I have added rock-cut. But you had also undid other changes I did such as shortening sentences, adding its location first, adding language of the builders of this temple etc. Please discuss before undoing large sections. ~rAGU (talk)

You have once again removed contribution from others including me without discussing. Pls. stop disrupting valid edits to this article. Already, admins have taken action in two other articles where you have tried to remove contributions from other contributors. Further disruptions will result in admins taking action against you. Thanks. Srirangam99 (talk) 15:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Brahmeshvara Temple, Kikkeri (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Moulding

Bucesvara Temple, Koravangala (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Moulding

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:59, 28 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Famous Vijayanagara era temples in Karnataka, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gokarna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:21, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I respected you as a wiki senior hoping to get guidance and advice. I thought if anyone including you had a doubt on the authenticity of my contributions and posts, you will discuss with me. Instead, first you arbitrarily resorted to deletion of my posts, despite my placing the reliable sources (not one but two books from K.A.N.Sastri, to begin with) on both this talk page as well as the talk page of Karnataka article. Now you are taking shelter behind my being blocked discourteously in an irresponsible manner without being given an opportunity. You have forgotten that such bullying have failed to dampen my enthusiasm and courage and not only have I also come back but also contributed vigorously to at least one page on Kulothunga Chola III which have been supervised by other seniors like User:Akerans and User:Sundar have expressed satisfaction. It is absolutely not fair that you should first arbitrarily remove someone's contributions, that too without discussion and now you are running to admins pointing out I was blocked and stuff. How would acting and trying to bully other wikipedians, new or old help your cause, when you yourself are guilty of deleting others' contributions without a single discussion. Srirangam99 (talk) 03:10, 31 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sir, you have mistakenly removed my line about parts of Karnataka being under Chola occupation not just between 1000-1116 AD but up to 1200 AD if not 1215 AD. I just noticed your removal of my contribution. Kindly wait till today evening before I carry out excerpts from the book by K.A.Nilakanta Sastri supporting my claim. Thanks. Srirangam99 (talk) 08:22, 20 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sir, in support of my contention that the Cholas held parts of Karnataka for around 200 years from 1000 AD to 1200 AD, here are excerts from two books by K.A.Nilakanta Sastri. The first book is 'A History of South India - From Prehistoric Times to the fall of Vijayanagar' - Fourth Edition, Oxford India Paperbacks (2003).

At page 176 of this the following text proves rule of the Cholas over parts of Karnataka:

Quote: "Rajaraja II ruled generally in peace till about 1173. Having no son, he chose Rajadhiraja II, a grandson of Vikrama Chola by a daughter, for the succession and appointed him yuvaraja in 1166. Rajaraja II's empire extended over the whole of the Telugu country up to Daksharama (Draksharama) and over large sections of Kongunade and the eastern part of Gangavadi." Unquote.

Let me add that Rajaraja Chola II ruled between 1146-1173. So I think you would accept that the hold of Chola over Gangavadi which is currently part of Mysore district and also contained parts of what is now the modern Mandya district in Karnataka, continued much beyond 1116 and hence my claim is not 'unsubstantiated' and I may be permitted to retain my part of the text.

That is not all sir. There is an excerpt from another book by K.A.Nilakanta Sastri titled "Advanced History of India" (1984 reprint), Allied Publishers (Low prized text book) at page 292 which reads:

Quote: "Kulottunga III undertook successful expeditions in Kongu country (Tagadur) and defended Gangavadi against Hoysala Ballala II. He also fought successful wars against the Cheras and performed Vijayabhisheka at Karuvur in A.D. 1193 while returning from his victories against Hoysala Ballala II and the Cheras." Unquote.

Here is another excerpt: K.A.Nilakanta Sastri titled "Advanced History of India" (1984 reprint), Allied Publishers (Low prized text book) at page 293 Quote: "Following his checking the growth of Hoysala power in Gangavadi and adjoining areas, Kulottunga's relations however, with Hoysala Ballala II became friendly, for Ballala married a Chola princess and both sides ceased fighting and ensured each other's territorial integrity. Ballala's attention however, was soon diverted towards protecting his northern conquests following the frequent incursions of the warrior-like Singhana, the Yadava who succeeded Jaitugi." Unquote.

Hope this satisfies. Srirangam99 (talk) 17:18, 22 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is to once again request you Sir, that kindly do not revert my contributions without any discussion or assigning any reason. You earlier reverted my contributions mentioning the reason as unsbstantiated. That cannot be true especially because my edits were based on two books by Sri K.A.Nilakanta Sastri. Srirangam99 (talk) 14:29, 25 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sir, once again you have deleted my contribution into the article. In case you feel what I have entered was incorrect or unsubstantiated kindly come up with your own reliable sources, so that we can have a tangible discussion and come to a logical conclusion. Kindly remember this, many people seeking to 'glorify' Karnataka simply never included or acknowledged any text or sources that mentioned Chola conquests and occupation of parts of Kannada country. Kindly remember it was not just Gangavadi, but during the time of Rajadhiraja Chola (1014-1053), after he fought against Chalukya Someshvara-I, the Chalukya capital itself was occupied, but the occupation of parts of Kannada country between Mysore and Dharwad/North Karnataka up to Manyakheta was continually being suppressed. I hope those anomalies will now stand corrected. Srirangam99 (talk) 18:44, 27 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sir, may I again request you not to remove additions to the article by me which have been taken from reliable sources. This is leading to an edit war and might warrant intervention by admins. I am reverting your reversion. Srirangam99 (talk) 15:23, 29 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Origin of Vijayanagara Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Golla (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:40, 16 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Ishvara Temple, Arasikere (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Shikhara and Vestibule

