User talk:Ranithraj

Hello Ranithraj! Your additions to Lankapura Dandanatha have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 00:51, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Ok Diannaa got it Ranithraj (talk) 04:52, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Brother, make pandyan kingdom involving battle pages like , Battle of Thalaiyanaganm, Battle of Kumbakonam..like create this Itsmethunder9783 (talk) 20:39, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

sure Brother will do Ranithraj (talk) 09:44, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

1. Battle of Thalaiyanaganm - Pandya victory

   (Chola Cheras vs pandya )

2.Pandya invasion of Anuradhapura 436 CE - Padya Victory

       ( Anuratha pura kingdom vs Pandya )

3. Battle of Nelveli - Pandya victory

       ( Pallava   vs Pandya )

4. Battle of Sennilam - Pandya victory

     ( Chera  vs Pandya )

5.Battle of Marudur - Pandya Victory

       (  Ay kingdom  vs Pandya )

6.Battle of Peruvallanallur - Pallava - Pandya - chola victory

      ( Chalukya vs Pallava , chola , Pandya alliance)

7.Battle of Kuzhumbur - Pandya Victory

      ( Pallava    vs Pandya )

8.Battle at Periyalur - Pandya Victory

  ( Pallava  vs Pandya)

9.Battle of Venbai - Pandya Victory

     ( Gang , Chalukyas vs Pandya)

10.Battle of Vizhinjam - Pandya Victory

    ( Chera    Vs  Pandya)

11.Battle of Kudamukku - Pandya Victory

     ( Pallava    vs Pandya)

12.Pandya Invasion of Anuradhapura - Pandya Victory

       ( Anurathaoura kingdom vs Pamgay)

13.Battle of Arisil - Pallava Victory

     ( Pandya      - Pallava )

14.Battle of Idavai - Pandya Victory 
   ( Ganga Kingdom va Pandya)

15.Battle of Sevur - Chola Victory

   ( Pandya Vs cholas )

16.Chola Conquest of pandya - chola victory

      ( Cholas vs Pandya)

17.Pandya invasion of chola 1215 CE - Pandya Victory

            ( Chola vs Pandya)

18.Battle of Tellaru 1231 CE - Pandya Victory

        ( Chola vs Pandya - kadava alliance)

19.Battle of Mahendramangalam- Hoysala victory

      ( Pandyas - Hoysalas)

20.Siege of Kannanur Koppam - Pandya Victory

          ( Hoysala vs Pandya)

21. Battle of Kannanur Koppam - Pandya Victory

             (Hoysala vs Pandya)

22.Seige of Sendamangalam - Pandya Victory

         ( Kadava Vs Pandya )

23.Battle of Mudugur - Pandya Victory

        ( Kakatiya - Bana telugu army alliance vs Pandya)

24.Seige of Kanchipuram - Pandya Victory

      ( Telugu choda vs Pandya)

25.pandya invasion of Jaffna kingdom - Pandya victory

           ( Tambralinga - pandya )

26.Pandya invasion of Chola 1279 CE - pandya victory

             (Chola - Hoysala alliance vs Pandya) Itsmethunder9783 (talk) 05:49, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

Sure will do Ranithraj (talk) 11:22, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

=== chalukya - chola wars === Itsmethunder9783 (talk) 15:54, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

As per wikipedia policy, only extended confirmed users can edit or create articles related to Indian military history Ranithraj (talk) 09:02, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Cholas Victory over Chalukyas :-

Raja Raja campaigns Against Chalukyas :

Battle of Annigeri,Battle of Gangapadi(998), Conquest of Nolabavadi(998), Battle Tadigaipadi(998), Conquest of Gangavadi(1004), Battle of Gulbarga, Battle of Ponnasoge.

