Talk:Madurai Nayak dynasty

Telugu Vandalism

Telugu speaking editors are poking their nose into every South India related articles. It has become a tendency of their editors. Every Kannada related articles have unnecessary mention of Telugu. Same things are happening with the articles related to Tamil and Malayalam. This is a nuisance. Vijayanagara empire was started on the advice of Guru Vidyaranya Theertha of Sringeri to unite all the small Hindu rulers to forma a greater alliance to fight the invasion. It included all the small rulers of Kannada, Tamil, Telugu and Malayalam speaking areas. People came together for a common cause in spite of the language barrier. Kannada, Tamil, Telugu and Malayalam were all the official languages in the respective areas. Nayakas in question in this article are the tributaries of Vijayanagara empire. Nayaka community is found in all the southern states, they have nothing to do with Telugu, Kannada, Tamil or Malayalam origin. They were the native rulers and tributaries of the respective territory. They spoke native languages. There is a caste called Nayakas in Karnataka, it does not mean that Nayakas are Kannada origin alone. Vijaya Nagara empire was called Karnata empire, it represented the entire Southern India. They promoted all the languages equally. This is the reason, the music which originated in that empire is called Karnatak Music (or Carnatic Music). Raghu-prdl (talk) 20:49, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Repeated Vandalism

Tamil guys Vijayanagara kings appointed telugu cheiftains to rule madurai/tanjore, dont try to change the history, please come out with facts and proofs. check chennai library for books like further sources of vijayanaga history. Great historians like nilakanta sastry,ranga chari,edger thurston had several times mentioned about nayak kings of Madurai/tanjore

Vandalism

The user 124.123.128.162 / 124.123.44.147 has been frequently making changes to various articles even though references have been provided.

The user 124.123.128.162 / 124.123.44.147 is hereby warned that I will get his IP address banned if his vandalism continues.

--= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 11:08, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Mayasutra

To user 124.123.128.162 / 124.123.44.147

You are repeatedly vandalising pages where references have been provided. If you wish to add something, please do so after providing references to your claims (from proper books, not blogs or your own POVs).
You first changed all articles to "Kamma". Later when references were provided, you started vandalising pages with the claim that wiki should be above castes. I have removed the Balija tag from Kandy Nayaks and Tanjore Nayaks. In the case of Madurai Nayaks and Gingee Nayaks, I have retained it due to the following reasons:
a) Joseph J Brennig was the first historian to trace the geneology of some of the nayaka kings by looking at various colonial documents and inscriptions. His work was later quoted by other historians such as Noburu Karashima and Sanjay Subrahmanya. Please look up his works before you vandalise.

In the case of Gingee Nayaks, part of Brennig's details were later quoted by Sanjay Subrahmanyam in "The Political Economy of Commerce: Southern India 1500-1650", page 304 as follows: Achyutappa, it is generally believed, belonged to the Balija Chetti mercantile community, originally of Telugu extraction, but settled in the Tamil region as a part of the extensive migratory movement from the Andhra to the Tamil regions that began c.1350 and continued into our period. The family tree of Achyutappa - to the extent we are aware of it - was as follows: Siblings of Achyutappa: Achyutappa--Chinnana--Kesava--Brother(unknown)--Sister(unknown). Children of Kesava': Laksmana. Children of Achyutappa's Unknown Brother: Koneri--father of Krishnappa (the founder of Senji Nayaka kingdom).

b) The Kaifiyat of Kotikam Kings was not written by those who wrote puranas. It was an official document written and maintained by muslim courts to record details of kings who ruled from time to time. In the case of the Madurai Nayaks, the Kaifiyat of Karnata-Kotikam Kings, LR8, pp.319-22 clearly mentions this: ..Acyutadeva Maharaya formally crowned Visvanatha Nayadu of the Garikepati family of the Balija caste as the king of Pandya country yielding a revenue of 2 and 1/2 crores of varahas; and he presented him the golden idols of Durga, Laksmi and Lakshmi-Narayana and sent him with ministers, councillors and troops to the south..
Do not compare based on present day castes and surnames. Sanskritization has always been happening. Please provide proper references before you change content of any article. --= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 08:10, 26 November 2009 (UTC)--= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 08:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)Mayasutra

