This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Dravidian peoples article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |
Dravidian peoples was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||
|
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Dravidian peoples:
|
Shouldn't in this article the fact be mentioned, that according to Srimad Bhagavatam 8.24.13 the Manu Vaivasvata, son of the sungod Surya, brother of Yama and founder of the vedic ("aryan") society in India after the great flood, is called "the king of Dravida"? That this contradicts the "Arian Invasion Theory" must not be mentioned explicidly.-- 87.178.207.98 ( talk) 22:23, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
In Ukranian and Russian ancient is DREVNI. Because Eastern-Iranics Jas,Ossetians,alans,Sarmatians,Scythians lived in Ukraine modern East Slavic has 40% of it's words ethymologically related to the Indo-Iranian languages including Sanskrit . Dravidians in Sanskrit means the Ancient ones . Edelward ( talk) 10:30, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Dravidian peoples's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Sengupta2006":
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:18, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
LA king's observations are tangeñtial to some extent ,about others it is far distants & confusing. Abdullateefkh20 ( talk) 00:59, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Change the name Dravidian to tamil people. There's no civilization in the name of Dravidian. The name Dravidians is a small community came from other land to this tamilnadu noted pls GovindanGanason ( talk) 08:36, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
I understand that Tamils may be the most 'proud' people who are dravidian, but that doesn't mean you should flood the people infobox with tamil people. For example, Thiruvallar is put first in the infobox (and although he may be great), he was the father of Tamil literature etc. However, Adi Shankaracarya was an Indian saint known all over India known for his principles of Advaita which changed Hinduism to what it is today. That is one example. Subramaniya Bharti was a tamil poet, (significant in Tamil Nadu), but not very known and important outside of it. Keep in mind that Tamils are not the only Dravidian peoples, and if anything, are possibly the furthest in genetics to the actual 'Dravidian' people from the middle east who brought the language over. There must be diversity represented by this infobox as that is the purpose of it. It actually looks extremely unorganized and ridiculous as of now, especially how it was said earlier that Dravidian history begins with tamil history. It is mentioned that the Katar is a 'Tamil' Dagger, while it is not said that Kalaripayattu is a martial art of Kerala. Kanchipuramsilk83 ( talk) 14:11, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Dravidian peoples's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Kumar":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:44, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I verified the sources stated in wiki for Dramira which mentioned Pandian. But 3 sources quoted in wiki never mentioned Pandiya as Dramira. So I am going to remove those contents related to Pandian of Dramira. The links for 3 sources given below.
This article does not talk anything about the existence of Scytho-Dravidians of Maharashtra. I am adding a passing note with credible evidence. Kindly check the below URLs. My only request - discuss on this page before making abrupt changes. https://books.google.co.in/books?id=LnoREHdzxt8C&pg=PA31&dq=scytho+dravidian+maratha&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAGoVChMIl5nD0YD6yAIVxsamCh0SDgSd#v=onepage&q=scytho%20dravidian%20maratha&f=false https://books.google.co.in/books?id=8WNEcgMr11kC&pg=PA71&dq=scytho+dravidian+maratha&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAmoVChMIl5nD0YD6yAIVxsamCh0SDgSd#v=onepage&q=scytho%20dravidian%20maratha&f=false
Amit20081980 User talk:Amit20081980 09:40, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Reci et al. does not say
What it does say is
and
That's something different. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 17:32, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Reich et al. (2009):
And please, don't remove sourced info as you did in these two edits diff diff. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:09, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
References
But you also removed again sourced content: "higher castes," "lower castes." Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 09:44, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
So, now you removed the castes a third time.It's notjust what Metspalu (2011) says, it's what a long series of publications have been saying throughout many years. It's not only a matter of geography, it's also a matter of social status. Period. Stop it. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:42, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
With the same edit, you changed the link from Australoid race to Austroasiatic languages. I can understand why, but this is not about languages, but about genes and peoples. I've changed the links again, to Negritos, which is the AAA we're talking about here. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 09:52, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
So, you removed the link again, you removed sourced info, and you're making statements which are not supported by Basu et al. (2016) diff. Basu discenrs four ancestral groups in India, AAA being one of them. According to Basu, the ASI are are related to the AAA, but not exactly the same. The AAA are descendants of the earliest settlers (but not exactly the same; the ASI are derived from the AAA (and possibly some other early population). Basu does not say "the ASI are earliest settlers in India"; they say "the ASI and the AAA being early settlers in India." I admit that I also used the word "earliest," so we may need to fine-tune that term; but you can't remove the term "AAA" just because of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I don't know what your problem is, but you can't censor basic facts. And note, again, that "Negritos" is a common term in scholarly publications. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:53, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
References
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.192.210.36 ( talk • contribs) 22:14, 26 March 2016
Please look at this study, I'm sure you have but you seem to have missed this. [1]
" By sampling populations, especially the autochthonous tribal populations, which represent the geographical, ethnic, and linguistic diversity of India, we have inferred that at least four distinct ancestral components—not two, as estimated earlier (9,10)—have contributed to the gene pools of extant populations of mainland India. The Andaman archipelago was peopled by members of a distinct, fifth ancestry. "
Negrito forms distinct, fifth ancestry, not related to the four ANI, ASI, AAA and ATB.