Rajendra Campaigns Agaist Chalukyas:

Battle of Donur(1007), Conquest of Raichur,Battle of Kollipakkai, Conquest of Bhatkal , Battle of Kogali ,  Conquest of Vengi ,Sack of Manyakheta(1017), Battle of Maski,Battle of Kadambalige,Re Conquest of Vijayawada,Re Conquest of Vengi(1037) , Re Conquest of Ganga padi (1037).

Rajathi Raja Campaigns Against Chalukyas #1.

Battle of Gulbarga(1042),Battle of Amaravathi, Battle of Dannada , Sack of Dannada, Re conquest of Raichur, Battle of Kampili, Sack of Pundur , Sack of Kalyani(1048) ,Battle of Kolhapur.

Rajathi Raja Campaigns Against Chalukyas #2

Siege of Uchangi, Siege of Nulambavadi, Siege of Kadambalige, Battle of Kogali, Sack of Kollipakai, Sack of Kampili,Batte of Karandhai.

Rajendra II Campaigns Against Chalukyas:

Battle of Koppam(1054) , Battle of Mudakkarru(1059) , Battle of Gangapadi, Battle of Kudalasangama(1062).

Vira Rajendra Campaigns Against Chalukyas:

2nd Battle of kudal sangama, Battle of Gangapadi,  Battle of Gulbarga(1063), Battle of Vijayawada(1066),Battle of Gulbarga(1066), Battle of Chakrakottam(1068), Battle of Gangai konda cholapuram, Battle of Karur, Battle of Kondapalli, Reconquest of Vengi, Sack of Kampili, Battle of Raichur .

Kulottunga I Campaigns Against Chalukyas:

Battle of Kolar ,Battle of Manalur ,Battle of Nagilli,Conquest of Gangapadi (1083),Battle of Navillai (1083),Conquest of Banavasi (1084),Reconquest of Kanchi (1089),Re conquest of vengi( 1088),Re conquest of Vengi (1099).

Vikrama Campaigns Against Chalukyas:

Re Conquest of vengi (1120) ,Battle of Vijayawada (1120), Re Conquest of Vengi(1127),Re Capture Vengi ( 1133).

Kulonthunga 2 Campaigns Against Chalukyas:

Battle of Manneru, Battle of Godavari.

Kulonthunga 3 , Re Capture of Vengi and defeated Someshvara IV and king Bhillama Yadava-Seuna Dynasty. This is last battle of Cholas and Chalukyas.

I collected sources across chola Inscriptions , Historians Books , Documents and Wikipedia article Refference with this wars..this wars untold wars and cholas victory over Chalukyas.. we should analyse and finish this Chalukya - chola wars artical page ...! I hope this will help everyone for sure..iam add all link and sourses in this talk page ..read and make war article between cholas and chalukyas ..!

https://archive.org/details/CholasI/page/n243/mode/1up?view=theater https://archive.org/details/in.gov.ignca.16035/page/172/mode/1up

https://archive.org/details/anirudh-kanisetti-lords-of-the-deccan-southern-india-from-the-chalukyas/page/n266/mode/1up

https://archive.org/details/sgw.chalukyasofkalya0000brgo/page/90/mode/1up

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Chalukya%E2%80%93Chola_wars

https://archive.org/details/historicalinscri035270mbp/page/n63/mode/1up

https://www.whatisindia.com/inscriptions/south_indian_inscriptions/tanjavur_temple/no.20_south_wall_1st_2nd_tiers.html Itsmethunder9783 (talk) 15:52, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Sure , but need some time Ranithraj (talk) 14:29, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

• Early Chola invasion of Anuradhapura (205 BC)

(Around 205 BCE, Ellalan mounted an invasion of the Rajarata based in Anuradhapura in northern Sri Lanka and defeated the forces of king Asela of Anuradhapura, establishing himself as sole ruler of Rajarata)

• Battle of Kariyaru

Manimekalai mentions of a great battle of Kariyaru in which the 'Chola junior prince' (Ilankon) defeated the Pandya and Chera kings. We can infer that the Chola prince Ilankon to be Nalankilli ilankon and that this was the battle in which Nedunkilli met his fate and the civil strife came to an end.

