Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sri Lankan Tamil people/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 15:53, 29 August 2008 [1].

Sri Lankan Tamil people[edit]

Nominator(s): Taprobanus (talk)


I'm nominating this article for featured article because this article has under gone Peer review and a successful GA review. I think this is ready for an FA status. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 17:41, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is now fixed. Watchdogb (talk) 13:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Oppose: The lead is too. lengthy. There are many sentences which need not be present in the lead. Examples Up to eighty percent of Sri Lankan Tamils are Hindus, primarily members of the Saivaite sect. Most of the rest are Christians, with Roman Catholics predominating and a small Protestant minority.
    Too. much of subgroup details when the corresponding details are present in the main prose.
    Look at the amount of history details in the Third Para.
    In short, the Lead needs to be compressed and unnecessary details need to be removed.     KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 10:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Issues resolved, Kensplanet - Talk 21:06, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The length of the lead is satisfactory per WP:LEDE. Some unnecessary details should probably be excluded, but as it is, the lead is of an appropriate size. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 04:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ok. The lenght is fine. But the contents are not fine. Unnecessary details need to be removed. I would be happy to see mention of literature in the lead. KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 07:59, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have removed some details. Is it ok now, or let us know what else you find not necessary ? Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 17:13, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • I have further updated the lead, any comments ?Taprobanus (talk) 13:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • The lead need a bit more work. Mention of history details are observed in the Ist para The Sri Lankan Tamil history is politically contested but is authenticated from the 2nd century BCE. when the third para is reserved for history. Secondly, what's so special about the sentence Up to eighty percent of Sri Lankan Tamils are Hindus with the rest being mostly Christians. All Asian ethnic groups have nearly the same statistics. The lead should be reserved only for unique facts. KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 20:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • The sentence Up to eighty percent of Sri Lankan Tamils are Hindus with the rest being mostly Christian is there to point out the religious aspects of the Sri Lankan Tamil people. It is necessary to discuss about the religious makeup of regional people. It really makes no sense to exclude the religious statics of the people from the LEAD since, according to WP:LEAD and Peer review, it is expected major aspect of the article be written on the article's lead. Another featured article, Azerbaijani people, also lists the religious makeup of the people too. Watchdogb (talk) 23:05, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • I have removed the statistics, does it satisfy User:Kensplanet? Also not all Asian people have such similar statistics. For Example Arabs, Iranians, Mizos, Filipinos, [Chams]] to name a few. I would say that it is a surprise to many me included that upto 80% were Hindus in 1981 Taprobanus (talk) 11:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • REF134 (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/194463/1/.html) doesn't seem to work properly.
  • What makes the following reliable sources?
  1. REF6 (http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=79&artid=25010)
  2. REF8 (http://www.joshuaproject.net/peopctry.php?rop3=210041&rog3=MY)
  3. REF19 (http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=99&artid=26230)
  4. REF40 (http://www.infolanka.com/org/srilanka/hist/76.htm)
  5. REF49 (http://www.defonseka.com/k21.htm) KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 10:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The above is not the publisher simply the archiving website of an article published long agao by the Sunday Obsevor a relibale newspaper from Sri Lanka. Taprobanus (talk) 12:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Current REF3 (http://www.ujaen.es/huesped/rae/articulos2007/acharya0907.pdf) [p. 108 (2 of 15)] says that according to official statistics there are only 100,000 Sri lankan refugees in India. But you have included 150,000 in the Infobox for India which is the unofficial number. Please stick to only official stats. KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 17:18, 2 August 2008(UTC)
  • This sentence from Migrations#Pre-independence A number of prominent Malaysians such as Ananda Krishnan, included in the Forbes list of billionaires, and economist Ramon Navaratnam are of Sri Lankan Tamil descent. needs to be cited with reliable sources. REF134 doesn't back them. KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 17:18, 2 August 2008(UTC)
  • Similarly for this sentence in the same section C. W. Thamotharampillai (1832-1901), an Indian-based Tamil language revivalist, was born in the Jaffna peninsula and settled in India after taking a position with the colonial authorities. KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 17:18, 2 August 2008(UTC)
  • The Tamil language sign Image under the caption Scarborough Grace Hospital in Toronto, Canada, has signs that include Tamil language. has no relation with the article. This should be in the Tamil language section. KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 17:18, 2 August 2008(UTC)
  • There are mention of languages such as English, Sinhala, French, German, Malay. How are they related to the Sri Lankan Tamil people. That needs to be clarified in the main prose. KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 17:18, 2 August 2008(UTC)

KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 10:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 6 and 19 are used per consensus. Watchdogb (talk) 13:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ref134 is now fixed with another reference. Watchdogb (talk) 13:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ref40 is now fixed to point to a popular English newspaper from Sri Lanka. Watchdogb (talk) 13:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ref49 is a link to an archived page. The original news appeared in Sunday Observer, a popular English newspaper in Sri Lanka. Watchdogb (talk) 13:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC
The picture of the Scarborough Grace hospital is in the right place IMO. It is related to the topic because the topic speaks about the migration of the Tamil people to foreign countries with the largest population residing in Canada. The picture illustrates the culmination of the Language in Canada. Watchdogb (talk) 19:23, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, it speaks about the culmination of the language. It basically speaks about the general Tamil Diaspora in Canada. But this article is strictly about Sri Lankan Tamil people. Perhaps, this image should be under Tamil people then. I am sure in Canada, not all Tamils are Sri Lankan. KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 08:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Removed so it is a mute point Taprobanus (talk) 12:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Claim about Ananda Krishnan's ancestry is cited now along with C. W. Thamotharampillai. Watchdogb (talk) 19:23, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You have provided http://www.island.lk/2002/03/20/midwee02.html for Ananda Krishnan. I cannot find any mention of Ananda Krishnan in that page. Please provide the sentences here which prove the claim . Even the title and publisher you have mentioned is incorrect. Publisher should be Sunday Island. It's basically a book review. I'm not sure whether book reviews can be considered reliable. Consider sourcing from the actual book instead. Also do provide a citation for Ramon Navaratnam. KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 08:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
removed Ramon Navaratnam from the article Taprobanus (talk) 13:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That was my mistake as I pasted the wrong url into the citation. The citation now backs claim about Ananda Krishnan. For Ramon Navaratnam I do not have any reference. We will have to wait for the person who added the information to provide the reference - monday perhaps. Watchdogb (talk) 12:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All instances of Tamilnet as a reference has been removed as other source exist to back the claim. Watchdogb (talk) 20:37, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.joshuaproject.net/peopctry.php?rop3=210041&rog3=MY has been commented out until it can be resolved at Reliable source notice board Watchdogb (talk) 22:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

  1. Please prove the reliabiility of http://www.tamilnet.com/
    Pointing to WikiProjects and other pages won't work.
  2. No problem if REF49 points to an archived page. Provide the exact URL of the article archived within the website then. The current URL is of no use to anyone. KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 16:57, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not clear what you want here, it does points to an archived page i.e the current URL Taprobanus (talk) 13:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Issues resolved, Ealdgyth - Talk 13:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So you disagrees with the consensus achieved by Sri Lanka centric editors ? No matter, the citation is removed and another added Watchdogb (talk) 20:37, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since they have been removed, it's a moot point. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
fixed Watchdogb (talk) 14:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done - it has been commented out until issue can be taken up on reliable source notice board. Watchdogb (talk) 22:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See below Watchdogb (talk) 16:26, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed UTHR from citing a historic fact but left it citing a political statement because they are relibale for such facts same as Amnesty International and Human rights Watch. Taprobanus (talk) 12:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Watchdogb (talk) 16:26, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Current ref 66 (Country study)>.. the publisher is the Library of Congress, not Robert Ross. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Watchdogb (talk) 16:26, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Current ref 96, the publisher is the Hindu newspaper, and it should be formatted as a newspaper article Ealdgyth - Talk 15:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Watchdogb (talk) 16:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Removed Taprobanus (talk) 23:43, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Watchdogb (talk) 16:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same for current ref 117 (Tamil Alientaion) and current ref 126 (Tamil Militant Groups Ealdgyth - Talk 15:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done and Done Watchdogb (talk) 16:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Current ref 134 (Asean's birth a pivotal..) is published by the Nation, not Kavi Chongkittavorn, who is the author.
Otherwise links checked out with the link checker tool. Sources looked okay. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
UTHR is a human rights organization based from Sri Lanka. It has been internationally recognized, including from Amnesty International(see here) and has won Martin Ennals Award, has been cited by the United States Government (see here), Canadian Government (see here) and Human Rights Watch (see here). Watchdogb (talk) 15:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 134 is fixed now. Watchdogb (talk) 16:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