Veera Narayana Temple, Belavadi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Vestibule and Stellate

Amrutesvara Temple, Amruthapura (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Vestibule

Chennakesava Temple (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Vestibule

Chennakesava Temple, Somanathapura (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Molding

Lakshminarayana Temple, Hosaholalu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Vestibule

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:29, 24 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kalleshvara Temple, Aralaguppe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jaina (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:39, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Keladi Nayaka (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Yali

Kote Venkataramana Temple, Bangalore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Yali

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 8 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Halasuru Someshwara Temple, Bangalore, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yali (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:40, 15 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Lakshmi Narasimha Temple, Nuggehalli (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Pantheon

Someshwara Temple, Kolar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Yali

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Standard Wikipedia style is to have the citations listed in the section name "References" and to have related material that wasn't directly used in creation of the article listed as "See Also".—Kww(talk) 17:55, 17 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chennakesava Temple, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gajasura (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 8 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for creating Doddahundi nishidhi inscription, Pied Hornbill!

Wikipedia editor Pjposullivan just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Extremely well-crafted article. A pleasure to see and promptly check off on the page curator! Thanks for your edits.

To reply, leave a comment on Pjposullivan's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Akkana Basadi, Shravanabelagola (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Vestibule

Nagareshvara Temple, Bankapura (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Rosette

Saumyakeshava Temple, Nagamangala (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sira

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:05, 9 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nanesvara Temple, Lakkundi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yali (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I saw your edit to Western Chalukya Empire where I had messed up an image file name. I'm sorry I made that mistake, but I'm glad that you were watching and were able to fix it. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike (talk) 23:25, 23 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First, thank you for creating the Nanesvara Temple, Lakkundi article. I note that you used the Template:Infobox Indian Jurisdiction on that article. The Template:Infobox Indian Jurisdiction was deprecated in June 2011 and is being phased out. The old articles that used the Template:Infobox Indian Jurisdiction are being converted to the Template:Infobox settlement. If you write any more articles about Indian places for the Wikipedia, and I hope that you do, please use the Template:Infobox settlement. Thanks. --Bejnar (talk) 07:26, 7 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Pied Hornbill, if you've noticed there is a cite error at the extreme end of the Vijayanagara Empire page. It seems to have been there for quite some time and I couldn't out which recent edit has caused it. Could you fix this? Thanks, Ugog Nizdast (talk) 18:44, 20 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Group of temples at Magadi, Karnataka, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yali (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 15 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ramalingeshwara group of temples, Avani, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Makara, Vali and Bharata (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 22 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Group of temples at Talakad, Karnataka, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jagati (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've given a reputed source?--213.47.76.227 (talk) 22:37, 30 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Its not actually epic, If you can see that page, it is about Andhra Kingdom. That's what I understood from this page History_of_Andhra_Pradesh#Pre-Satavahana_Period, where a link Main article: Andhra Kingdom redirects to the page Andhra in Indian epic literature. If you say its wrong one. You can revert all of them. Thanks for notifying.--Vin09 (talk) 15:12, 11 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Western Chalukya Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pala dynasty. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 13 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Kumar Gandharva may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• '''Kumar Gandharva''' or '''Shivaputra Siddharamayya Komkalimath''' (pronunciation:((IPA-sa|kumɑːr ɡən̪d̪ʱərʋ ə|)) ([[Kannada]] ಕುಮಾರ ಗಂಧರ್ವ) (8 April 1924 - 12

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:44, 12 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Veera Ballala III may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Maharashtra|Devagiri]] occupied by the Delhi Sultan. The Delhi Sultanate was now being ruled by [[Muhammad bin Tughluq]., Veera Ballala III withdrew from his earlier pact to support to the Delhi

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:57, 3 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Veera Ballala II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halashi. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:27, 5 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Deva Raya II, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tenasserim and Malabar. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 25 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello,

• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AHindu_philosophy&diff=635608605&oldid=635608201

(not sure why additions did not work)

This is one of those templates that has a <includeonly> tag at its very start that needs disabling (temporarily) if any changes are to be visible when previewing it. (Turning it into a comment should work, i.e. making the first line <!--<includeonly>-->((Sidebar) You just need to remember to remove the comment tags before saving the new version of the template!

Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 16:55, 27 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS If this doesn't explain why you didn't see any changes, then I'm also puzzled. I've added the two saints to the template, though, following the above.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jayasimha II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daulatabad. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 23 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I'm Robvanvee. Pied Hornbill, thanks for creating Gunja Narasimha Swamy Temple, Tirumakudal Narasipura!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Interesting article!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Robvanvee 16:08, 3 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for creating Arakeshwara Temple, Haleyedatore, Pied Hornbill!

Wikipedia editor Robvanvee just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Also interesting!