" The absence of significant resemblance with any of the neighboring populations is indicative of the ASI and the AAA being early settlers in India, possibly arriving on the “southern exit” wave out of Africa. Differentiation between the ASI and the AAA possibly took place after their arrival in India. The ANI and the ATB can clearly be rooted to the CS-Asians and E-Asians, respectively; they likely entered India through the northwest and northeast corridors, respectively. Ancestral populations seem to have occupied geographically separated habitats. However, there was some degree of early admixture among the ancestral populations as evidenced by extant populations possessing multiancestral components and some geographical displacements as well."
Therefore, Munda is still appropriate term to use here when we are talking about AAA in terms of India. 117.192.210.36 ( talk) 21:53, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
References
Therefore, we should delink it from Negrito and just add Ancestral Austro-Asiatic/AAA 117.192.210.36 ( talk) 22:42, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
At the talkpage, the table of contents is contained within the to do list, and collapsed. At the main page, the TOC is also collpased. Which template is being used here, and where? And how can we get back to the standard display, both for the talkpage and for the main article? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 19:46, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Dravidian peoples. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 04:18, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Dravidian people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://inic.utexas.edu/asnic/subject/peopleandlanguages.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Dravidian people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:20, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
@ Kautilya3: They are giving false population numbers, " http://www.friendsoftelugu.org" and " http://tamilo.com" is not government source. They have also added random flags with outsourced content. We have govt sources on Tamil language page, it's 75.8 million, not 78 million. And, telugu language page also has govt survey source (india times) says 74 million first language speakers. We should remove population numbers from all, or else they will keep adding false numbers every week, as langauge page and ethnic group page gives better population information.
Near East : Given source of genetic study said "Nonetheless, the fact that we can reject West Eurasian population sources from Anatolia, mainland Europe, and the Levant diminishes the likelihood that these areas were sources of Indo-European (or other) languages in South Asia." As study says, Zagros neolithic farmer are from Elam region, it's not in Near East (Levant/Anatolia). 117.192.206.150 ( talk) 21:14, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
The source for Population says 200 million but the Article says 250 Million, Can someone with Access fix this, please?
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Dravidian people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:46, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
I would like to point out that currently Dravidians are also found in Australia. Modern migration has been taking place over the last eight decades. Some countries already mentioned are Malaysia, Singapore, UK, USA and Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.246.180.191 ( talk) 18:42, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
I have some time ago deleted/changed the statement: " Archaic Ancestral South Asians, descended from the first migrants out of Africa who are not related to any group outside of the Indian subcontinent." to " Archaic Ancestral South Asians who are not related to any group outside of the Indian subcontinent." My change was based on the given reference. The edit was reverted because it is written in the source, but I can not find any part of the reserach that support this claim. I have also used the search function. The word "african" is not included in the reseach and is not used to call them migrants out of africa. (At least I do not find this part). Could someone show me this part of the research? And include the part as comment to the reference? Thanks, 212.241.98.39 ( talk) 20:08, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
According to Narasimhan et al. (2018), Dravidians formed as a mixture of Archaic Ancestral South Asians,and neolithic farmers from Iran. [1]
According to Narasimhan et al. (2018), Dravidians have a mixture of origins: Archaic Ancestral South Asians, descended from the first migrants out of Africa who are related to Negritos and Australian Aborigines. Related groups are the indigenous inhabitants of the Andaman Islands and much of Maritime Southeast Asia. Another group is neolithic farmers from Iran. These farmers brought agriculture to the Indian Subcontinent, but are distinct from the later Indo-Aryan migrations. [1]
<br.
