Talk:Bunt (community)

nairs
Bunts are no where similar to nair community of kerela. some one with pov want to vantalize this page. please take care.

Give evidences supporting your argument.Article 'nair relations with bunt' is supported with evidence from reliable sources.Also things like maritenial way of inheritance,martial tradition are common to both the communities.

Sitush is here too, after destroying the Nair page. Bunts, be careful!! He is a christian hell bend on portraying all hindu castes in bad light. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.99.254.247 (talk) 17:05, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree Sitush & Linguisticgeek are vandalizing & presenting false image of bunts community by presenting omitted information

Also on the topic of Nairs, There are inscriptions found in Barkur that show nair communities in tulunadu were absorbed by bunts community in tulunadu since both are serpent worshiping martial clans

Writer2editor (talk) 09:49, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes bunts and Nair's are of the same caste they have same traditions and culture .the only difference is they speak different languages Ajay Shetty tulunad (talk) 03:11, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

https://tulu-research.blogspot.com/2008/01/67-bunts-and-nairs.html?m=1 Read this article Ajay Shetty tulunad (talk) 09:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That's a personal blog, and not a reliable source. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:57, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

The bunt community can be found among kundapura kannadigas that don't speak tulu and can be found among tuluvas that can't speak kundapura kannada. What comes to the south of tulunadu is kerala where nairs are found. Perhaps the existance of bunts who speak malayalam but not kannada or tulu cannot be denied as nairs are concentrated to the north of kerala right after tulunadu. Perhaps this isnt reliable as this sounds more of a speculation. But bunts and nairs are the only two classes in south india to follow maritenial way of inheritence and worship serpents. And they both happen to live right next to each other. Nair happens to be a surname among bunts. If you read news articles of kasargod taluk you will see them consider nairs and bunts as the same cast. Perhaps the people of kasargod have long agreed upon the fact. But yes we all can agree that there hasnt been a proper research done by a bigshot on this issue so maybe we shouldn't put it on wikipedia even though it sounds true from every aspect. Maniaccpoke (talk) 14:09, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Page style
This article is being repeatedly edited by some anon ip's who keep on adding unrequired wiki links to the article like the word Nair is linked more than 10 times.a link should be only once it shouldn't be repeated.also in the notable sections please only add names which have a wiki article.and don't mix up nairs and bunts notable nairs should be in List of Nairs and bunts in the notable Bunts sub section page.this page is also not meant to write comments on the photographs in the articleLinguisticgeek (talk) 07:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Bunts and Kadambas
This edit on 07:44, 14 January 2010 added this text "according to one of various theories regarding the origin of Kadamba Kings ,they are connected to the bunts since one inscription states the kadambas belonging to the Nāga or the serpent lineage". I looked at the reference used for the claim. Here is the link to the reference. The page 10 as indicated by the reference does not mention the word "Bunt". could it be that the page number is wrong. could the person who added the text please clarify this. Thanks. -- Car Tick  11:09, 29 September 2010 (UTC) VITLA KINGS ARE NOT BUNTS THE DOMBA HEGGADES WHO RULED VITLA ARE NOT BUNTS. THEY BELONG TO THE CASTE BY NAME HINDU SAMANTHA KSHATHRIYA BALLALA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.255.210 (talk) 12:13, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

All ballals and heggades are bunts who came from the Alupa dynasty. please go and study Tulunadu history clearly Ajay Shetty tulunad (talk) 03:02, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Ajay is right all ballala and heggade rulers either belonged to Jain bunts or hindu bunt community Akankshs248 (talk) 09:49, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Infobox images
There is at present a trend developing to remove the "glorifying" collages of beautiful people and heroes from infoboxes on caste articles. The reasons are many but include issues relating to WP:NPOV, WP:DUE, WP:OR and even WP:BLP. For this reason, I removed the images from the infobox on this article. - Sitush (talk) 09:37, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Connection to the Nairs
This article is a complete disaster in terms of sourcing. I've tagged a lot of stuff & there have been some maintenance tags at the top of the thing for many months now.

I propose to concentrate initially on the Origins section, where there is a weird mix of "Bunts come from Indo-Scythian" and "Bunts come from "Indo-Aryan", not to forget the claim of a relationship to Nairs that I simply cannot source. The nearest I can get to it is Thurston saying that the Bunts are a "corresponding" group to the Nairs, which is not at all the same as saying that they are related.