To reply, leave a comment on Robvanvee's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Template:Other Hoysala temples has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sitush (talk) 15:33, 9 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not create navbox-style templates in an attempt to circumvent WP:NLIST. That particular template will be deleted anyway because it is ludicrous, as is a lot of stuff you have written about Hoysala architecture etc. - Sitush (talk) 18:48, 9 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This template is also going to be deleted. There is no need for it, and it is another example of your very peculiar adaptation of Wikipedia's conventions. See Talk:Hoysala architecture. - Sitush (talk) 20:59, 9 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hoysala architecture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gajasura. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:06, 11 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For articles on Hoysala architecture. Rayabhari (talk) 16:45, 13 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hoysala architecture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Motif. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 18 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What's the difference bw two in cats? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 15:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC) -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 15:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. The issue is you were dropping Jain related cat's on dynasties that were either mostly or totally Hindu. In medieval Karnataka, it was common for Hindu kings to have Jain poets/commanders and even saints/advisers in their court, but that does not mean the dynasty itself was Jain. True, every now and then you see a Hindu king take up Jainism or be deeply influenced by it while the later kings of that dynasty may have not shown any interest in following their forefather. So you can't call the entire dynasty 'Jain' for that one reason. Rashtrakuta king Amoghavarsha I (still being debated by historians because he was a devotee of Hindu Goddess Mahalakshmi too) and Kadamba king Shivakoti are good examples. The kings of those dynasties who ruled before them and after them did not follow Jainism. Hope you understand this difference and be more careful when you add cats. Good luck.Pied Hornbill (talk) 19:02, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since both Hinduism and jainism was prevalent, it would be good to add both the categories. I was replacing Jain clans with Jain dynasties, it took me huge time to make those changes and you reverted them and added Jain clans back. I think word dynasty is better than clan. If theres a difference between these two words, i am all open to the views. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 19:09, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Both were prevalent no doubt, but one has to focus on the ruling dynasty itself and be careful not to POV. Lets consider the Hoysalas and Western Ganga Dynasty for instance. The Hoysalas were Jains upto about 1110 AD when the dynasty was an obscure hill clan under the Kalyani Chalukyas. Once Bittideva (later called Vishnuvardhana) came to power and took up Hindu Vaishnavism, the rest of the dynasty followed him, either as Vaishnavas or Shaiva Hindus. But because they has already ruled as Jains for about a century (11th century) and Queen Shantala Devi (the most famous queen) was a Jain, one could have both Hindu and Jain cats attached to the article. Similarly the Western Gangas (4th-10 century). Up to about the 9th century, they were followers of Vedic Hindusim, but their real claim to fame (vis-a-vis architeture and literature) is during their Jain period (10th century) after which they go out of existence. So here again both cats are needed. So one has to carefully study their history and give correct weight. Otherwise we will have to add every cat for every religion under the Sun. Hope you understand this point.Pied Hornbill (talk) 19:19, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not discussing Hindu or Jain, categorise it based on the weights. I'm talking about word 'clan' and 'dynasty'. Why are you avoiding that question? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 19:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was not avoiding your question. Both mean the same, except the term Dynasty is usually used to define a clan that grows its area of control to the stature of a Kingdom and Empire. The term "ruling clan" is often used to for chiefdoms that pay tribute to larger kingdoms. Ofcourse, you may well find some authors who disagree with me. Its like splitting hairs.Pied Hornbill (talk) 19:57, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A clan simply implies a certain ruling family lineage.Pied Hornbill (talk) 20:00, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you agree both mean same thing, then please change clan tags to dynasties. We don't want duplicity in WP do we? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo 20:15, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pankaj, I only reverted three articles that you edited--Rashtrakutas empire, Chalukya dynasty and Durvinitha. Please continue your good work with other articles in changing cat types. I have no problem with your cat type changes. Only that cat should really not have been in those three articles in the first place which I have removed.Pied Hornbill (talk) 20:44, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, that's a logical argument! Though, it may be of interest that apparently Shankara was a Tamil, not a northern Indian. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:56, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arakeshwara Temple, Haleyedatore, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epigraph. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:07, 30 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tailapa II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jayasimha II. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 17 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tailapa II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bijapur district. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:00, 24 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, you have recently removed some content stating repetition. Please consider that if the content is in lede and section, that's not repetition. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · ) 02:27, 29 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please monitor Kannada People page, someone keeps adding Adil Shahi - Bijapur - Shivaji as Kannada people, it's absurd and very silly, when i removed it, he called me BJP or RSS troll. 61.3.103.42 (talk) 19:52, 3 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Don't add videos" on the edit comment tells me nothing - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carnatic_music&oldid=prev&diff=725006607. Kindly clarify. Sorry I am getting to this so late, but I am curious. Aruna Sankaranarayanan 01:54, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