References
Whenever I read an article on ancient Indian history, I see people only writing about the Indus valley civilization and the Aryans. But what about Dravidians? Didn't they exist even before the Aryans came to India? Also I see a lot of other languages follow the Dravidian script or something similar like the Georgian, Korean, Sri Lankan etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nittin Das ( talk • contribs)
This article is full of orphaned Harvard-style references like Lockard 2007. I strongly suspect they originated as the result of sloppy copy-paste moves of chunks of text from other articles. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 14:02, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
The article's grammar and capitalization needs polishing. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Chickensarebleepssorryuncle ( talk) 03:37, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Why does the map show a Dravidian group called Malto, but the Malto people are nowhere mentioned in this article? Please fix. 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 07:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the opening sentence to reflect the chosen title of the article, e.g. The Dravidian peoples, or Dravidians… 96.8.24.95 ( talk) 02:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I refer to the following content from the lead:
The Dravidian peoples are of a mixed genetic origin and formed initially due to the mixture of indigenous South Asian Hunter Gatherers and Neolithic West Asian farmers from Iran, with all [1]/almost all Dravidian groups later additionally acquiring admixture from Steppe Yamnaya pastoralists. [2] [3] [4] From these interactions and migrations arose eventually the so-called "Hindus synthesis", after 500 BCE. [5]
There are multiple problems with these references. Together they appear to form a synthesis of unsupported original research.
The notion that the Yamnaya, a Bronze Age people who lived in Ukraine from 3300-2600 BCE, relocated to South Asia and donated genetic material to the ancestors of Dravidians, is a very specific idea, which should be supported with high quality secondary sources, which actually contain the word 'Yamnaya', per WP:SCIRS. Since none of these are secondary sources, and only Reich, et al. can be considered a valid primary source, I removed this content. Thanks for reading, and happy editing! Hunan201p ( talk) 13:22, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
References
"Dravidians are also present in Singapore or the United Arab Emirates through recent migration" ... and many other places too. This sentence is pointless. 216.8.188.31 ( talk) 14:56, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
there is a line linking a "tamil brahmin madisar" to the clothing of "dravidian women". there are no links to a tamil brahmin, who follow indo aryan culture, to that of the native dravidian people. adopting a sari does not make them "dravidian". genetic studies also disagree. Temporary 1010 ( talk) 18:10, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Are all Central Dravidian (Kolami–Parji), North Dravidian (Brahui-Kurukh), Gondi-Kui languages speakers considered as sheduled tribes in India? Kaiyr ( talk) 08:15, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
Like Vijayanagaras. Venuvg04 ( talk) 06:49, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Dravidian peoples article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |
Dravidian peoples was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||
|
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Dravidian peoples:
|
Shouldn't in this article the fact be mentioned, that according to Srimad Bhagavatam 8.24.13 the Manu Vaivasvata, son of the sungod Surya, brother of Yama and founder of the vedic ("aryan") society in India after the great flood, is called "the king of Dravida"? That this contradicts the "Arian Invasion Theory" must not be mentioned explicidly.-- 87.178.207.98 ( talk) 22:23, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
In Ukranian and Russian ancient is DREVNI. Because Eastern-Iranics Jas,Ossetians,alans,Sarmatians,Scythians lived in Ukraine modern East Slavic has 40% of it's words ethymologically related to the Indo-Iranian languages including Sanskrit . Dravidians in Sanskrit means the Ancient ones . Edelward ( talk) 10:30, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Dravidian peoples's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Sengupta2006":
{{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:18, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
LA king's observations are tangeñtial to some extent ,about others it is far distants & confusing. Abdullateefkh20 ( talk) 00:59, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Change the name Dravidian to tamil people. There's no civilization in the name of Dravidian. The name Dravidians is a small community came from other land to this tamilnadu noted pls GovindanGanason ( talk) 08:36, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
I understand that Tamils may be the most 'proud' people who are dravidian, but that doesn't mean you should flood the people infobox with tamil people. For example, Thiruvallar is put first in the infobox (and although he may be great), he was the father of Tamil literature etc. However, Adi Shankaracarya was an Indian saint known all over India known for his principles of Advaita which changed Hinduism to what it is today. That is one example. Subramaniya Bharti was a tamil poet, (significant in Tamil Nadu), but not very known and important outside of it. Keep in mind that Tamils are not the only Dravidian peoples, and if anything, are possibly the furthest in genetics to the actual 'Dravidian' people from the middle east who brought the language over. There must be diversity represented by this infobox as that is the purpose of it. It actually looks extremely unorganized and ridiculous as of now, especially how it was said earlier that Dravidian history begins with tamil history. It is mentioned that the Katar is a 'Tamil' Dagger, while it is not said that Kalaripayattu is a martial art of Kerala. Kanchipuramsilk83 ( talk) 14:11, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Dravidian peoples's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Kumar":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:44, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I verified the sources stated in wiki for Dramira which mentioned Pandian. But 3 sources quoted in wiki never mentioned Pandiya as Dramira. So I am going to remove those contents related to Pandian of Dramira. The links for 3 sources given below.