As requested I'm undertaking an overall copyedit, here, both for general English grammar/syntax and to shorten. It's a big article, so I hope others will help too: it's a really interesting article, I think, and merits the work. I've added a "Bibliography & Resource List" and will be adding general sources there, but I hope whoever wrote this will put in specific references where these are needed, too.

--Kessler 22:47, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Excellent work! However we should probably split this into a number of bio article and keep this as the summary article on Madurai Nayaks.

- Parthi 22:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I dunno. I sort of like the "flow" of the overview chronicle/text: for anyone who has been to Madurai and / or its region the article provides a pretty good summary of the period it addresses -- I'd hate to see that get too broken up. But a couple of the rulers described do get pretty detailed coverage, don't they: I suppose Tirumala and Queen Meenakshi could get broken out into independent articles just on each of them, couldn't they. We're currently at 48k, here: that would get us back down below 32k, I guess.

--Kessler 00:48, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Took your suggestion and edited out the sections on Tirumala, Chokkanatha, and Rani Mangammal -- interesting folks on their own, all three, merit their own articles -- I merged the text into existing articles on them or starting new articles, and left just "please see link" notes here. We're now down from 48k to only 30k: still getting "article size" warnings at only 30k, for what reason I don't know, do you? I'm going to leave it there for now, tho, and just continue with my copyedit.

--Kessler 17:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Basic copyedit is complete. This history is one of the more interesting I've ever read: I hadn't known it -- been to the region itself, but never knew the stories -- plenty of fascinating themes and plots, in all of that, with all the "Heroes" and the "Embattled Queens", and all the "skulduggery" and "Last Stands", for any number of short stories and novels and Bollywood etc. feature films...

I hope others here will come up with the missing citations for the few uncited quotes left. I will summarize & rewrite those, for now, but we can get them back into the article once someone comes up with valid citations to include in the references.

--Kessler 21:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

"Madurai" vs. "Madura" ?

Someone please clarify for me the distinction between the terms "Madurai" and "Madura"?

Does the first refer only to the city and the second to the entire region? Or is the first the more modern term and the second the more ancient? Or are they co-extensive, and used interchangeably?

--Kessler 23:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Madurai is the correct usage for the town of Madurai and the district. Madura is the anglisized name and should not be used to refer to the current town in Tamil Nadu as it is confused with the north Indian town of the same name of the Javanese territory of Madura - Parthi 01:59, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

OK thanks very much.

--Kessler 15:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Some more Info The original name was Madhura after the more ancient Hindu religious place called Mathura (North India), associate with Lord Krishna. The name evolved as Madura and later Madurai.

Tamil Naickers

Madurai Naickers were Tamils. The evidences showing them as Telugu guys were all fabricated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.94.200.29 (talk) 08:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

Madurai Nayaks were Telugu speaking Naickers.During Vijayanagar rule,Telugu speaking groups like Kamma,Velama and Balija were prominent as commanders in Vijayanagar Armies and were appointed as governers in parts of Andhra and Tamil Nadu.They later split away after the death of Krishnadeva Raya to become independent kings.You can find Kamma Zamindaris in areas like Tirunelveli and Tanjore in South Tamil Nadu who descended from the Vijayanagar Military. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raghavan2010 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