• • Wiki is an encyclopedia. It is not meant to be used as a blog page with video uploads.Pied Hornbill (talk) 14:39, 4 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am sorry, but this does not seem reasonable. The media in question is relevant, and is from Wikimedia Commons. Are you trying to say that there are no Wikipedia articles, or there must be no Wikipedia articles which have a video? - Aruna Sankaranarayanan 20:05, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Pied Hornbill. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Important milestones in Kannada literature. Since you had some involvement with the Important milestones in Kannada literature redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:42, 21 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Pied Hornbill. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Pied Hornbill,
Isn't it proper to include a footer template on featured article: Political history of medieval Karnataka like 'Indian state of Karnataka'?
--Ganeshprasadkp (talk) 08:18, 4 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Its important not to clutter a featured article, with templates. There is already one template there regarding "History of Karnataka". Too many templates makes an article look shabby. There is no rule one way or another, as such.Pied Hornbill (talk) 14:24, 4 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ashoka was an emporor who lived between 3rd and 2nd century BCE not 5th and 6th century AD.. Kannada script evolved during ashokan times from Brahmi. It cannot be 5th and 6th century CE. Steamerrr (talk) 06:48, 26 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at MOS:INDICSCRIPT. You should read the MOS:INDICSCRIPT once again to understand really what it says and why it says. before you go enforcing without having full clue. Thank you for self reverting. regards. DBigXrayᗙ 15:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sanskrit too wasn't a "central language." Was it? Sam Noam (talk) 17:42, 28 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And Vellore was one of the capitals of Vijayanagara empire to boot. Sam Noam (talk) 18:14, 28 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Common languages" does not necessarily mean administrative or court languages. Sam Noam (talk) 18:16, 28 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Pied Hornbill. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to add new information? And how to add evidence Allwynsamuvel2 (talk) 13:51, 20 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Common languages is different than administrative languages of the dynasty

Common language means how many languages are spoken in the empire

Thank you, bro. Allwynsamuvel2 (talk) 14:02, 20 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Pied Hornbill Further discussion reply please :) Allwynsamuvel2 (talk) 14:07, 20 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are wrong. In a featured article, the language section (what ever it is called) is meant to include languages that are predominantly used for inscription and literature. In a land like India (or ancient India) it makes all the more sense because there were no shortage of spoken languages and dialects. Going by your definition, we would have to include numerous Prakrits, Telugu, Tulu amd Malayalam as well. That is not the intention of that template. Only predominantly used languages in public discourse, public instruction and literature is required there. Hope you understand this. Wikipedia is and encyclopedia and is about "MAJORITY" and "MAIN" facts, not minor facts or issues.Pied Hornbill (talk) 18:24, 20 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I totally agree with Pied Hornbill. Imagine what would happen to an article such as Roman empire, Byzantine empire, Ottoman Empire or even our own Gupta empire, Maratha empire or Chola dynasty if all commonly spoken languages were to be listed. Irrespective of whether an article is a featured article, good article, or just an article, this is a common practice related to empires and dynasties. However it is not the fault of User:Allwynsamuvel2 who has made the same classic mistake made by many other new users who come to wiki enthusiastically and start assuming things. It takes time for them to learn how to edit and therefore these discussions are necessary. Wiki articles are meant to be "Summary style article", not a verbose article which dwells on every minor issue leading the reader no where.Mayasandra (talk) 18:56, 20 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chandragiri is one of the capital of Vijayanagara empire. In Chandragiri many inscriptions were found in Telugu and Tamil languages. Vijayanagara empire also contribute a great works in Tamil literature. Vijayanagara empire is not only contribute to Kannada and Telugu, also Tamil too. Samuvel1 (talk) 08:47, 29 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Samuvel, wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Here only major facts are recorded, not minor facts. This is a common confusion that new users like you have. Tamil was only a provincial language of inscriptions and literature with very very few Tamil scholars being patronized in Vijayanagara. "Common languages" means "languages commonly used in the seat of power" (in this case Vijayanagara, the main capital from 1342-1565). Tamil was not a language of power in the capital of the Empire from 1342-1565 AD. Chandragiri was later capital after the fall of the main empire. What happened after 1565 is not of critical importance to the overall summary style article and gets very little coverage as such in popular literature. Hope I made this issue clear to you..Pied Hornbill (talk) 17:05, 29 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree with Pied Hornbill. If one were to consider the 5 languages (Kannada, Telugu, Sanskrit, Tamil and Malayalam), the order of importance with respect to political power and literary production, Tamil and Malayalam would be at the bottom. Kannada and Telugu dominated the empire. Kannada was the main language of inscriptions (according to ASI and other sources) and had a steady production of royal literature. In addition Carnatic music saw its emergence in Kannada first under Purandaradasa, Kanakadasa and others. Telugu literature dominated for a short period after 1500AD under Krishnadevaraya but sustained it's importance in Chandragiri and later also. Compared to all this, Tamil pales in importance.Holenarasipura (talk) 17:38, 29 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I quote the following from the Wikipedia page of Vijayanagaram empire:

"Kannada, Telugu and Tamil had been used in their respective regions of the empire. Over 7000 inscriptions (Shasana) including 300 copper plate inscriptions (Tamarashasana) have been recovered, almost half written in Kannada, the remaining in Telugu, Tamil and Sanskrit."

"Though much of the Tamil literature from this period came from Tamil speaking regions ruled by the feudatory Pandya who gave particular attention on the cultivation of Tamil literature, some poets were patronised by the Vijayanagara kings. Svarupananda Desikar wrote an anthology of 2824 verses, Sivaprakasap-perundirattu, on the Advaita philosophy. His pupil the ascetic, Tattuvarayar, wrote a shorter anthology, Kurundirattu, that contained about half the number of verses. Krishnadevaraya patronised the Tamil Vaishnava poet Haridasa whose Irusamaya Vilakkam was an exposition of the two Hindu systems, Vaishnava and Shaiva, with a preference for the former."