This article does not talk anything about the existence of Scytho-Dravidians of Maharashtra. I am adding a passing note with credible evidence. Kindly check the below URLs. My only request - discuss on this page before making abrupt changes. https://books.google.co.in/books?id=LnoREHdzxt8C&pg=PA31&dq=scytho+dravidian+maratha&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAGoVChMIl5nD0YD6yAIVxsamCh0SDgSd#v=onepage&q=scytho%20dravidian%20maratha&f=false https://books.google.co.in/books?id=8WNEcgMr11kC&pg=PA71&dq=scytho+dravidian+maratha&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAmoVChMIl5nD0YD6yAIVxsamCh0SDgSd#v=onepage&q=scytho%20dravidian%20maratha&f=false
Amit20081980 User talk:Amit20081980 09:40, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Reci et al. does not say
What it does say is
and
That's something different. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 17:32, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Reich et al. (2009):
And please, don't remove sourced info as you did in these two edits diff diff. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:09, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
References
But you also removed again sourced content: "higher castes," "lower castes." Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 09:44, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
So, now you removed the castes a third time.It's notjust what Metspalu (2011) says, it's what a long series of publications have been saying throughout many years. It's not only a matter of geography, it's also a matter of social status. Period. Stop it. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:42, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
With the same edit, you changed the link from Australoid race to Austroasiatic languages. I can understand why, but this is not about languages, but about genes and peoples. I've changed the links again, to Negritos, which is the AAA we're talking about here. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 09:52, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
So, you removed the link again, you removed sourced info, and you're making statements which are not supported by Basu et al. (2016) diff. Basu discenrs four ancestral groups in India, AAA being one of them. According to Basu, the ASI are are related to the AAA, but not exactly the same. The AAA are descendants of the earliest settlers (but not exactly the same; the ASI are derived from the AAA (and possibly some other early population). Basu does not say "the ASI are earliest settlers in India"; they say "the ASI and the AAA being early settlers in India." I admit that I also used the word "earliest," so we may need to fine-tune that term; but you can't remove the term "AAA" just because of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I don't know what your problem is, but you can't censor basic facts. And note, again, that "Negritos" is a common term in scholarly publications. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:53, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
References
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.192.210.36 ( talk • contribs) 22:14, 26 March 2016
Please look at this study, I'm sure you have but you seem to have missed this. [1]
" By sampling populations, especially the autochthonous tribal populations, which represent the geographical, ethnic, and linguistic diversity of India, we have inferred that at least four distinct ancestral components—not two, as estimated earlier (9,10)—have contributed to the gene pools of extant populations of mainland India. The Andaman archipelago was peopled by members of a distinct, fifth ancestry. "
Negrito forms distinct, fifth ancestry, not related to the four ANI, ASI, AAA and ATB.
" The absence of significant resemblance with any of the neighboring populations is indicative of the ASI and the AAA being early settlers in India, possibly arriving on the “southern exit” wave out of Africa. Differentiation between the ASI and the AAA possibly took place after their arrival in India. The ANI and the ATB can clearly be rooted to the CS-Asians and E-Asians, respectively; they likely entered India through the northwest and northeast corridors, respectively. Ancestral populations seem to have occupied geographically separated habitats. However, there was some degree of early admixture among the ancestral populations as evidenced by extant populations possessing multiancestral components and some geographical displacements as well."
Therefore, Munda is still appropriate term to use here when we are talking about AAA in terms of India. 117.192.210.36 ( talk) 21:53, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
References
Therefore, we should delink it from Negrito and just add Ancestral Austro-Asiatic/AAA 117.192.210.36 ( talk) 22:42, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
At the talkpage, the table of contents is contained within the to do list, and collapsed. At the main page, the TOC is also collpased. Which template is being used here, and where? And how can we get back to the standard display, both for the talkpage and for the main article? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 19:46, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Dravidian peoples. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 04:18, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Dravidian people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://inic.utexas.edu/asnic/subject/peopleandlanguages.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Dravidian people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:20, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
@ Kautilya3: They are giving false population numbers, " http://www.friendsoftelugu.org" and " http://tamilo.com" is not government source. They have also added random flags with outsourced content. We have govt sources on Tamil language page, it's 75.8 million, not 78 million. And, telugu language page also has govt survey source (india times) says 74 million first language speakers. We should remove population numbers from all, or else they will keep adding false numbers every week, as langauge page and ethnic group page gives better population information.