Yes, I can find sources connecting the Nadavars to the Bunts in some sort of vague way, but I can find nothing connecting the Nairs to the Nadavars & so that link looks dubious. To be honest, the whole section smacks of synthesis and original research ... and a weird situation where it seems we may have actually violated the copyright of a notorious copyright abuser, being Tyagi.

I'll give it a couple of weeks for someone to come up with some evidence/page numbers etc and thereafter, if nothing of merit has appeared, I'll probably remove the section & look towards rebuilding it from scratch. - Sitush (talk) 06:41, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Targetting Bunt page
Sitush is deliberately targetting the bunt article by removing images of notable bunt people who have enough references in their respective articles about their bunt ethnicity. i don't see him applying same rules to articles of other ethnicities he/she constatantly edits for example Ezhava.27.4.214.106 (talk) 09:45, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, you are wrong. I am applying the rule all over the place & have done so for many months. In this instance, there is confusion about the Shettys & i may have reverted you incorrectly. That does not alter the fact that these items should be sourced in this article, as I have explained to you. Relying on other articles is never a great idea and can lead to just the sort of confusion that has occurred here.
 * It would be great if you could do something really useful, such as provide citations for all the other stuff that needs it here. If they do not turn up soon then this article is going to end up being a stub because I will clear out all of the uncited statements. - Sitush (talk) 09:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

i agree refs with a lot of content in the article need to be found.sadly i have lot of other work to do.will help if if i find refs i have added some in other articles.27.4.214.106 (talk) 10:02, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * You should not have made that last revert - I think that it puts you over the three revert limit and that usually means an immediate block from contributing, regardless of whether or not you were correct. These issues are particularly complicated when the statements relate to a living person and I really would advise you to get some references next to those names.
 * As it happens, I would prefer that we did not have these montages at all because they lead to awkward format issues, poor sourcing, puffery and undue weight. Not to forget that quite often they have turned out to be copyright violations. Far better to adopt the growing convention of having a single, historic image there. - Sitush (talk) 10:15, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Shetty is a bunt surname Ajay Shetty tulunad (talk) 03:05, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Thurston
Edgar Thurston was a devotee of Herbert Hope Risley. Along with others who liked Risley's theories of scientific racism, his Castes and Tribes of Southern India contains comments that were intended to enable classification of people according to anthropometric devilments such as the nasal index, as well as generalised descriptions of skin types etc that clearly could not apply to everyone within a community. These people even used a form of colour chart against which to compare and classify.

As noted at the articles linked to above, the theory was mad, had a short life span and is discredited. Furthermore, the sample sizes used were extremely small, eg: Crispin Bates notes that Risley often used as few as 100 samples and his devotees, such as Thurston, used even less. When you bear these points in mind and also the statements at WP:FRINGE, including appearance/physique comments from Thurston in this article are clearly inappropriate for the general reader. To make sense of them we would have to give a long exposition of the situation within the article because relying on people using the links to work it out for themselves would be an unreasonable imposition. - Sitush (talk) 10:56, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Edgar Thurston is not a fringe author and we all know that.between who the hell is alagodi(whose opinions you have added while removing those of thurston).i haven't even heard his name before.only through a google search did i come to know he was some christian priest.calling people comely (which is subjective) and describing them as having aquiline noses is scientific racism since when?.Thurston's 7 volumes on south indian communities is still a reference point for many even after 100 years.Infact Jawaharlal Nehru University had a two-day National Seminar which celebrated the centenary of the publication of Castes and Tribes of Southern India Link Here.27.4.212.123 (talk) 11:22, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Have I added Alagodi? I would be surprised and would like you to show me with the diff - I tend not to source etymological stuff.
 * Thurston is a poor source: he can be better than nothing if used carefully but there is no need to use him for statements such as the one that you reinserted: if adds nothing but puffery and is a fringe view based on small samples and discredited ideas of racial stereotyping. The fact that people still rely on Thurston for stuff such as this says more about the state of caste biases in present day India than it does about the source itself. They are equally quick to demand his removal when the opinion expressed is less than complimentary.
 * I am well aware of the university's seminar: it was not entirely "pro" Thurston (just as seminars celebrating 200 years since the birth of Charles Dickens this year will not be entirely "pro" Dickens) and in so far as it was, well, just look at how James Tod is lauded in Rajasthan despite being a complete waste of space as a source. Furthermore, aside from his anthropological stuff, Thurston actually did very little field research: I would estimate that 80%+ of his writing is just quotations of other amateur anthropologists who preceded him, some of whom were writing 100 years earlier! In this regard, his book are primarily compilations.
 * I would lay a fair amount of money on you having some sort of association with the Bunt community; I do not and I can see the wood for the trees. - Sitush (talk) 11:38, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, I see that I did insert Alagodi. That is unusual for me. If you want to discuss that source then feel free, but please do not mix up discussions. Each should be discussed on its own merits. - Sitush (talk) 11:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * From a snippet view it seems that Thurston may have sampled as few as 40 people from the Bunt community. Pathetic. Source is Mind you, that source is produced by the Anthropological Survey of India, who are also often not reliable. - Sitush (talk) 12:49, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I raised the matter at NPOVN. Sorry for not saying this earlier. - Sitush (talk) 10:36, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Images in infobox
There are too many. What are we trying to do here? Create an article or a page consisting of a photo-montage? I suggest that if we want to insert other people then we need to remove the same number of photos as we insert. - Sitush (talk) 10:34, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