Now, of course, the languages were used in their respective regions. Certainly, Kannada wasn't used as extensively as Tamil in Tamil Nadu. Duh!

Now here are my following questions, Pied:

A) What do you mean by "common languages used by the seat of power"? The remnants of the Vijayanagaram empire, the Nayakas, widely used Tamil. Vellore, one of the capitals of Vijayanagaram empire, (if capitals are seats of power, by your definition) is in Tamil Nadu. Several inscriptions of the empire at the SriRangam temple are in Tamil. King Krishnadevaraya's preceptor Lakshmi Kumara Thathachariar was Tamil. And there are other inscriptions and literature of the Vijayanagaram empire which are in Tamil. So what is this rhubarb about common languages being "only administrative languages," I fail to understand. Who has said so? Is there such a rule instituted by Wikipedia?

B) When Tamil authors were patronised, as is acknowledged in the page itself, from which I have quoted, and when yet you claim rather astutely that Tamil was used only in Tamil Nadu and not elsewhere, as if Kannada were more widely used in Andhra Pradesh, why do you include Sanskrit? It certainly was far more marginally used than any other Dravidian language. And furthermore, why is there even a question of Malayalam being used, when no one has produced any proof of it?

C) In Shilhara Dynasty's page in which you've undone several edits made by some people claiming that Marathi was a common language, you never said that it wasn't widely used or the language of the "seat of power" or "an administrative language." And now the claim is back. No one has done nothing about it. And guess what, the citations affixed only contains allusions to and pictures of several Marathi "inscriptions." So why haven't you or anyone else erased that? I do not know. Why have such double standard of proof? When inscriptions cannot be accepted as citations for the use of a particular language on one page, why accept it in the other? Same is the case with the page about the Satvahana dynasty. So why is all this happening? It very clearly reveals something, but what that is, I do not wish to say right now.

Best, Chippy pest Chippy pest (talk) 20:01, 31 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please address my queries ASAP. I think the administrators will have to look into this.Chippy pest (talk) 13:15, 1 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have reverted all unsourced claims on this article. I'd briefly highlighted the issues regarding it on its talk page. Kindly look into it and resolve the issue. Also please ensure that there is no further disruptive editing or vandalism.

Thank you. Destroyer27 (talk) 16:50, 6 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Old Bengali is nothing but an offshoot of Old Maithili. Many examples could be given that the language of Charyapada is related to Oriya , Old Assamese and Old Maithili. There are no or much less traces of it being Old Bengali. Most of the old Bengali literature is nothing but minor alterations of Older literatureof Maithili. Vidyapati was a very respected author of Maithili, he also wrote some books in Abohatta, predecessor of Old Bengali. Even that Abohatta, claimed as old Bengali, is known as Maithili version of Abohatta. And this is oldest specimen of Bengali (actually Abohatta) literature, whereas Maithili had already came in its medieval form, having older literatures pointing towards 12th century (Varna Ratnakar and others). Even Assamese and Oriya does not explain the formations of compound verbs ( in present tense, especially), but Maithili does. Further, it shares many features to the two languages and their dialects. Oldest literatures of Assamese and Oriya have influences from Maithili. Even in Tripura, Maithili songs and dramas were prominent in 13th and 14th centuries. These all points towards the fact, that Maithili is the oldest and most culturally prosperous eastern language. And even, it is probably the oldest of New Indo Aryan languages. Ashutosh Jha (talk) 14:48, 29 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Ashutosh Jha, just because the earliest possible dating is 10th century, you cant place it above a Indian classical language such as Kannada. You can take a nominal and usually accepted date such as 11th-12th centuries and place it below Telugu which itself is a classical language of India. If Maithili were truly so old, why is it not in the running for the tag of classical language of India?Pied Hornbill (talk) 15:55, 29 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Also, even if you consider earliest possible versification, there are versified inscriptions in Kannada from 370 AD (Talagunda inscription for example) and 575 AD in Telugu (Choda Nellore inscription). So you have to go with a broadly accepted most possible nominal dating. In case of Kannada and Telugu, the earliest available book literature is precisely dated. Hope you understand.Pied Hornbill (talk) 16:01, 29 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I agree. the article under question only pertains to datings based on classical texts, not inscriptions or rudimentary writings on palm leaf or any other medium. Old Maithili falls under a long list of North India Indo-aryan languages that came into existence fully only after 12th century.Holenarasipura (talk) 16:24, 29 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There arw some supportings for granting Maithili a classical status. But please notice, I have not placed Classical Maithili before Kannada or Telegu. I have placed old Maithili before them. And old Maithili is just a predecessor of Classical Maithili (ultimately modern Maithili), Magahi and Abohatta (predecessor of old Bengali) with a big influence on Assamese and Oriya. It is directly related to Maithili, but it is different from old Maithili as Tamil is from old Tamil. But the problem is , you are supposing I am writing about Modern Maithili. Perhaps you are one of them, who think old Maithili as old Bengali. But Maithili is closest to the old Maithili (which you are thinking Bengali). You can call it whatever you want, but that's the reality. Even today a Maithili speaking person can understand those old Bengali verses, but a Bengali can't. Is it not an irony? For an example, in Bengali 'I am eating' is said 'āmi khāchhī'. But you can't explain the formation. It is not observed as a periphrastic verb. But in Maithili, it is 'ham khāit-chhi'. It clearly shows how it came. Even the classical language Oriya can't give these results. Old Maithili (or old Bengali) should not be treated as the Magadhi Apabhramsha, which was ancestor to Oriya and Assamese as well, besides Old Maithili. Classical Maithili was first recorded in the Jyotirishwar Thakur's Varna Ratnakar in 12th century, which flourished later under Vidyapati. Charyapada doesn't belong to an individual author not in a fixed period. Some of the verses are in the old Oriya, some in the old Assamese, some in the old Maithili and some being composed in a mix of these. Old royal records of this area along with the famous Panjis give a systematic development of Maithili. And Maithili is indeed a north Indian​language, but not a dialect of any language. It not only differs very much from its neighbours besides Magahi, but to most of the languages that it is the only language along with non-official Magahi in the world in which verbs not only depend on the subject but also on the object. I don't know why it has been given a classical language status. I can place it after 9th century in that page, but I don't think it to be called old Bengali.

