Asitaram

The additions have been made after extensive research of South Indian Inscriptions. Please do not revert without stating a reason for reverting.

Thanks, Aravind Sitaraman

Hoysala Empire

Please dont add you POV without references and valid citations. The citation should come with complete info such as Source material, author, page number, publisher, year of publication, ISBN/OCLC number for the book etc. If you cant provide this info, keep your POV to yourself.thanks.Dineshkannambadi 13:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

My response to Dinesh Kannambadi:

I have cited the south indian inscriptions that I host on http://inscriptions.whatisindia.com. The inscriptions have been provided by ASI. I believe research is a process of inquiry where multiple theories are debated and earlier assumptions are questioned and challenged. Shutting out discussions is not the right way to go.

Rgds, Aravind Sitaraman Editor, whatisindia.com

Can you point to me the exact inscription you are taking about? Is this your opinion or the opinion of a historians?Dineshkannambadi 13:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

If it is your opinion as an edtior of a web page, it has little value. If it is the opinion of a historian from ASI, then it has some credibility. The word MUNDA may be common across South India, which does not make it a Tamil Cholan name.Dineshkannambadi 13:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, thanks for being very welcoming about discussion and dismissing someone who has worked on inscriptions extensively and also taken the trouble to host it. This is the problems with us where we are unwilling to listen to another point of view but to dismiss it quickly.

Most research into inscriptions was done before 1935 when the British turned off the funding. I did not say that that it was a Tamil Cholan. All I said was that the word Munda (which has not been repeated in inscriptions since) was a previously known name and a country/land associated with it. The question is whether Munda was a name that was used to denote a king of that country (as Cholan is used to describe a Chola King). The references made to Munda-Rashtra is http://www.whatisindia.com/inscriptions/south_indian_inscriptions/volume_12/stones_1_to_25.html.

Unless we question assumed theories and research, there can be no development. Perhaps that is why there is no development in historical studies in India.

Sir, it is not for you or me to question theories, make personal assumptions/decisions and write about it on wikipedia. That becomes original research which is not acceptable on wiki. Again you have not given the name of the historian who has made this claim and other details I asked for, for this to be a citable info. Anyway, please give the inscription number on the linked page.thanks.Dineshkannambadi 14:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your clarification. Most of the wiki pages are filled with such theories. My understanding of wiki policy is that citation of a theory (published or personal) as an absolute fact is not acceptable in Wiki but not an alternate point of view is. As I said before, no research has been done on epigraphy since 1935. In any case, the inscriptions that contain information on Munda-Rastra is 4, 5 on the page I have listed. You could also used a text find on this page or on any search engine to find it.

Nobody is trying to establish an absolute fact here. But even an alternate theory has to come from valid sources and cant be personal opinions based on conjecture, coincidence. What is on other wiki pages is not relevant to this topic. By the way, It was I who put the "whatsindia.com" link as reference on the Hoysala article. If you have any more discussions, we should do it on the article talk page and have more editors be involved, not here.Dineshkannambadi 14:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I read the inscription 4 and 5. It makes no reference what so ever and is not connected to the Hoysala Empire in any concievable way. we are talking about two different Empires seperated by centuries. Clearly, Mr Sitaraman has connected the info on the inscription "Munda-rashtra" by name conjecture (just because there was a Hoysala king by name Munda) and has tried to POV on the Hoysala page. Please avoid this in the future. If you are interested, we can call a larger audience. thanks.Dineshkannambadi 15:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Hoysala Empire

If you don't think I did the right thing, ask User talk:Dineshkannambadi. Maybe I made a mistake. Sincerely, Mattisse 14:29, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you did the right thing here to keep POV out.Dineshkannambadi 14:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Dinesh:

As the self-nominated custodian of the page, you are welcome to throw out the comments and stub out what does not meet *your* POV and inrepretation of data. As much as I find your approach to further research frustrating and unhelpful, I will defer to your energy.

Thanks, Aravind

YOU SHOULD TAKE UP YOUR INSECURITIES WITH YOUR OWN. RUDRAN-TAM-PIRATTIYAR. ENDS THERE! Sembiyan (talk) 00:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

You claim to be editor of a reputable site, but you do not seem to have one of the most important inscriptions of Rajaraja. ......................signed Kurukadi Kilan. Where is it? Sembiyan (talk) 00:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

From your site: Queen of Uttama doing the sivasraddha for her hubby during the reign of Rajaraja. Keep it flowing, I like this beer. Sembiyan (talk) 06:45, 21 October 2010 (UTC)