Kovur Kilar again pleaded with both the Chola princes to give up their strife, as whoever wins, the loser will be a Chola (Purananuru – 45).

The plea apparently had no effect and Nedunkilli was killed in battle at Kariyaru.

• Battle of Vahaipparandalai ( 2 nd Century CE)

The Battle of Vahaipparandalai was a significant military engagement during the Sangam period in South India, where King Karikala Chola defeated nine enemy chieftains. This victory is one of Karikala's notable achievements and contributed to the Chola kingdom's rise to prominence. The battle likely took place in the region known as "the field of vahai trees.

• Battle of Talaiyalanganam ( 3rd Century CE)

The Battle of Talaiyalanganam was a significant military victory for the early Pandya king Nedunjeliyan II during the Sangam period, around the 3rd century CE. He defeated a coalition of Chola and Chera kings and their vassals, who had attacked the Pandyan capital of Madurai. The battle took place at Talaiyalanganam, a town in present-day Tamil Nadu.

• Battle of Vallala (911 CE)

The Battle of Vallala, also known as the Battle of Tiruvallam, was fought in 916 CE between the Cholas and the Rashtrakutas. The Chola king Parantaka I led his forces to victory against the Rashtrakuta king Krishna II. This battle took place near the village of Vallala, which is located in present-day Andhra Pradesh.

• Battle of Chevur (959 CE)

Th e Battle of Chevur was a significant engagement during the Chola-Pandya conflict in the 10th century, specifically between the Chola forces led by Parantaka Chola II (also known as Sundara Chola) and his son Aditya Karikalan (Aditya II), and the Pandya forces under Vira Pandya. The battle, which took place at Chevur, resulted in a decisive Chola victory, with Aditya II reportedly killing Vira Pandya. This victory, however, did not lead to a complete conquest of the Pandya kingdom.

• Battle of Udagai (1003 CE)

The Battle of Udagai was a conflict between the Chola and Chera dynasties, fought during the reign of Raja Raja I, the greatest Chola king. The battle, which took place in present-day Udayagiri in Kanyakumari district, resulted in the Cholas plundering Udagai and returning with significant spoils, including gold and elephants.

Source :-

https://archive.org/details/CholasI/page/n243/mode/1up?view=theater

https://archive.org/details/in.gov.ignca.16035/page/172/mode/1up

https://archive.org/details/historicalinscri035270mbp/page/n47/mode/1up

Itsmethunder9783 sure but need some time

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

TeenX808 (talk) 18:46, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Ranithraj we currently have 4 other disputes in 4 different articles do you want to try solving it once more by collobarating together.Thanks TeenX808 (talk) 04:07, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Sure, I'd like to solve it, but not right now. Can we start next month instead, as I'm currently busy with work? I'll be available to collaborate on weekends in the next month. Until then don't change anything in those articles. Ranithraj (talk) 14:34, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ranithraj It won’t take too long let’s solve Parantaka I and Gajabahu invasion, pandyan civil war let’s solve it next month cause it’s big

Message me and let’s solve the two issues in minutes. Thanks TeenX808 (talk) 01:45, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I don't think we can solve those two in minutes. Why so hurry ? Nothing is gonna happen in a month. As I said above, I am busy with work. Let's solve all those 3 in a next month. I think we need moderator as we had in Parantaka 2 case. So until next month , don't ask any moderator to review this. I am not yet done with the sources, I need to add more sources. Then we will look for moderator or file a case in dispute resolution noticeboard. Again don't do this until next month. Just stay calm and happy. Ranithraj (talk) 18:25, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ranithraj- Only one of the sources from the 5 mention conquered and that source violates WP:Old Source, the source which mentions is trustworthiness of mahawansa while all the other sources say the invasion failed and the north of Ceylon was pillaged not conquered.