Ashutosh Jha (talk) 18:25, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I had written in previous talk that "I don't know why it has been given classical status." Please take it as "I don't know why it has 'not' been given classical status." Also there are some spacing problems in the above, but please manage it.

Ashutosh Jha (talk) 18:33, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I think you have misunderstood the intent of that page "Classical language". It is meant to list all languages by their earliest available text, either secular or religious. Any writing before that is considered an archaic form that could be in the form of inscriptions, simple verses or even versified passages that are not meant to qualify the language on that page. There are versified inscription in Kannada from c.370 (Talagunda inscription) and in Telugu from c.575 (Nellore inscription) but these are not classical texts. The older version (prior to its first classical text) of a language is not meant to be listed here. True, some languages are listed as "old Norse", "old Saxon" etc, but all refer to classical texts such as the "Sagas". The old Maithili you refer to can be in a different page. Going by your argument, Old Kannada needs to be placed in the section called "classical antiquity" just based on passages in inscriptions from the 4th century. Hope you understand. With regards to "classical status" for Maithili, antiquity is not the only criteria. A language should have a literary tradition that is independent and not born out of any other language though influences are acceptable.Pied Hornbill (talk) 17:47, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maithili not only has its own literary traditions, but it also influence other languages, especially Bengali, Magahi, Assamese, and also influenced creoles in north east states. Even poetry works of the Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore are influenced by Maithili and Maithili poet Vidyapati. His first work, Bhanusimh Thakurer Padabali is written in Brajabuli, a language which is immensely based on Maithili. Bengali literature, especially till Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, Bengali literature were mere minor alterations of Maithili literature. And this could be called translation, but essentially it was Maithili. Like 'Chhala' (meaning, was) was altered to 'Chhila'. Even in Tripura, Maithili songs were popular. Even, the songs of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu had been influenced by Maithili. Now, what else you want to be called as a classical language. It has antiquity and influences on other languages. Influences from Sanskrit can be observed in all the languages of India, including all the government authorised classical languages of India. So, why not Maithili. Ashutosh Jha (talk) 09:10, 22 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• • Somehow I think you are missing the point Mr.Jha. I think this discussion has taken a tangential turn which does not need further impetus. I have made my point clear w.r.t your claim on old Maithili as far as the article Classical language is concerned. If you have any grievances, I suggest you bring in an administrator to resolve it. But a 9th-11th century dating of earliest Maithili texts is not tenable.Pied Hornbill (talk) 17:25, 22 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jaykul72 (talk) 07:01, 18 April 2020 (UTC) You removed my edit on Vijayanagara empire on the caste of the founders. I have introduced a good faith edit on the page Vijayanagara empire that "Founders of Vijayanagara empire Harihara I and Bukka were from Sheperds (Kuruba) clan", this has been mentioned in the secondary source book by Robert Sewell (1900): A forgotten empire (vijayanagar), page 64. The author has compiled the book from multiple primary sources of books from Faxian, Dominogo Paes, Ibn Batuta who were visitors during the Vijayanagar dynasty. This as per Wikipedia:Reliable sources page is a better source of data. Please state the reasons for your claim that British era books are inaccurate. You also mention that no recent book mentions the caste of founder, this does not mean the fact stated in a historical book is inaccurate. Please provide references to sources where you find the fact stated by my edit can be contested. Let us take the source Robert Sewell, A Forgotten Empire Vijayanagar: A Contribution to the History of India, to the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, instead of edit warring.Reply[reply]