where can i file a complain against sitush
i need some administrators to answer this is sitush not trying to own this article.he is not assuming good faith.constantly pushing unheard of sources like alagodi.what on earth makes alagodi reliable and npov and Edgar Thurston pov.27.4.218.66 (talk) 02:12, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:ANI. - Sitush (talk) 02:16, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

File:AishwaryaRai.jpg Nominated for Deletion
Bunts are connected to the Rajus of Andhra Pradesh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bootpowertrox (talk • contribs) 06:19, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Links with Kashmiri Pandits
I hear quite a many mangaloreans including the bunt community there claiming to be of Kashmiri Pandit Origin. Is this TRUE, and if so, should there be a section on it. If there are any sources or books that talk about this linkage, please leave the Links here. -Ambar (talk) 15:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Fake news Ajay Shetty tulunad (talk) 03:05, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Inheritance vs descent
I am mystified by recent removals of a statement from the lead section by. The edit summaries seem to be saying that there is a difference between matrilineal inheritance and matrilineal descent, which seems reasonable enough until you consider that everyone has 50 per cent descent from their mother.Even TitsforTats seems to agree that a part of the lead statement is sourced elsewhere, so why the entirety is being removed is also a mystery. I would appreciate an proper explanation. - Sitush (talk) 01:15, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Sitush, the source referred to in the main body concerns the practice of "aliya santana". Aliya santana is a system of inheritance where material property or land were passed to the son of the bunt king's sister. Please note that the source is concerned with property only and *not" how bunts trace lineage or ancestry. However, "matrilineal descent" is concerned with lineage and ancestry.   Therefore the lead statement is unsourced.  Titsfortats (talk) 01:54, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

To add to the above, the page on matrilineality, at least as far as the india section is concerned, is completely unsourced.Titsfortats (talk) 02:04, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

And I just visited the page aliyasantana, which also seems to be an unsourced mess. The equivalent nair system (marmakkathayam) seems to have more sources, but there is nothing to connect that practice to the Bunt practice of aliya santanaTitsfortats (talk) 02:09, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Additionally, endogamy/exogamy is not sourced in the article.Titsfortats (talk) 13:01, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

The article contains incorrect pieces of information. Vitla & Kumble kings are not Bunts. Vitla kings belong to a caste named Hindu Samantha Kshathriya Ballala.All ballalas are not bunts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.198.113.230 (talk) 05:34, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Where are bunts found? just Dakshina Kannada & Udupi? NOT Kasargod??
I have created this section because some of the editors think Bunts are not found in Kasargod or may be I'am not sure what their concern is.

One of the editor had reverted the changes I had made where i mentioned "bunts are not just found in the coastal and Kodagu districts of Karnataka but also Kasargodu district of Kerala. Historiclayy tulu Nadu being a home to Bunts, which included Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts of Karnataka and Kasargodu district of Kerala.

Few notes from official website of Kasargod: (Ministry of Communication & IT, Department of Information Technology) 1. Kasargod was part of the Kumbala Kingdom in which there were 64 Tulu and Malayalam villages.

2. Later Kasargod was part of Bekal taluk in the South Canara district of Bombay presidency.

3. Kasargod became part of Kerala following the reorganisation of states and formation of Kerala in November 1,1956.

Now some people agree that Kasargod belongs to Tulu Naadu, but they argue that bunts don't belong to Kerala.