which opens up more questions than it answers. Of the 3 groups then discussed in Moors article, none is said to be Tamil--or it is a very hidden statement. Same when this article is linked in other places as well. Hmains (talk) 21:10, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sri Lankan Moors predominantly speak Tamil as their mother tongue, however, they claim to trace their ancestry from Arabs and not "Dravidian" like Tamils. The current coverage of Sri Lankan Moors in wikipedia is lackluster and filled with opinion and POV pushing. Once this article is finished, Sri Lankan Moors article will be developed into featured article. Watchdogb (talk) 22:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We cant wouch for the Sri Lankan Moors or Islam in Sri Lanka articles. They are not peer reviewed nor GA quality. All what the Sri Lankan Tamil article needs to say is that Sri Lankan Tamils are distinct from X and Y although X and Y also speak Tamil and cite it properly which it does. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 17:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have unlinked Sri Lankan Muslims from Islam in Sri Lanka. Taprobanus (talk) 12:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Issues resolved, Watchdogb - Talk 21:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)~[reply]

(http://www.defonseka.com/k21.htm) is used to cite This village has roughly 15,000 inhabitants and has become a refuge for Tamils displaced by the Sri Lankan civil war. No mention of 15,000 and the civil war. Figures need to be cited. KensplanetTalkE-mailContributions 20:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence has been removed and citation remains for a claim backed by the source. Watchdogb (talk) 21:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Watchdogb (talk) 00:07, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Err.. I'm not sure what this advice was meant to say, but properly speaking, the statement that "According to Jonathan Spencer, ..." should still have a ref in it for this article. Creating an article on Jonathan Spencer does not remove the need to source a statement attributed to a person. Any statements attributed to someone specific needs a citation. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ealdgyth, I tracked that one when it happened, and my understanding was that it wasn't related to sourcing, rather to creating an article on Jonathan Spencer to avoid providing the long definition in this article of who he is; nominators, is that correct? The only source removed, I think, was to who Jonathan Spencer is. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:14, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sandy is correct. The comment was relating to the text about who Jonathan Spencer should be removed and written on an article called Jonathan Spencer. That has been taken care of. 21:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Works for me. The way it read, it was confusing. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:01, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support and comment

