Talk:Veerappan

Removing WikiProject templates

Dineshkannambadi, please stop removing the WikiProject Dravidian civilizations and WikiProject Tamil civilizations templates. Furthermore these are not fake templates, but templates of actual WikiProjects. Wiki Raja (talk) 03:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

How is Veerappan related to Dravidian civilization? - KNM ^Talk 18:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

He is a Dravidian just like you... Wiki Raja (talk) 03:19, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Stop talking about me and making original research on me and Veerappan. Provide a reliable source for your claims, else just stop this nonsense of claiming me of a civilization of a notorious criminal. Next time you do that, you will be reported to an admin. Consider this as a warning. - KNM ^Talk 03:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Consider this as a warning and chill out before I go to admin to report your racist attitude toward Tamils and other Dravidians! Wiki Raja (talk) 12:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

KNM, can you explain why you removed the Tamil civilization WikiProject off of this article? Are you claiming that there is no such civilization ? Surely, I am not here then ? Watchdogb (talk) 01:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Let us not take this discussion out of context. We are not here to discuss what is my civilization or your civilization.

I removed the Tamil and Dravidian cililization wikiproject templates, because it is not shown how Veerappan belongs to either or both of those civilizations. As you can see above, I have asked for reliable sources that we can refer for this discussion, but none have been provided yet. - KNM ^Talk 22:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

So, if Veerapan is not a Tamil, then he must be a Kannadiga. Am I right, because that's what your comment implies. Wiki Raja (talk) 23:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Veerapan is Tamil. So when did wikipedia turn into "revert before discuss"? All that was needed to be done is ask for citation and not revert and delete the Tamil wikiproject. Thanks very Watchdogb (talk) 23:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

The citation you have provided doesnot talk anything about "Tamil civilization" or "Dravidian civilization". "Veerappan is Tamil" does not prove anything about the civilizations. If those templates need to remain in this talk page, you will need to clearly establish the relationship between the subject of the article with the so-called civilization(s). Please do not uncomment the commented templates, while this discussion is in progress. - KNM ^Talk 07:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, read the actual info and purpose of the wikiproject Tamil Civilization: "We are a WikiProject, a group of registered Wikipedians, who try to improve articles related to the Tamils of Southern India and Northeastern Sri Lanka". Here we can see that this project is dedicated to improving articles related to Tamils. As such this article is in the scope. I am not here to debate about the name of the wikiproject and that is not what wikiprojects are supposed to be concerned about. The only thing that wikiprojects are concerned about is the SCOPE. As the scope of the wikiproject covers this article I will be re adding it. Last, the fact that Veerappan is a Tamil makes him part of a civilization! The Tamil Civilization. However, if your problem is the term Civilization and the use of the word to describe Tamil society is another matter. You should take that up as a separate issue. Watchdogb (talk) 14:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

The discussion going on here summarizes the actual problem, and hopefully that will result in the resolution. - KNM ^Talk 17:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Not "great"

As per records, Veerappan was a sandalwood smuggler turned killer, who has killed more than 180 people including civilians, police officials, forest department personnel and kidnapped people for ransom. Some of the edits in the article use word "great" for Veerappan, which seems inappropriate. As he used criminal ways for leading life, he may not be heroised, for neutrality. I have tried to remove some flowery language used in the article and added details of his criminal activities and all these done with maximum neutrality point of view, to put facts- and without any bias to any group of people.Rayabhari (talk) 15:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

what it means to be as per records? is the word "records" refer to materials available in media or government records? the word great cannot be used alone for glorifying someone.when i say i made great mistake it doesn't mean i made a glorifying mistake..great can be used as in the sense its big.--Universalrahu (talk) 12:18, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Kindly lock this page or permanently ban ihaveabandonedmychild, who always enters false information in the sarcastic tone. Nara vettai (talk) 05:06, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

I am new to the site and do not know how to revise the page to earlier version. I have provided proper citation for my claims.Any admins lurking here, please undo the edits by Nara Vettai. Ihaveabandonedmychild (talk) 05:25, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Veerappan is still a hero for Vanniyars and one can see his pictures feigned on huge banners with eulogizing quotes in Vanniyar dominant districts of Tamil Nadu. I can't attach image here but it is no secret that many Vanniyar boys sport tattoos of Veerappan face on their arms Ihaveabandonedmychild (talk) 05:28, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Does it count as an invalid source?

Veerappan is an iconic imagery among Vanniyars and has been celebrated by the community for his supposed bravery and robinhood-esque charity work. I have cited an article which primarily speaks about PMK, a Vanniyar political outfit, and its leader's advice to the community to shun some imagery which are deemed casteist. The article briefly mentions about hero-worshipping by Vanniyars which the PMK leader wants his brethren to avoid . While the overarching theme of the article was PMK's rebuilding its image as caste-neutral party, it certainly did mentioned the fact that Veerappan is considered as icon by Vanniyars. In general, let's say an article speaks about A majorly but briefly mentions about B. Can someone use it to cite B while the entire gist of the article is A while A and B may or may not be related? Ihaveabandonedmychild (talk) 06:18, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Ihaveabandonedmychild, WP:SYNTHESIS explains this. The source must explicitly state what you add. Also that content doesn't belong in the lead. SUN EYE 1 06:49, 23 January 2021 (UTC)