Read: History of Bunts inviting for discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CodePanda (talk • contribs) 08:56, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Do we have consensus on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CodePanda (talk • contribs) 15:54, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

More than 1.5lakh bunts live in kasaragod Ajay Shetty tulunad (talk) 03:07, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

location
bunts are not find in kodagu and north canara hence the cited source gives the proper information of the place inhabited by bunts,bunt the edittor PAGEIMPL is constantly reverting the edit eventhrough the cited soure gives proper information,so stop reverting from now onwards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.49.0.90 (talk) 07:55, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bunt (community). 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/20141108093630/http://www.mangalorean.com/news.php?newstype=broadcast&broadcastid=176932 to http://www.mangalorean.com/news.php?newstype=broadcast&broadcastid=176932

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:28, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Surnames, Religious Rituals & Bunts Community Activities as the Military Class of Tulu Nadu region
Please do not vandalize the entries that summary or detail Bunts Community activities within several dynasties that have arisen in the region called Tulu Nadu by either removing sourced association of Bunts with Ruling Dynasties or Military administration activities. These claims have citations.

Other information like Bunt surnames & Rituals are as per the Official Sangha / Organization site of the Bunts Community - do not vandalize this information - the primary source is the Official Site itself. There is no source more valid than the Official Bunts Community Sangha (Organization) for surnames, ritual information. Every other source regarding rituals, surnames, etc is secondary source of information.

Detail real information about the Bunts Community from Official Organizations involved with the Bunts Community on Daily basis.

Do not remove information from Official Bunts Community Sangha Organization. After all, it is the Bunts Community Wiki Page & this page should reflect accurate information about the Bunts Community.

Please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia and its citation policy before dumping content on the article that is badly phrased. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a page to promote any community organisation. Linguisticgeek (talk)

There is nothing in the statement in summary that violates any rule & reflects the summary information of the Bunts Community with Citations of Claims & neither is this page used to organize communal organization. The page refers to the bunts Community & needs to reflect Accurate information of the community. We have not added any mythology like being born of snakes, etc. This page needs to reflect accurate information about this community if you want it to refer to the Bunts community of India Writer2editor (talk) 13:12, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

While I understand your enthusiasm to add content on the article. Please find some reliable third party sources or books to make citations. Do not use community specific website as source. Also the citation you added in the lead is just a repetition of what is mentioned in the history section with the sources added by other editors. You have not even read those sources and just copy pasted it. Linguisticgeek (talk)

Information about the Bunts Community that this page refers to is false if you are not connected to the Bunts Community Organization - who are you to sit in Europe & print fantasies - even if its published in some of your books? Unless the information comes from the Sangha of Bunts - your page is just Defamation of the Bunts Community. The Citations are repeated because this is a summary of information that is later reproduced. Linguisticgeek are assuming a lot of things & diverting from the fact that the information is not false. The edits & information are true & this page needs to reflect true information. This is a wiki for the Bunts Community

Or Erase this page since the information you provide is False due to vital Omissions of information regarding the Bunts Community - Our page needs to reflect proper FULL & Validated information regarding our community Writer2editor (talk) 13:31, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

I do not know what you are arguing about. The content you have added is grammatically incorrect apart from being from a primary source. You are also not assuming good faith and trying to own this article which is against Wikipedia policy. You are also copy pasting the history section into the lead with sources added by other editors. Linguisticgeek (talk)

The content I have added is NOT grammatically incorrect as can be seen from a good examination. You are just pushing for some political agenda here - all have correct sources exactly the same as in the history section - you need to stop publishing half truths & defamatory lies by OMISSION of certain facts that show martial activities of the bunts in several dynasties of tulu nadu over the years or delete this page Writer2editor (talk) 07:13, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Removal of important religious & historical context of the bunts community by Sitush
Sitush is accused of these vandalization along with Linguisticgeek

1- Removal of Religious Activites of the Bunts like Nagaradhane

2- False accusations & misrepesentation about grammatical errors

3- Accurate sourcing of material in summary

4- removal of information of bunts community sangha with real knowledge of this community

Writer2editor (talk) 07:21, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Bunts as a Martial Class have been active in several Dynasties like Alupa dynasty, Tuluva dynasty
This information has been detailed & cited in the History section & i have simply summarized these claims in at the beginning which is very important to our Bunts community.