Also for the north to be conquered there should be a administration but Parantaka I after defeating udayas forces kept marching towards south but at the end he was forced to retreat back to mainland.

So the changes should pillaged not conquered also there should be mention of the counter invasion and we can put exclusively mention in the chronicles and some historians.

We can end these two topics today and talk about pandyan civil war next month. Thanks TeenX808 (talk) 02:09, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Trustworthiness of Mahavamsa was written in 1930 by wilhelm Griger he also translated the Mahavamsa. His thoughts are supported by other historians like Sastry in 1955 Colas book he referenced Griger, pillay in 1963 the South India and Ceylon book , again this author too referenced Griger . Also I see you have added many sources older than this in your article, And this source is not even 100 years old, Again Griger thoughts are supported by other historians like Sastry and pilay. Zoozaz1 also told"a source being old does not discount it as providing evidence for a claim." so we can consider this source.

"all the other sources say the invasion failed and the north of Ceylon was pillaged not conquered."

I disagree with this,

as per Spencer(1) "When the Ceylonese king, Udaya Iv (940-953), refused to surrender them, Parantaka used this refusal as a pretext for launching a new invasion of Ceylon, defeating Udaya's forces, and pillaging the countryside. But Udaya retreated southward with the Pandyan regalia into the wilds of Rohana"

He clearly said Cholas defeated Udayas forces but they couldn't get the crown.

2.Pillay

" The Chola army progressed well at first and succeeded in killing the Sinhalese Senapati in battle. But soon after, Udaya, taking the Pandyan crown, proceeded to Rohana. The Chola troops tried to marcha gainst Rohana but finding it difficult to enter that territory, turned back and returned to their own country. Thus Parantaka's effort to secure the Pandyan crown and the necklace of the king ended in failure."

According to him Cholas won the battle but failed to get the crown.

3. Wijetunga Rise and decline of Chola power in Ceylon pg. 95

"But at the battle which followed

between the two armies, the Sinhalese were badly defeated and the commander was killed. Udaya, when informed of the disaster, hastily moved to Rohana, taking with him all the treasures, including the Pandyan regalia. The victorious Colas pursued the Sinhalese right up to Rohana, but before they could lay their hands on the king or the treasures, they had to make a hasty retreat. They had to turn back presumably because of tidings of some grave developments in the Cola country itself. The Culavamsa, of course, avers that the invasion was called off owing to their inability to penetrate into Rohana’ It is inconceivable that tlie defences of Rohana would have been so formidable that they could have withstood the Colas."

He calls victorious Cholas.

I disagree with the statement that invasion is failed. From the above sources I understand Cholas had the battle with Udayas forces in anuradhapura kingdom in which obviously cholas won and conquered the Kingdom but they couldn't get the crown when udaya retreated to rohana.

So Chola had captured and Conquered Anuradhapura kingdom but couldn't get the crown.

"Also for the north to be conquered there should be an administration but Parantaka I after defeating udayas forces kept marching towards south but at the end he was forced to retreat back to mainland."

There was some temporary administration until their withdrawal to Chola country. That's why griger mentioned it. Not all forces marching towards there must be some in North. Also He was forced to withdraw because of Rashtrakuta invasion.

"So the changes should pillaged not conquered also there should be mention of the counter invasion and we can put exclusively mention in the chronicles and some historians."

So changes should be Conquered and pillaged. We can mention the counter invasion but we need to add it is not mentioned in Chola sources.

'We can end these two topics today and talk about pandyan civil war next month"

Why so hurry ? Nothing is gonna happen in a month. As I said above, I am busy with work. Let's solve all those 3 in a next month. I think we need moderator as we had in Parantaka 2 case. So until next month , don't ask any moderator to review this. I am not yet done with the sources, I need to add more sources. Just stay calm and happy. Ranithraj (talk) 18:26, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ranithraj: Again the citations you gave doesn’t say conquered but simply pillaged whatever let’s call for a dispute resolution board and also you tried countering my draft by saying it wasn’t mentioned by other historians and I hope you can remember what you said it self “ Finally, the fact that some historians have not mentioned this event does not necessarily mean they disagree with it or prove it didn’t happen. It's likely that it was overshadowed by more significant events, which is why it was overlooked in their accounts.”