"Kammavar Naidus= No doubt Naicker is the Tamil version of Nayakudu or Nayaka of Telugu.That doesn't mean that all Naickers are Tamilians. Balija is a community which is similar to chettiyar Initially they where doing business with the help of KAMMAVAR NAYAKAR rulers and due to their loyalty under kings they where given some ministers to report under kammavar naidus ,Thanjavur and Kandy Nayaks were all Non Tamilians and belonged to Pala ekari Naidu caste. Some of the Madurai and Thanjavur kings were well known poets in Telugu( in the minds of Telugu people)who encouraged Telugu poets,art and sculpture.Telugu literature knew no bounds during Nayak era eventhough Nayaks ruled Non Telugu lands.Nayak kings of Madurai,Thanjavur and Kandy (of Ceylon)were out and out Telugu people belonging to kammavar Naidu casteand their family names were Garikepati,Alluri and Chinthalapudi respectively.

Baliaja is a caste even now in Andhra these people are known as valyal chettiyar.Gavara/Kappu/Balija all these groups where woring under kammavar nayaks to increase their army & business

Misplaced enthusiasm

In your enthusiasm to establish Madurai Naickers as Telugus you have gone to the extent of attaching caste lebels to them. It seems you are more interested in the caste of Naicker kings rather than their role in Tamil Nadu history. Restrain your casteist attitude. For your information, Periyar was a Kannada speaking Naicker. He himself said so in many meetings. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.94.200.182 (talk) 17:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

Truth

If someone is arguing that Nayak kings were of Tamil origin( which is far from truth) what is wrong in mentioning the caste name and family names of Nayak kings to give authenticity to the fact that they were of Telugu origin . Mentioning Telugu caste names such as Balija Naidu and some Telugu family names would give credence to prove that Nayak kings were not of Tamil origin.For this smearing with caste color is highly unwarranted.By the way EV Ramaswami Naicker was Balija Naidu and could speak Tamil,Kannada and Telugu.

Telugu Nayaks

Madurai Nayaks were Telugu Balija Nayaks. See the evidence on talk page of Kapu (caste). This fact should be mentioned in the text in a subtle manner citing references. I would appreciate if Users with proper Login ID do this exercise.Kumarrao 13:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Other Telugu nayaks

Kumarrao.Not only Madurai Nayaks,but also Thanjavur,Khandi(Kandy),Musunuri, Koppula and Korukonda Telugu Nayaks were Balijas(Kapus)as per Kapu (caste). Kaakateeya Nayakas used to keep Balija women for entertainment — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.42.48.152 (talk) 15:38, 26 September 2024 (UTC) Korukonda Nayakulu kammavaaru Musunuri Nayakulu Kammavaaru — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.42.48.152 (talk) 15:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Why to remove the reference numbers?

I have been seeing some peculiar phenomenon in Madurai Nayak article recently. Few times I saw reference numbers with arrows near Balija name and other times not as they were removed by some people. I believe some contributors did good job in digging out the information on Madurai Nayaks and putting the reference numbers with arrows to make it easy for the readers to look for the information on Madurai Nayaks . Numbers with arrows would facilitate the people to go over some information in the books "Mughal State" by Muzaffar Alam,"Tidings of the King " by Phillip Wagoner and "Vijayanagar history" by K.A.Nilakanta Sastry. But by curtly removing these numbers with arrows on the grounds of speculative caste claims and caste crap is not going to help the reader.More over keeping these numbers and arrows intact would not only help looking for the information with ease but also would clear the speculations or doubts anybody would have on the subject matter.

Possible Vandalism

There seems to be a case of possible vandalism. I think that in future it is best to leave out the caste factor of the people in question, as it is very much disputed. Thank You. --Altruism^{To talk} 12:09, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Double standard

Reference numbers that appeared near Balija community in " Madurai Nayak dynasty" article are very informative about the origin of this Telugu dynasty. It is not wrong to mention the very truth that Garikepati Viswanatha Naidu of Balija caste was the founder of Madurai Nayak dynasty as the genuine books say. But what is wrong is the erasing of the genuine information on Madurai Nayaks with genuine references and resorting to the distortion of the sur name "Garikepati " and insertion of some other name in its place . It is hoped that one would respect the genuine authentic information of others and would not replace it with one's agenda driven material and blame the others of possible vandalism.