The two users - Sitush & Linguisticgeek, are acting in bad faith trying to erase the evidence of Martial activities of the bunts by erasing this piece of information & presenting a half baked image summary of the Buntaru warrior community that are liberal in both Religion & work. Being liberal does not mean, people can simply erase & rewrite history of entire communities to suit their own world view. Reality does not work this way.

This information has full citations in the history section in detail - do not remove this piece of information because we need it to present a full picture of bunts community as both martial class, land gentry & urban folk who were liberal in India - the community is filled with jain, hindu & other traditions & is a testament to adaptation over the thousands of years.

Writer2editor (talk) 08:40, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

ANY ONE WHO WANT TO REMOVE THIS INFORMATION IN SUMMARY NEED TO CITE CREDIBLE SOURCES AGAINST THE CLAIM: "Bunts were active in several dynasties like Alupa dynasty, Jain kingdoms, Kolathunadu & Tuluva dynasty of Vijayanagara Empire."

However, you may remove wiki linking if it does not suit the esthetic taste of the page - just leave the information alone as it is vital to present a full view of Bunts community

Writer2editor (talk) 08:46, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

My name is Writer2editor, I am a Bunt Investor
My background is that I am a bunt investor & want to present perfect historical, ritualistic, customs image of my community.

I have made contributions from official Bunts community sangha page & our martial, ritual history is very important for me & my people especially while living abroad. We cannot tolerate half truths & lies due to omissions of vital details that have been presented here like claims of martial activities with in several dynasties of Tulunadu, Kerala & Karnataka.

Due to business ventures, I may often be busy but will keep an eye on this page. Failure to present accurate information about us & any efforts to omit certain details pertaining to our martial class history, activities, other historical or ritualistic information will entail swift action & request to delete this page because half truths & lies by omissions is simply defamation & poor representation of the bunts community very likely by NON BUNT users here

This warning is in good faith, there should be no politics while presenting true information & representing a community.

Message to fellow bunts members: "Ee Page-nu thoolai, dai-pandha net-tai musthu politics nada-thondu undu - enklain-nu mokulu SC/ST malpunet-te ullaire. Jaggratte"

Writer2editor (talk) 08:55, 25 September 2018 (UTC)


 * , Please read WP:NOR, WP:HERE, WP:NOTHERE, WP:OWN and most importantly WP:THREAT.. best regards --Adamstraw99 (talk) 09:33, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

This is not a legal threat to wikipedia. What happens when certain users are manipulative like remove / omit information critical to the subject presenting false view & thus not in good faith like Linguisticgeek & Sitush?

1- We will approach Wikipedia regarding the dispute - first option - we expect the disputes to be resolved by wikipedia admirably

2- With much due respect to Wikipedia, if the staff have political bias like google, facebook, etc - then we will need to find some other remedy. Freedom of speech is not Freedom to Lie by Omission.

This is how corporate world works. But I am sure wiki operates in good faith & every thing will be resolved admirably.

Writer2editor (talk) 10:04, 25 September 2018 (UTC)


 * , in addition to above mentioned guidelines, you need to read and understand this too -->> WP:TRUTH.. Also you appear to be ignorant about the fact that there is no such things like "Wikipedia staff" who work/write upon on any article...Google is a search engine which only helps in finding reliable sources, nothing more than that...and Facebook is already not considered reliable source in Wikipedia...You appear to be confused about how Wikipedia works...We work here as volunteers and this is a collaboratively developed project in good faith..kindly see this... I would again request you to thoroughly go through all these links -->> WP:NOR, WP:NOTHERE, WP:OWN '''and most importantly WP:THREAT...-- best regards --Adamstraw99 (talk) 11:28, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

1- You dont seem to fail to understand the ramifications of defamation by omission to wikipedia:

source: http://www.aaronkellylaw.com/defamation-by-omission-a-legal-explanation-definition/

2- Volunteer project or not, you cannot spread omitted information on communities by law.

3- WP:TRUTH - The information I have added is verifiable & can be proved in a court of law as the information is either cited in the same article or the information comes from official site of the community you are publishing information on. You cannot publish a false view by omitting certain information because of political bias or whatever your problem may be.

4- Wikileaks is a non profit but there will be management - dont argue with me for argument sake, you know exactly what I mean.