• Jaykul72, I understand Robert Sewell's book was the very first book ever written on the history of the Vijayanagara Empire, but it was written in the 19th century if I am not mistaken. Generally books written prior to Indian Independence when indology, archeology and epigraphy was not as developed as it has today is frowned upon. There are a few exceptions to this rule ofcourse. However, issues such as caste are flimsy reasons to use such an old book when there are literally dozens of later published books, especially in the last 25 years that give a better account. "Kuruba", "Golla" "Kaapu" and such claims that often come to this article usually carry narrow sectarian intentions which an encyclopedia is not meant to portray. Hope you understand.Pied Hornbill (talk) 21:03, 18 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  
• The text from Robert Sewell's book provides a contrarian view to the claim on the social life that "hindu caste system was rigidly followed". Stating a claim without including the oldest book ever written on the Vijayanagara empire constitutes selective bias on part of the editor. As the founders of the vijayanagara empire were themselves from a kuruba clan. This is an important fact that needs to be accounted for before making a wild claim that hindu caste system was rigidly followed. This is in no way a filmsy reason. Further, you have not provided any valid sources for undoing my edit which contest the fact I have stated. Further here is another secondary source, Dhere, Ramchandra Chintaman (2011). Rise of a Folk God: Vitthal of Pandharpur, South Asia Research. Feldhaus, Anne (trans.). Oxford University Press. p. 243. ISBN 978-0-19977-764-8 has stated that Sanghama dynasty was founded by kurubas. As per WP:QUO I have provided a secondary reference. Further, kurubas, gollas, yadavs do not consititute "narrow sectarian" tribe as you mentioned, they population of these clans is about 90 million as compared with bramhins who are 60 million. However, 20% of the social life paragraph is about brahmins, whereas you are reverting adding one line on shepherds clan. Jaykul72 (talk) 02:23, 19 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• • Jaykul72, going by your reasoning, a summary style featured encyclopedia article should contain information on the contributions of every caste in Southern India? This is not about whose populaton is what percentage, but rather what are the main summary points that a summary article can present. Do you think only the Lingayats fought for the empire? Don't you think Non Lingayat Shaivas, Vaishnava chiefs, Gollas, Reddys, Kaapus, Kammas, Velirs etc etc also fought various battles for the empire. Should we start adding lines to include that too? Hope you get the drift. I suggest this new user firt understand what a summary article is all about before making this article a fertile playground for caste aspirants. Hope you understand.Holenarasipura (talk) 02:51, 20 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• • Holenarasipura, thanks for your comment. That's the point that I am trying to raise here. When we present the summary of the social life in Vijayanagar empire, you do not have 20% of the paragraph dedicate to one caste that is Bramhins who might have been 3-4% of the population by then. Reddys were the chieftains/zamindars in most villages in Telugu speaking areas, Gowdas were the chieftains in Kannada speaking areas - Bangalore was founded by Kempegowda during Vijayanagara empire. Keladi Nayakas were Lingayats who ruled a large state under Vijayanagar kings (Shimoga) they continued to rule for 200 years after the fall of Vijayanagar. Adding all these references would make the social life paragraph more balanced. The other option, let us not allow any mention at all. Remove all references to caste and keep it generic. Thanks. Jaykul72 (talk) 04:25, 20 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Moved to Vijayanagara Empire Talk Page

This is regarding the reversion of my edit on Hoysalas. While I agree that dynasties lose and gain their sovereignty, for most of the other Indian dynasties like Western Chalukyas, Rashtrakutas, Kakatiyas the reign mentioned in the lead is from their date of sovereignty to their disestablishment, while 'Earliest Rulers' is the entry for the year of their first recorded rulers, either independent or vassals. Shouldn't the same convention be followed everywhere? This also becomes prominent as the name of the article is 'Hoysala Empire' and not just 'Hoysala Dynasty'. Reo kwon (talk) 09:09, 6 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Hi. How are you Reo kwon. I do see your point. When one looks at the history of the Hoysalas in detail you see a certain peculiarity that may not seen in the case of other dynasties, and let me explain. From around the beginning of the 11th century, the Hoysalas remained hereditary rulers of the Malnad region although under the Western Chalukya umbrella (and we even see them building architectural temples in Chalukyan style). In c.1116, with the rise of King Vishnuvardhana and his victory over the Chola Empire (the main adversaries of the Chalukyas), the Hoysalas enjoy a vast amount of independence with a very nominal allegiance to their overlords. From c.1150 to c.1189 their subordination to their overlords further diminishes with the fast decline of the Chalukyas themselves. Perhaps c.1116 is the more accurate date of establishment, but I will not make a big issue of this. I have self reverted.Pied Hornbill (talk) 15:54, 6 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That indicated their independent rule but how about indicating their complete rule just like in the pages of Paramara dynasty who were vassals of Rashtrakuta dynasty in their early rule and Chandelas of Jejakabhukti who initially ruled as feudatories of the Gurjara-Pratihara dynasty etc Abhishek0831996 (talk) 17:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• • There appears to be two schools here, one which wants the entire rule and another that wants only the independent rule to be highlighted. The FA Hoysala Empire is an example for this where only the independent rule is highlighted but the box gives full rule details, from beginning to end. This argument can go on without a solution. Since both the Seunas ad Hoysalas were essentially contemporaries and both started as subordinates of the Western (Kalyani) Chalukyas, I though we could be consistent. But there is no rule as such in wiki.Pied Hornbill (talk) 17:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Respected Sir, you’ve been reverting my edits about the origin of Rashtrakutas, by claiming I am removing existing data. However this is not true. I have only added new data and have not touched any of the existing information. Kindly look carefully.