Response to some self-styled expert's comments

I see that some unqualified editors, are deeply possessive of some reference numbers, which lend support to their vested claims and self-gratification. Since, the caste here, is riddled with ambiguity, I suggested that it would be wise, in the first place, to not include it, at all. But the editor (s) in question go on not only to create an aura of certainity around the caste, but also painstakingly add references very convenient to them. It is perhaps unknown to these users that credible sources, only could be cited, not those pieces which appease and glorify a section. Its even worse to label some of these specimens as "genuine books."

Its no doubt very easy for one to claim that, the information being added, is genuine, contrary to the claims of the majority. Agendas could be had only by vandals, who are hell-bent on driving home the point. The font size speaks volumes on that front.--Altruism^{To talk} 09:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Advice

1. I have been advising for long that 65.24.145.57 should create a Username, User page etc. and participate in Wiki.

2. Earlier, I added some references (which 65.24.145.57 copiously quotes now) which point out that the Madurai Nayaks were probably of Balija origin.

3. Surnames quoted by 65.24.145.57 are also common to Kamma and Raju communities of A.P.,

4. The caste affiliation of Thanjavur nayaks is not clearly known. They were sworn enemies of Madurai nayaks.

5. I am not very certain about Kandy nayaks. Marital alliances with Madurai nayaks cannot be an evidence for caste affinities.

6. Musunuri nayaks were kammas and there were ample evidences.

7. Instead of prominently talking about caste in the Introduction, a subtle mention with a citation can be made in the text that follows.

8. I ventured earlier to edit 'Kapu caste' article, which is in a terrible shape, and backed out because of abuse and slander.

9. 65.24.145.57 should focus on Wikifying 'Kapu Caste' article and make it more presentable. Kumarrao 05:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

RESPONSE TO TWO-PRONG ONSLAUGHT

1.Unqualified editors ,self-styled experts ,vandals, and users not knowing how to cite credible sources : usage of all this against other contributors with sarcasm is rather far fetched and the contributors at least deserve minimal courtesy.

2. Whosoever are the contributors of the reference numbers of Madurai nayak dynasty article ,they should be lauded for enlightening others on the origin of Madurai Nayaks.It is rather preposterous to ridicule the contributors of these reference numbers as if they did not know how to cite credible sources. Though they are disparaged as using "specimens" to glorify a section one can not underestimate the impeccability of these rare books.

4.Kandy Nayaks were descendents of Madurai Nayaks. Kandy Nayak Chinthalapuri Vijaya Bhupala Naidu's(Lakshmana Simha Vijaya Palana Raju's) sister was married to Garikepati Kumara Krishnappa Naidu(son of Garikepati Viswanatha Naidu) of Madurai dynasty. Madurai king Garikepati Thirumala Naidu was married to one of the family members of Thanjavur king Alluri Sevappa Naidu.One of the family members of last king of Thanjavur ,Chengamala Dasu was married to the king of Kandy.

Viswanatha Nayudu

The name of Viswanatha's father was Adapa China Nagama Nayudu, the carrier of royal betel-bag. Adapa is a surname found in Kamma and Telaga castes of A.P., How can the surname of Viswanatha could be Garikapati (prevalent inmany castes)?

See this page: http://ia300235.us.archive.org/0/items/FurtherSourcesOfVijayanagaraHistory/HTML/00000148.htm

Seems the matter is controversial.Kumarrao 12:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Caste claims of Madurai Nayaks

In recent months some members have made pompous and bombastic claims over the Caste origins of the Madurai Nayak Kings and Queens. The Caste in question is the Nayyakar and Nayudu or Naidu title, which is used by three different Communities of Telugu speaking population.The claimants also keeps pointing out to various resources to support their theory. But they have to understand that even British records were sometimes not accurate in classification and description of various castes.Fine,if any of them wants to claim all these Kings and Queen as their long gone kin, then Wikipedia is not the page for such silly disputes, rather they put them on their own or other free servers.

