Talk:V. Nagam Aiya

Confusion causing word
Quote: was an Indian historian END of QUOTE

The use of the word 'Indian' has to be checked for correctness. The word can be mistaken to mean a citizen of India, which was a nation, newly formed in the year 1947. Nagam Aiya could have been born in British India. However, he was a civil servant of Travancore State, which again was not India. In fact, it was an independent kingdom that tried to retain its independence, but was forced to join India, under military intimidation.

All over the Wikipedia pages, this error is seen. People and place before the formation of India, cannot be simple defined as Indian, without specifically mentioning the parameters.

Also the words: QUOTE: In 1875, at the age of 24, Nagam Aiya conducted the first census operations in Travancore END of QUOTE    need some inspection. In Travancore State Manual which he wrote, the census is not mentioned as his work, but just a part of the Census done by the British-Indian government all over the sub-continent.

Availability of works
I can see you reverted my removal of the 'Availability of works' section. I'm not sure this section adds value and there's the possibility it contravenes WP:PROMOTION. How do we normally handle external links to specific resources? I'm especially nervous about the link to buy on Amazon. Thoughts? Darren-M (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Hey Darren, yea, I was wondering why you thought it was a promo for a book or an Advertisement and removed that. The reason for the links to the books/journals on amazon is only so people can get a hand on some 120 year old material if they choose to, making this information available if need be, and its all informational as you can see, if you clicked on that Amazon link, you'll see its a broad link to whats available out there, and not a promotion to an individual book store/seller. The other 3 volume google links are also public links to the 3 volumes which were made available to the world through google archives. I was myself surprised to find some of this work, and thought sharing it was worth it. Many similar works by other historians have been linked the same exact way, i went ahead and removed the Amazon link regardless. Thoughts?... Nik (I'm in CA, USA, i see you are in the UK, Happy New year to you, btw :))

Dewan Peishkar Vs Diwan
I want a clarification on this. Were Diwan and Dewan Peishkar two different posts? I am asking this because the article says he held the office of Dewan Peishkar from 1870 to 1906. But his name is not seen among the List of Diwans of Travancore. --99v (talk) 13:53, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Dewan Peishkar was a post subordinate to the Dewan. I say this because the article on T. Madhava Rao says he was Dewan Peishkar of the Southern Division of Travancore before he became Dewan. NRPanikker (talk) 23:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)