBg Author Dr. CJ Roy, " The Thiyya Dilect" Madurai Kamaraj University.Irajeevwiki (talk) 05:16, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think anyone disputes that there are people within the Tiyya community who consider themselves to be superior to the Ezhava and, indeed, our article already says that. We could and probably should elaborate the point but it is difficult to do so unless we have the complete source(s) available and they too elaborate it. Can you see that source in full or are you using the "snippet view"? I can only see snippets, which is why I will not use it to support the legendary/traditional Ceylon/Sri Lanka origins that Pnranjith disputes (see page iii). You should perhaps note that, for example, many castes consider themselves to be kshatriya and to be descended from various mythological dynasties: we mention these things in the relevant articles but we do so with circumspection. - Sitush (talk) 07:22, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, by the way, I have a long list of academic works that equate the two groups. One example, published by Cornell University Press, says, Beedi workers were mostly drawn from the ranks of a lower caste, the Tiyyas (Kannan 1988: 196). Tiyyas - or Ezhavas as they were known in southern Kerala - were an intermediate caste below the Brahmins and Nairs, the upper castes. (Page 25). A lot of these seem to refer to Kannan, which is a source that I am still trying to track down. - Sitush (talk) 07:36, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

And Robin Jeffrey's oft-cited classic from 1976, The Decline of Nayar Dominance: Politics and Society in Travancore 1847 - 1908, a copy of which I bought last week & am presently reading, says on p. 332 that IRAVA. Ilavan. One of the names given to the Malayalam- speaking caste, traditionally concerned with the cultivation of the coconut palm. Also known as Chogans in north Travancore and Cochin, and as Tiyyas in British Malabar. The Nayars, of course, are the other numerically significant community of Kerala. - Sitush (talk) 07:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Robin Jeffrey's book is not at all trusty. He says that Nayars are like samurai. Thats completely invalid. Also he says that Nayar are only matrilineal caste of Kerala. That is also invalid. There are many similar wrong claims in this book. So we can never consider that book as authentic.Pnranjith (talk) 11:28, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Robin Jeffrey. I'd rate him somewhat more authoritative than you, sorry, but if you want to debate him then provide some page numbers etc. - Sitush (talk) 14:39, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

You rate him as somewhat more authoritative than me. But sorry to say, I rate you as completely an idiot about this topic.Pnranjith (talk) 17:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Remove invalid citations

In History section, there is a new section called "Legend". The citation given there is absolutely invalid. EMS Namboothiripadu is a politician. He has never done any study of ezhava. So, this has to be removed.

It is not a new section - it has been there for years. There are actually loads of sources that discuss the Ceylon legend, which has or had some currency among historians and linguists. The problem is getting hold of them. For example, if I search on Google Books for "ezhava ceylon" then practically everything is either snippet view or lacks a page before or after the relevant bit, which really is necessary to put it in context. Nonetheless, many of them are clearly discussing the legend.

I think you will find that the tag that currently exists against the source in the article was added by me - I was reluctant to remove the information when there seems a reasonable likelihood that sources exist and one is in fact mentioned. Indeed, I have seen a decent source for it but I was unwell at the time and now I can't remember what it was! I need to get my brain into gear (Sadavsivan mentions it, I am sure, but he has proved to be a contentious source at Nair). - Sitush (talk) 17:56, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

1. Osella, Filippo and Caroline Osella (2000). Social Mobility in Kerala. Modernity and Identity in Conflict. Pluto Press, London. ISBN 0 7453 1694 8.
2. Fuller, C J (1976). The Nayars Today. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0 521 21301 0.
3. Kurup, K.K.N. (1988). Modern Kerala : studies in social and agrarian relations (1st ed. ed.). Delhi: Mittal Publications. ISBN 81-7099-094-7. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)

• C-Class India articles
• Mid-importance India articles
• C-Class India articles of Mid-importance
• C-Class Kerala articles
• Mid-importance Kerala articles
• C-Class Kerala articles of Mid-importance
• WikiProject Kerala articles
• WikiProject India articles
• Misplaced Pages controversial topics