An interesting read, although I wouldn't claim any great expertise in this topic, other than having been to the country. Some of the paragraphs are far too long (history, para 2), and need splitting. I think that the left-aligned images immediately after a heading are not in accordance with MoS and should be moved down a bit or to the right jimfbleak (talk) 09:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - References have been reviewed and updated by Doibot. --Meldshal42? 19:55, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: Watchdogb, you shouldn't cap comments made by others (see WP:FAC instructions). Please doublecheck with everyone whose comments you've capped to make sure they concur (example, Nishkid64 and others). You should only cap resolved issues raised by you under your sig. See Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Sri Lankan Tamil people#Notes about keeping FAC easy to read. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:35, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are still mixed citation styles (see WP:CITE, don't mix {{citation}} with cite xxx templates), there are numerous issues with WP:MOS#Images, images left-aligned below third-level headings, it's not clear that the {{main}} templates are used correctly to reflect summary sytle, some of those appear to be {{seealso}} or {{further}}, citations need work, there are missing publishers (example: ^ Marschall, Wolfgang (2003). "Social Change Among Sri Lankan Tamil Refugees in Switzerland". Retrieved on December 22, 2007.) and newspapers should be in WP:ITALICS, see WP:LAYOUT regarding lengthy list in See also, can any of that be incorporated into the article, if not, why is it needed, if already in the article, why is it in See also, WP:OVERLINKing needs attention (example, most readers know what rice is, there's more), averages in the text include standard deviations without explaining them to the reader, is that really needed. Work to be done here, that's just a very quick pass to try to get this moving from the bottom of the page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      (Standard deviations are included here but never explained to the reader: is their inclusion necessary?) The study of the genetic admixture also indicated that the Tamils of Sri Lanka have received a higher contribution from the Sinhalese of Sri Lanka (55.20% +/- 9.47) than from the Tamils of India (16.63% +/- 8.73), and the Sinhalese of Sri Lanka have a higher contribution from the Tamils of southern India (69.86% +/- 0.61) than from the Bengalis of northeast India (25.41% +/- 0.51). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Removed duplicate in See also Taprobanus (talk) 16:51, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Added three missed publisher information Taprobanus (talk) 20:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Removed as much as possible over linking Taprobanus (talk) 16:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • User:Redtigerxyz kindly helped us with the MOS issues on pics. Hope it satisfies requirements Taprobanus (talk) 16:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • There are still left-aligned images under headings, and there's a more serious problem with WP:ACCESSIBILITY, WP:LEAD and WP:LAYOUT. Templates in the lead belong under the text; there are two templates linked before the text in the lead. The options are to move them, convert the first to an infobox, convert them to horizontal templates and place them at the bottom of the article per WP:LAYOUT, maybe there are other options. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • One of the template has been changed to Infobox and the other template has been moved to the bottom of the LEAD section. Watchdogb (talk) 03:21, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Clarified Main and See also articles properly. Taprobanus (talk) 16:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose. This far in, I think the article should be withdrawn and worked on solidly. I've started the first two paras and got bogged down in so many instances of vagueness and poor expression that it can't possible be considered close to promotable this time. Sorry. —This is part of a comment by Tony1 (of 12:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)), which was interrupted by the following: [reply]

  • To reduce the blue-splotch size, could you pipe "and the enforced disappearance of a large number of people" to just two words?
  • Second sentence: you're listing three similar things, so please don't vary the wording for each: "They constitute a majority in the northern region and the eastern region holds a significant number, but they are a minority in the rest of the country." No. Try "They are a majority in the northern region, live in significant numbers in the eastern region, and are a minority in the rest of the country." I'd still like to check this wording against the actual percentages in each of the three regions.
  • "The Sri Lankan Tamil history is politically contested but is authenticated from the 2nd century BCE." This is very woolly. What does "polically contested" mean, and by whom? What does "authenticated" mean, and by whom? Please remove this sentence or tighten it up so it actually means something.
  • "Most modern Sri Lankan Tamils derive their ancestry from descendants of the former Jaffna kingdom in the north of the island and feudal divisions called Vannimais from the east." What, so most individual "are" (not all those words, please) descended from the X and the Y, both? Make it clear. Do some people trace it back to X, and others back to Y? I'm confused.
  • "although caste distinctions are no longer as strong as they once were"—MoS breach; please read "Vague chronological expressions", whatever it's called. "Once were" means ... when? You don't have to pin it down to a precise century, but it must be known whether it was 100 or 1000 years ago. Tony (talk) 12:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment  : Most problems commented here are personal opinions. We had a heavy copy edit by a established copy editor and a former member of LOCE. First and last points are the only essential part that may need be fixed and will be edited. Point two is again something that is the users personal opinion since the copy editor felt that the sentence brought a better flow to the article. Essentially the point here is that while one user may feel that the wording is improper, another user feels that it is proper. Personal opinion and cannot be alluded to because if the article was to be edited to this user's wishes another user may well come along and suggest the opposite. Point three seems to be caused by the user's unfamiliarity with the civil war and the subsequent politics in the country. We could say that X politically challenges the Sri Lankan Tamil history but Y says otherwise. We did not do that because that sentence alone will bring edit wars on the article. Majority of one ethnic group politically challenges the Sri Lankan Tamil history while the other ethnic group says otherwise, but the history has been authenticated by more scholars. If you take a minute to read the history section things will be clear. Point four is again being misinterpreted by the user since they did not take a look at the relating section of the article. Again I must remind to user that this article was the subject of Copy edit my a couple of user including an established copy editor. Point one and four are actually something that is not a result of personal opinion and misinterpretation but concerns within wiki rules. It shall be edited. Thanks Watchdogb (talk) 13:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think Tony's comments although may be too harsh about needing to withdraw this nomination should still be addressed. He is right about confusing the readers and imprecise language. Where pointed out, I have fixed them. Taprobanus (talk) 16:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm disappointed to find that this old argument is being run to devalue a reviewer's remarks. Everything I write is my personal opinion. Now, if you want to debate further the four ways in which scoundrels try to game the reviewing system, let's do so on my talk page. Here, let's be professional, please. Who has copy-edited the text, and how many times it has been copy-edited, is totally irrelevant. We are concerned only with the product. These were merely examples of why the text needs scrutiny throughout. Do you know how to locate good copy-editors in this area? Tony (talk) 03:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Anything specific you need done. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 12:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Tony1, I did the copyedit, and I'll be happy to address whatever issues you still have with the text. --AnnaFrance (talk — blunders) 13:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spot check on prose: two short paras in the middle.