The Intention of this wikipage/article is to provide a brief history of these rulers who made quite an impact on the regions they ruled and is still felt in these regions. Also their reign marked massive immigrations to their region,large lands brought under cultivation, coastal trade with European rulers and later events eventually leading to the British setting their foot in Chennai. More important happening in their reign was the re-construction and new establishment of Religious monuments, which were severely damaged by Muslim rulers.

Hence it seems totally Ludicrous, when someone keeps continually bragging in vanity, that he belongs to his or so and so caste. And the moment these claims fill the early pages, then any reader would loose interest and view the article with suspicion.

Enough said,if caste wars are not to be waged in wiki pages.

Southernstar 07:44, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Controversial

We could always mention the controversy and mentioned existing evidence for and against. Provided we have academic sources concerning the dispute. Dimadick 09:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

TRUTH

Those who can follow Telugu language please see the following Kotikam kaifiath as to the origin of Madurai dynasty founder Garikepati Viswanatha Naidu of Balija caste. "Sreemanmahaa mandaleshwara Achyuthadeva mahaaraayalayya vaaru daivaprasaada labdavasaath chethanu karunathogoodi BALIJA VARNA GARIKEPAATI VAMSAMUNA KALGINA SREE SREE VISWANAATHA NAAYAKA gaariki Paandya mandalaadhiraju ane rendunnara koti dravya Raajyaanku saasrokthamugaa pattaabhishekam Vijayanagaramandu cheyinchiri".

I am glad that Kumarrao at least agrees that Madurai king Viswanatha Naidu belonged to Balija caste according to his quote in the talk page in Telugu Cholas, which says " Nagama Nayak and his son Viswanatha Nayak were Balija merchants. The father was the royal mace-bearer and the son was betel-bearer in Vijayanagar court. Both impressed the king with their loyalty and obedience. This information is available in two well-known historical books on Vijayanagar. Every Telugu should be proud of these Nayaks. The contributions of Tirumala Nayak, descendent of Viswanatha, are simply magnificent".Kumarrao 12:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

There is some evidence to show that Madurai Nayaks were of Balija descent. However, that does not hold good with Thanjavur Nayaks. One has to be dispassionate in accepting the truth rather than being driven by bias.Kumarrao (talk) 04:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

LIKE MADURAI AND KANDY NAYAKS THANJAVUR NAYAKS WERE BALIJA NAIDUS TOO

Yes,they were! If one accepts this very truth one should not be branded as having bias.After all truth is truth ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.81.203.17 (talk) 00:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Editing

Lineage and surname of Viswanatha were given with supporting evidences. It is frivolous to mention the caste multiple times, hence, edited.Kumarrao (talk) 13:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

VIJAYANAGAR, THANJAVUR, MADURAI, KANDY AND MATLA RAJAS WERE INTERRELATED

Matla( Matli) Rajulu of Pottapi Chola descendents (Kadapa) of Balija caste had matrimonial alliances with Sadasiva Raya,the nephew of Achyuthadevaraya of Vijayanagar dynasty.The relationships of the other dynasties are well known. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.195.193.226 (talk) 21:07, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

It is undisputable that Madurai Nayaks were Balijas. I incorporated this info with sources. There is no need to mention this fact again and again and spoil the academic nature of the article.Kumarrao (talk) 07:57, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Kalahasthi kings were of balija origin