Near East : Given source of genetic study said "Nonetheless, the fact that we can reject West Eurasian population sources from Anatolia, mainland Europe, and the Levant diminishes the likelihood that these areas were sources of Indo-European (or other) languages in South Asia." As study says, Zagros neolithic farmer are from Elam region, it's not in Near East (Levant/Anatolia). 117.192.206.150 ( talk) 21:14, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
The source for Population says 200 million but the Article says 250 Million, Can someone with Access fix this, please?
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Dravidian people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:46, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
I would like to point out that currently Dravidians are also found in Australia. Modern migration has been taking place over the last eight decades. Some countries already mentioned are Malaysia, Singapore, UK, USA and Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.246.180.191 ( talk) 18:42, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
I have some time ago deleted/changed the statement: " Archaic Ancestral South Asians, descended from the first migrants out of Africa who are not related to any group outside of the Indian subcontinent." to " Archaic Ancestral South Asians who are not related to any group outside of the Indian subcontinent." My change was based on the given reference. The edit was reverted because it is written in the source, but I can not find any part of the reserach that support this claim. I have also used the search function. The word "african" is not included in the reseach and is not used to call them migrants out of africa. (At least I do not find this part). Could someone show me this part of the research? And include the part as comment to the reference? Thanks, 212.241.98.39 ( talk) 20:08, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
According to Narasimhan et al. (2018), Dravidians formed as a mixture of Archaic Ancestral South Asians,and neolithic farmers from Iran. [1]
According to Narasimhan et al. (2018), Dravidians have a mixture of origins: Archaic Ancestral South Asians, descended from the first migrants out of Africa who are related to Negritos and Australian Aborigines. Related groups are the indigenous inhabitants of the Andaman Islands and much of Maritime Southeast Asia. Another group is neolithic farmers from Iran. These farmers brought agriculture to the Indian Subcontinent, but are distinct from the later Indo-Aryan migrations. [1]
<br.
References
Whenever I read an article on ancient Indian history, I see people only writing about the Indus valley civilization and the Aryans. But what about Dravidians? Didn't they exist even before the Aryans came to India? Also I see a lot of other languages follow the Dravidian script or something similar like the Georgian, Korean, Sri Lankan etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nittin Das ( talk • contribs)
This article is full of orphaned Harvard-style references like Lockard 2007. I strongly suspect they originated as the result of sloppy copy-paste moves of chunks of text from other articles. -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 14:02, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
The article's grammar and capitalization needs polishing. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Chickensarebleepssorryuncle ( talk) 03:37, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Why does the map show a Dravidian group called Malto, but the Malto people are nowhere mentioned in this article? Please fix. 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 07:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the opening sentence to reflect the chosen title of the article, e.g. The Dravidian peoples, or Dravidians… 96.8.24.95 ( talk) 02:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
I refer to the following content from the lead:
The Dravidian peoples are of a mixed genetic origin and formed initially due to the mixture of indigenous South Asian Hunter Gatherers and Neolithic West Asian farmers from Iran, with all [1]/almost all Dravidian groups later additionally acquiring admixture from Steppe Yamnaya pastoralists. [2] [3] [4] From these interactions and migrations arose eventually the so-called "Hindus synthesis", after 500 BCE. [5]
There are multiple problems with these references. Together they appear to form a synthesis of unsupported original research.
The notion that the Yamnaya, a Bronze Age people who lived in Ukraine from 3300-2600 BCE, relocated to South Asia and donated genetic material to the ancestors of Dravidians, is a very specific idea, which should be supported with high quality secondary sources, which actually contain the word 'Yamnaya', per WP:SCIRS. Since none of these are secondary sources, and only Reich, et al. can be considered a valid primary source, I removed this content. Thanks for reading, and happy editing! Hunan201p ( talk) 13:22, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
References
"Dravidians are also present in Singapore or the United Arab Emirates through recent migration" ... and many other places too. This sentence is pointless. 216.8.188.31 ( talk) 14:56, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
there is a line linking a "tamil brahmin madisar" to the clothing of "dravidian women". there are no links to a tamil brahmin, who follow indo aryan culture, to that of the native dravidian people. adopting a sari does not make them "dravidian". genetic studies also disagree. Temporary 1010 ( talk) 18:10, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Are all Central Dravidian (Kolami–Parji), North Dravidian (Brahui-Kurukh), Gondi-Kui languages speakers considered as sheduled tribes in India? Kaiyr ( talk) 08:15, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
Like Vijayanagaras. Venuvg04 ( talk) 06:49, 7 May 2024 (UTC)