Atleast my draft issue has to be solved and what you did was WP:Stalking I hope for a quick response regarding this situation. Thanks TeenX808 (talk) 05:11, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

@Ranithraj: it’s been the next month and I hope we can solve the issues now, I have no reason to wait for your permission since your edits violate WP:NPOV, there literally written according to chola sources.

Also you have ignored my previous response regarding Gajabahu invasion

I hope I can get a response by 3rd, if not necessary changes will be done.Thanks TeenX808 (talk) 20:51, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes, we can solve the issues from this weekend onwards as I mentioned above that I am available on weekends. My edits don't violate as they are confirmed by historians. It's your edits which are based on Culawamsa. Regarding Gajabahu invasion I have given multiple reasons other than some historians not mentioned it. Don't change anything until consensus is reached or get the response from moderator. I am saying again we can solve this on this weekend as I am busy on week days. Ranithraj (talk) 17:35, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

@Ranithraj : this Saturday the issue has to be solved plus I have cited countless historians which contradicts which is written in pandyan civil war and almost the entire article is based on chola account which directly violates WP:NPOV, you itself accepted that historians haven’t directly declined Gajabahu invasion. Whatever waiting for you until this Saturday, 13 TeenX808 (talk) 12:34, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Let's solve this on Saturday. The most of the historians you cited says Cholas defeated sinhalese. Entire article is based on what the historians has said. The historians have analysed both the accounts and gave their insights. Regarding Gajabahu invasion I never accepted that historians haven't directly declined, I clearly said some of the historians have directly declined the invasion. And my sources include both the direct decline and questioning the invasion. I don't wanna argue here. Our debate will never end as we don't agree each other. Let the moderator decide. Ranithraj (talk) 17:16, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

@Ranithraj: sure, again only some say and the rest declines also pandyan civil war ends after lankapura campaign, whatever lets countinue this Saturday TeenX808 (talk) 05:44, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

@Ranithraj: Let’s start with Gajabahu invasion, over here send reliable sources by historians not by proclaimed scholars which exclusively calls the invasion fake or a myth, not historians saying they are not sure or else missing the event in their respective sources, plus this won’t change a lot in the article, the article will get published the only difference is the mention of it might be a myth will be included. Thanks TeenX808 (talk) 03:38, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

not here , file this in dispute resolution notice board. Let the moderator decide whether this is invasion or myth. You shouldn't decide the sources, I will give the reliable sources which proves this event is myth in dispute resolution notice board page not here.Regarding the changes in the article. It's upto the moderator to decide what should be in the article. I want the title itself to be changed to mythical invasion. We don't need to argue here because we don't come to the solution.Also listed this in Wikipedia third opinion, let the moderator decide.Ranithraj (talk) 04:15, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

@Ranithraj: the complaint will be filed then. TeenX808 (talk) 15:03, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

TeenX808 (talk) 05:12, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Please read the ArbCom ruling on Indian military history and take note that editors who are not extended-confirmed may not edit articles on the subject of Indian military history. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:18, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

sure , I got it. Thanks for the instructions. Ranithraj (talk) 01:45, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

hi, I see your content in the article talk page but why are not modifying in the article, Despite having the right sources? I see you are not changing the content 2409:40F4:1024:E7C:DC6A:6AFF:FEE1:455B (talk) 16:16, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

That is related to Indian military history so I cannot edit until I became an extended confirmed user Ranithraj (talk) 18:14, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

TeenX808 (talk) 09:38, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Monkeysmashingkeyboards. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Nalankilli, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 18:20, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

I have provided reliable source which The Cholas by Nilakanda SastryRanithraj (talk) 18:23, 15 October 2025 (UTC)