5- Google is a heavily leftist politically biased search engine which only helps in finding sources from their affiliated political side.

source 1: https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/09/12/google-video-after-donald-trump-election-may-fuel-conservative-bias-charges/1285424002/

source 2: https://nypost.com/2018/09/22/trump-may-push-antitrust-probe-into-google-facebook/amp/

6- Social Media like Facebook, Twitter Bias also known to operate under heavy leftist bias

source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/09/24/google-twitter-and-facebook-should-evaluate-their-biases-column/1366591002/

7- Don't patronize people - WP:NOR - this is not original research, you are liable for lying here as we can prove this in a court of law

8- Don't patronize people - WP:NOTHERE - this is not promotion of any business - again, you are liable for lying here as we can prove this in a court of law

9- Don't patronize people - WP:OWN - this is not an issue of ownership, this is an issue of representation of FULL information of the Bunts Community, you are just a volunteer who does not have any stake in wikipedia - you must remember this while operating in this platform.

10- I am a member of this Community & as such I am NOT a volunteer - I have stakes in the information you are publishing here. When you omit certain verifiable facts about the bunts community, you are endangering this platform & its reputation as well as misrepresenting the bunts community.

11- WP:THREAT - this is a project by volunteers who need to take extra care, they do not break Defamation by omission Laws.

Writer2editor (talk) 12:28, 25 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Google is leftist-biased or not, i don't know but you are free to pick your sources from it or pick another search engine.. Everybody is free to edit Wikipedia but in case of any disagreement with other editor(s), kindly go through this process].. Best --Adamstraw99 (talk) 12:55, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

thanks Adam, will do

Writer2editor (talk) 12:57, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Bunt and Shetty
There has been a long-running situation on Wikipedia relating to whether the Shetty community is the same as the Bunt community, ie: that the two names are synonymous. This seems to have boiled over again with edits such as this. Sure, the news sources in that edit note that the people concerned were claiming the two to be the same thing but do we actually have any academic source that says so? What people claim is their caste is a notoriously dodgy area and has been so for a couple of centuries - we cannot just rely on what someone claims while trying to seek some sort of social, political, religious or economic advantage. - Sitush (talk) 13:02, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

I see there is also a comment from about this situation at Talk:Shetty. The IP keeps making wild accusations in their edits and referring to talk pages but so far hasn't actually commented on them. I'm not fussed which article talk page we use to sort this out but do note that Talk:Shetty has some similar comments from 2017. - Sitush (talk) 13:07, 2 June 2019 (UTC)


 * @sitush: To add further proof to my claim that shettys and Bunts belong to Backward Caste & Backward class, let’s look at the Bunt community name, as cited in the stable Wikipedia version. They are also called “Nadava”. The “Nadava” community comes under OBC list(Other Backward Class list) as given in the official Indian government website http://www.ncbc.nic.in/Writereaddata/cl/karnataka.pdf. Also, all the other Shetty’s too come under the Backward class as stated in the official Indian government website.


 * So, clearly all the shettys including the Bunts come under OBC category as cited in Official Indian Government Websites data. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.209.14 (talk) 10:11, 4 June 2019 (UTC)


 * As I have just explained in the thread at Talk:Shetty, we do not use OBC etc lists to verify synonymity. - Sitush (talk) 11:15, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Shetty surname is only found bunt caste only Ajay Shetty tulunad (talk) 03:09, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Shetty’s ie Bunts do not come under OBC, SC etc. They are a forward caste in Karnataka and in India. Stop publishing false data. PageImp (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Remove “Varna Classification” section
Was the Bunt community “officially” categorised? How can one publication claim for its status? The Varna system was not prevalent in South India and the Bunt caste was not part of the chaturvarna system. The classification mentioned in the publication seemed more like an opinion. Claims like Kshatriya/Sat Shudra/Upper Shudra/Clean Shudra etc should not be added as it would confuse readers. Claims should not be made until it is official. PageImp (talk) 19:52, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * You are being obtuse now. You are well aware that there is no official varna status for anyone, anywhere: it is a mix of how people perceive themselves and how others perceive them, with the latter counting for much more. Yes, the system was weak in South India but it was so in a way that meant people were either brahmins or shudras, yet at first here you were wanting to classify Bunts as kshatriya. In other words, until you couldn't get your own glorifying way you were quite happy to accept that the system existed in the region and then, once you could revert no further, you decide that it did not. This is blatant pov-pushing and if you persist in it you will be at least banned from contributing to this article and probably from all caste-related articles. - Sitush (talk) 01:20, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Varna rules not applicable in south india. The bunts Reddy kongu vellalars menons are kshatriyas of South india. Mumbai777 (talk) 08:41, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

