Talk:Kavijanasrayam

Moving debated and settled items to Talk Page
I think the direction of the article changed because one of the editors(SubhashiniIyer) was continously disrupting the page based on these aspects.

1) Jain Origins and 2) Nativity of the poet 3) Antiquity (940 AD)

The editor(Abrahmad111) has provided groundbreaking evidences from Telugu books on the above aspects.The editor who disrupted initially is shell shocked from the past 5 months and not even a single evidence has been challenged.The prejudiced and unintellectual editor 1)cannot tolerate the fact that Jain religion Telugu literature preceded Vedic religion Telugu Literature. It is a kind of religious intolerance extended to wikipedia.2) wanted the poet to belong to her home state(province) 3) cannot tolerate any Telugu Literature to be placed before 1050 AD since she assumes that all literature started after 1050 AD only after poet Nannaya, who belonged to her home state(province).

Malliya Rechana-First Telugu Author (940AD), Kavijanasrayam,Vemulawada Karimnagar, 2

Organizing content
Please use the sources presented at the AFD to integrate into this article. The preface is helpful in providing some background. Also, is there a Telugu equivalent article this can link to? AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 23:42, 4 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I'll note that I withdrew the AFD because of Heymann Standard (WP:HEYMANN) improvements to the article. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:38, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Dating of the literature
There were differing opinions on the exact year when the book was written because initial scholars did not have strong evidences. In fact in 1900-1950 scholars Chaganti Seshayya, Vavilla,Veturi etc said "Based on the first hand evidences we have, Kavijanasrayam predates poet Nannaya, i.e., predates 1050 AD.However we will have to wait for more evidences in the future."Antiquity - This is a very mature and balanced acknowledgement by scholars. In 1980s, ground breaking evidence was discovered which was dated to 940- 946 AD - InscriptionInscription Based on this evidence, Central Sahitya Academy in 20003 has reaffirmed that it belonged to 9th century(they meant 900-1000AD) and other Telugu scholars like P.V.P, Nidudavolu Venkat Rao etc have reaffirmed the same.. A few closed mindset editors(who initially disrupted the page) still want to stick to some old dates although the older scholars themselves acknowledged that the dating is left to evidences in future. Please show one or more present generation scholar/academy which NOW disputes the date.SattiPandu (talk) 04:55, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello SattiPandu. May I request you to stop commenting on editors as having a "closed mindset" and similarly? Editors here are collaboratively improving the article, including the editor who nominated this for deletion – so please work with other editors proactively and without insinuations. Comment on actual edits, not on the presumed character of editors. Now to the issue of dating. Unless you have a source which confirms the exact year when this was published, you should not use terms like "firmly established". Another request, please read up on referencing for beginners to understand why references are given after a comma or a full stop or a semi-colon and not before. Feel free to ask of me any assistance in the meanwhile. Thanks,  Lourdes  07:48, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Apologies Lourdes!! I did not mean you or any of the recent editors.I was only referring to SubhashiniIyer.If you see the history of the article(and related pages), you will get to know how many personal attacks were made and how much regional intolerance was exhibited by her.SattiPandu (talk) 17:05, 5 January 2018 (UTC)