Balija is not chatrya community they where similar to chetayar in tamil Just because experienced editors like Kumarrao and Altruism quoted sources by Telugu authors and asked for solid proofs stating that the Nayaks of Madurai and Tanjore were Balija Naidus,a few casteist minds have gone about posting multiple sources for the same without any of them being convincing for the following reasons: 1.These sources say Vijayanagar Kings are Balijas which is not true.There are enough sources saying that the Sangama dynasty were Kurubas,the Saluva dynasty were Boyars,the Tuluva dynasty were Bunts and the Aravidu dynasty were Rajus. 2.The surname of Madurai Kings is mentioned as Garikepati.Most of the sources in the Vijayanagara pages mention the surname as Kotikam. 3.It is known that Kandy Nayaks were descendants of Madurai Nayaks.The sources say the surname of Kandy Nayaks is Chintalapuri which is unlikely. 4.I read somewhere that Tanjore and Madurai kings claimed to be descendants of Kshatriyas having the Kasyapa Gotra.Here its mentioned that they claim a descent from the Banas of Kolar.

Other than the above stated reasons,I feel the article could be improved further but these casteists are more interested in going on proving that the Nayaks were Balijas than expanding the article.

Raghavan(Talk) 02:53, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Identity

There are several evidences to point out that Madura Nayaks were of Kammavar nayakar descent. There is no need for elaborate arguments in this respect. Same thing cannot be said with certainty about Thanjavur Nayaks although cetain Users are emotional about this issue. The books they refer in this regard only contain some speculative sentences. We got to be objective while discussing history.Kumarrao (talk) 16:04, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Madurai Nayak dynasty. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051202102715/http://historion.net/r.sewell-vijayanagar-history-india/ to http://historion.net/r.sewell-vijayanagar-history-india/

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).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:02, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism

Repeated Vandalism by Durjaya vamsam, Palegar Deepak P Nayak, Tivok, SHK7, 106.76.224.153, 157.51.74.252, and 2401:4900:16bf:54c2:48c8:e963:f1bc:3dbc. Suspect sock-puppets. Request the page to be locked. --Kammanati (talk) 10:09, 24 April 2020 (UTC)Kammanati (Tamil:மதுரை நாயக் இராச்சியம்) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8806:400:6F0:9973:8555:8FE7:4BEA (talk) 02:04, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Inexplicable removal of referenced statements regarding social origins of the Madurai nayaks

User:Koronerman User:MaterialsScientist User:Flyer22 User:Cullen328

Social origins of a dynasty is an important piece of historical information that deserves mentioning.

Take any standard work of history, whether it be works of Richard Eaton and John F Richards regarding history of south India , the social backgrounds of the ruling dynasty and its nobility are prominently mentioned.

However I'm at a loss to understand @koronerman motivations to undo these particular edits :

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/977026183

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/976981989

The sentence added in these edits indicate the social origins of the Madurai nayaks and provide atleast 3 references to that effect.

I believe it's highly inappropriate to leave such information out without a proper explanation. For instance in the second edit by @Koronerman, the simple reason give was that it was "irrelevant".

I propose adding of the social references back to the article and hope other editors, especially @Koronerman have strong reasons to not to do so and would hope they could provide their reasons in this thread. Psi93 (talk) 18:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)Psi93 (talk) 16:57, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Inexplicable edits and suspected vandalism by Koronerman

There has been a trend observed where the newly joined Koronerman has been reversing the edits of previous users with no proper explanation provided.

For instance please see these edits, where Koronerman removed statements that have been corroborated by atleast 3 references :

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/977122167

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/977034248

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/976854823

Interestingly here Koronerman removed the same content that HE regarded as irrelevant, but instead of the usual one liner that it's irrelevant he chose to use the excuse of no edit summary :

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/976532304

I'm not alone on noticing this. Koronerman's vandalism have also been reverted by two other users with same concerns.

The edit by Tayi Arajakate :

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/975992227

And here is the edit by Materialscientist :

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/976533408

This totally against the collaborative spririt that's the foundation of the wiki project and it's requested the admins look into this and stop any edits to the information regarding social origins by Koronerman or any user unless it's thoroughly discussed on the talk page Psi93 (talk) 06:02, 7 September 2020 (UTC)