I’m not wanting to classify Bunts as Kshatriya. If the community identifies itself as Bunts, who is Sitush to decide their status? You have only cited publication, which is cherry picked by you. It clearly shows you are running some propaganda of denigrating the Bunt community page or I suspect you are being paid for doing so. It seems you are pushing your POV when you clearly have no idea where the community stands. PageImp (talk) 16:23, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I challenge you to cite one more publication for the same. PageImp (talk) 16:25, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * PageImp is now blocked for 31 hours for that personal attack, after having already been warned. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:29, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


 * For what it is worth, I didn't add that information in the first place. However, a search for bants reveals saying Inland, and away from the narrow strip of Brahmin settlements along the coast, the land was held and cultivated by the Bants, a caste of 'clean' Sudras. I really have more important things to do than this at the moment. - Sitush (talk) 16:52, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Same source later says The agrarian economy was dominated on the one hand by communities of Saiva Brahmins and their institutions, particularly off the coast, and on the other by a Sudra cultivating caste, the Bants, to the inland. And that's me done here for now. - Sitush (talk) 17:13, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Please remove the chaturvarna category, the Alupa rulers who ruled Alvakheda for 1400 years (one of the longest reigns in Indian history) were bunt kings, we do not want to be categorised alongside shudras, this hurts our sentiments, It's not a matter of shame, let us have our rightful piece of glory, this is very insulting to our rich history, and the link you have provided proves nothing at all, so kindly consider this as a request. Akankshs248 (talk) 09:58, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You will need to provide a reliable source to support your claims. And if you dispute the source that's in the article, you would need to do more than just claim that it "proves nothing at all" - you would need to address the actual content of the source and explain why it does not support the content it is cited against. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:27, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, I'll just add that what you *want* to be categorized as, and your feelings, are not of any relevance. Nor is any consideration of glory. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:33, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Well what's with people wanting to so basly prove supremacy and people so badly wanting to degrade a sect because they got mad at some arrogantly proud people. Well lets take it proffessionally shall we? Perhaps everyone can agree upon the fact that the chaturvarna system was very weak in south India. The fact that bunts were considered shudras is also something we all can agree upon as its already been proven by sitush The fact that bunts have had their fairshare of royalty is proven by the fact that rani abbakka chowta was a bunt. So basically bunts were a unique case. Maniaccpoke (talk) 13:57, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

The People of India
Please avoid citing the "states" series of The People of India because it is not considered reliable. The "national" series, which was published by Oxford University Press, is fine. One discussion is here. - Sitush (talk) 15:02, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Recent changes
Today, with these edits, deleted the sourced content without giving a proper explanation and replaced it with improperly/poorly sourced content. The content added by them is poorly sourced, as one of their two cited sources is authored by a politician (Ram Manohar Lohia) and is non-scholarly in nature. The other source doesn't seem to mention "Bunt" anywhere in it. The sources are improperly cited, as the user didn't give page number(s) in their citations. So I will revert their changes for now. They should propose their preferred version here, along with providing the relevant quotations.

PS: Previously, similar edits were made by an editor who is now topic banned. And those edits were challenged by – see this section. So I am pinging him as well. - NitinMlk (talk) 23:53, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We're getting a lot of this lately, so I've put a semi-protection on the article for 3 months. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:12, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Heads up, Alva000 is a new editor who is admin shopping on this topic, and possibly a sock. Fabrictramp &#124;  talk to me  15:58, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

I have added citations of a reputed historian who not only has a Phd in history but also heads the department of history in his university,please do not revert the edit again. Vicky4197 (talk) 17:20, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Reservation
I have added a new section called “Reservation Status” and explained the reservation controversy. I have moved the reservation information from the introduction to the newly created subheading. It’s better to not misportray the community without sufficient explanation. Bitterpill99 (talk) 08:16, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Bots monitoring the page and removing neutral content
Why are bots being used to reverse the edits within seconds, The new description had some old links and some new links as well, and since when does Wikipedia allow bots to monitor pages ? Anthrop2238 (talk) 11:40, 31 October 2023 (UTC)