I have nominated Vijayanagara Empire for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. I have left this notice because you are one of the active top editors for the page. Izno (talk) 20:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There were multiple style corrections made in the same edits—reverting the entire thing deleted those corrections, which were necessary. BiliousBob (talk) 13:04, 22 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I changed the sentence as previously it meant that Vidyaranya belonged to Vaishnava Order. It is factually incorrect. Vidyaranya was a saint from Advaita philiosophy and Sringeri Mutt was established by Adi Shankaracharya. Provided reference from official Mutt. Please do not change this unless you have a better argument and proof.

https://www.sringeri.net/jagadgurus Hnaluru (talk) 11:45, 23 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your web source is not FA worthy. Bring a secondary source such as a book published by a historian.Pied Hornbill (talk) 17:48, 23 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do not intend to start an edit war in the article but I give my references about Swami Vidyaranya here:

Page 1041:

https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/A_Comprehensive_History_of_India_The_Del/iRJuAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=vidyaranya+nilakanta+sastri&dq=vidyaranya+nilakanta+sastri&printsec=frontcover

A Comprehensive History of India: The Delhi Sultanat, A.D. 1206-1526, edited by Mohammad Habib and Khaliq Ahmad Nizami

Page 300:

https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/A_Forgotten_Empire_Vijayanagar/_kc3LKI_slEC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=vidyaranya+swamy+vijayanagara+empire&printsec=frontcover

A Forgotten Empire (Vijayanagar): A by Contribution to the History of India By By Robert Sewell, Fernão Nunes, Domingos Paes

I hope you will have the decency of reading through these and make the changes yourself. Hnaluru (talk) 07:00, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please don't get personal. I will go through your references. Give me a day.Pied Hornbill (talk) 11:08, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I didn't mean anything personal. It is all business and moreover when I look at so many articles that were redrafted with scanty and spurious evidences, I feel that Wikipedia has lost it's values particularly for someone who relied on Wikipedia for the past 20 years for information.

Anyway no offense meant. Hnaluru (talk) 16:05, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The first source you gave me is a snippet. The second source by Sewell is a British era source that has been rejected as a policy by wikipedia. So I have gone ahead and used the same source that was used earlier (book by Suryanatha Kamath, 2001) and copy edited to be more inline with your edits, but made a specific reference to the founding kings. The preceding line makes reference to the secular nature of the later kings too.Pied Hornbill (talk) 21:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@User:Pied Hornbill Thanks for keeping away the vandals from all the featured articles on Indian Empires. I have learnt a lot about the Karnataka empires from them. Superbly written and sourced. Thank you for maintaining them. _/\_ 2405:204:5319:BF8F:28FC:8A54:7517:627C (talk) 14:13, 26 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Native Kannada poetic metres has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 05:35, 11 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have nominated Hoysala Empire for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:44, 6 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm Throast. I noticed that you recently removed content from Chalukya dynasty without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Throast ^{((ping)) me!} (talk | contribs) 11:28, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. How are you. Yes I removed that for a particular reason. The content introduced their is misleading calling the Chalukyas as "Velir" people which is a name given to the tiller/ farming community of Tamil speaking regions. The Chalukya home base and origins are in the upper Deccan around Badami in the Kannada spoken region. They are tillers no doubt, but they are not Tamil if you get the difference. The content introduced misleads the reader to believe they were Tamils, while through out their rule they were sworn enemies of the same.Pied Hornbill (talk) 11:34, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It would be helpful for you to explain as much in your edit summaries, especially when reverting at such a large scale. I want to point out that the edits you reverted were all supported by inline citations, so regardless of whether you find the information misleading, if it is adequately supported by inline citations, it can stay. Maybe the best way forward would be to start a discussion at Talk:Chalukya dynasty and get other editors' input. (For full disclosure: I indented your response to visually separate it from my message; feel free to undo this if you prefer no formatting) Throast ^{((ping)) me!} (talk | contribs) 11:42, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's the real problem, when the editor is an IP, throws in some data and vanishes opening up a non-directional discussion.Pied Hornbill (talk) 11:52, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I have re-added the edit from the Velir article. It needs to be in the Chalukya article, whether people like it or dislike it. Wikipedia strictly follows WP:UNCENSORED. As his (@Throast) sayings, we should be neutral. Further, those references are WP:RS and appropriate to be there. I hope you understand my concern and If my request seems wrong to you, I apologize. Wormholexx (talk) 23:31, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for reverting the fake GDP value on the Rashtrakuta dynasty article. I'd intended to remove it along with the user's similar edits on other articles, but I didn't notice that they'd edited this article twice and ended up undoing the wrong one so the figure was still there. Neiltonks (talk) 14:19, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Note that I did not start the discussion, but the original poster forgot to notify you. – dudhhr ^talk _contribs (he/they) 01:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, a user already warned you that you revert WP:RS edits which doesn't suit your pov. The Chalukya dynasty was a kannadiga dynasty. But they originated from Yadu (Src:Kamath). Velir linking is an additional context to the claim. If you think someone claims Chalukya was a Tamil dynasty, cease this thinking. No one is claiming that. Velirs originated from the same northern yadu origin. Chola's incriptions cite Chalukyas and Velirs belong to the same stock.

Without consensus, you're removing WP:RS sourced content. It is not constructive manner. I hope you understand. Still if you try to revert the WP:RS edit with the wrong summary, It will create chaos between us. We are here to build a Wikipedia. If you think the content is wrong, we can seek WP:RFC. Even after this if you try to revert due to your ownership issues, I'll take this issue to ANI. As a fellow editor,I respect your time and value. Wormholexx (talk) 16:23, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]