Talk:Toda people

Toda people was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 27, 2008	Good article nominee	Not listed

Dont delete. I am from the area where Toda Tribes, Nilgiris.

freddy / freddymr@rediffmail.com

I think it's going to be staying. RickK 04:58, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Don't they practice female infanticide? I read about it in my sociology book at school.-Jessie

They practice polyandry "As a result, only around a few thousands of them still remain in the mountainous terrains, facing the threat of complete extinction." This statement is terribly ridiculous. What is the source or where is the reference???

I'm going to take a wild guess and say it is Freddy, the guy who lives in the Nilgiri hills, amongst this tribe. Vvuppala 21:23, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A completely unsubstantiated statement needs to be cited[edit]

"According to the Todas, the goddess Teikirshy and her brother first created the sacred buffalo and then the first Toda man. The first Toda woman was created from the right rib of the first Toda man."

This is obvioulsy a blend of Judeo-Christianity and Native American religion. Can we get some clarification and/or sources? --208.254.174.148 03:59, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I heard something about Christianity being copied from other religions, or at least some parts of it. - Rain. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.217.66.26 (talk • contribs) .

I agree with Rain that Christianity does have influences -

like the 72 verses of the Avesta (Zoroastriansm, worlds first revealed religion) and the 72 apostles of Christ??? (Christianity came almost 1000 years later in the same region once dominated by Zoroastrian fire worshippers.

photo description is obviously wrong[edit]

can anybody please show a photo of that hut with somebody moving in or out? i'll bet that either the entrance hole in the front is smaller than 3x3 feet or the hut is bigger than 10 feet high and 9 feet wide... there's nothing to compare and scale on this picture. how can such a bad photo with an obviously wrong description pass as picture of the day? Henningz 08:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about this for a better photo? It certainly seems to show everything in scale. http://www.berlin-indien.de/images/PICT0728.jpg - Norminator 15:11, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

U can also check my website for pictures on the TODA- there is one of an old lady with her grand children in their home. http://www.priyamani.com

Changing Mythology to Religion?[edit]

Shouldn't mythology be changed to religion? It seems like the article is not respecting their beliefs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.217.66.26 (talk • contribs) .

As is stated elsewhere on wikipedia in respect to this issue: "Categorising a story as a myth does not necessarily imply that it is untrue. Religion and mythology differ, but have overlapping aspects. Many English speakers understand the terms "myth" and "mythology" to mean fictitious or imaginary. However, according to many dictionary definitions, these terms can also mean a traditional story or narrative that embodies the belief or beliefs of a group of people, and this [article] should be understood in this sense only. The use of these terms... does not imply that any story so categorized is historically true or false or that any belief so embodied is itself either true or false." --Krsont 12:58, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

however the discription given is clearly a description of their religion, not mythology. It does speak about their supposed creation myth (but see note below), but then goes on to speak about what gods they worship, what temples they create etc.

also, from the article about origin beliefs:

"The term creation myth may be seen as offensive when used to describe stories which are still believed today, as the term myth may suggest ideas which are absurd or fictional. These beliefs and stories need not be a literal account of actual events, but may express what are perceived to be truths at a deeper or more symbolic level. "

So, mythology is definitely totaly unappropriate on all accounts

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Toda people/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

This article does not meet the Good article criteria and has therefore failed. Issues include:

There is at least one [citation needed] tag.
" History" is unreferenced
"Culture and society" is essentially unreferenced; only the first few sentences are referenced
" Religion" is unreferenced
Format references according to WP:CITE/ES so that they include publisher and access dates

Once these issues have been resolved, feel free to renominate the article. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 00:49, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which century?[edit]

The lead says

The Toda population has hovered in the range 700 to 900 during the last century.

Does the cited 1984 reference refer to 19th century or to the 20th century? In either case, the verb should be changed from 'has hovered' to 'hovered'. YBG (talk) 04:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

pictures[edit]

there are too many pictures that r making the read difficult, can we move'em to commons & link via commons cat ? or create a gallery section below and move'em down.Kanatonian (talk) 13:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cephalic index?[edit]

It seems like references to cephalic index -- which is a relic of an anthropological tradition that ranked 'races' based on head shape -- should be qualified in some way. Excalibre (talk) 03:26, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Toda people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Toda people. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 07:11, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Toda people. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 16:18, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Toda people. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 20:57, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]