  • "The Sri Lankan Tamils, (or Ceylon Tamils) are descendants of the Tamils of the old Jaffna kingdom or those of east coast feudal divisions called Vannimais". Is that an "either or" (the second one in the sentence)—in which case use "both ... and", or an "equative or" (in which case use parentheses instead). "East coast" could have a hyphen.
  • "The Indian Tamils, (or Hill Country Tamils), are descendants of"—remove both commas.
  • "and in the capital of Colombo"—so what is this city that is the capital of Colombo? Is Colombo a state? (Remove "of", of course).
  • "Live in ... inhabit"—are you trying to be various in your choice of words? When presenting a straight contrast, as here, don't: use the same wording.
  • "which included G. G. Ponnambalam, a leader of the Tamil Congress"—so there were a number of such leaders at the time? ("a").
  • "lead by S. J. V. Chelvanayakam"—"lead" is a chemical element (Pb). Word order a little clumsy here, too.

Why haven't you heeded my earlier advice to withdraw this and work on it properly? There's nothing wrong with a timely resubmission. It can't possibly pass at present. Tony (talk) 11:10, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tony while appreciating your sentiments we also have number of other editors who support this submission. I will leave it to Sandy to decide the final status. Also thanks again for your comments, it is difficult to get good advice in Wikipedia Taprobanus (talk) 12:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there's a tendency to sit around doing nothing, hoping that a vote-count of Supports will get it across the line. It's not a vote. I see that my colleague's comment above "These examples also illustrate the verbosity and redundancy that ruin the article." is not being taken seriously, but instead resisted. Have you found one or more good copy-editors by researching edit summaries in the edit-history pages of similar articles? Tony (talk) 06:34, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have not resited any request for change, in fact I have tried to prune it down to it's bare essentials. Do take a look. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 00:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tony, what you may not see is that [141 edits done by Anna were all copy edits. A lot of emphasis was placed copy-editing this article - a task I believe was accomplished. Watchdogb (talk) 18:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Responding to a request to revisit, on my talk page, I had another look at the lead. I have to wonder why this nomination remains on the FAC page. It's way below the standard of writing required.
    • The infobox isn't wrapping.
    • Opening sentence: "Tamil speaking" requires a hyphen.
    • "Attested" is not really the right word. "There is evidence of the presence of ...".
    • "are mostly Hindus with a seizable Christian population"—is it violent?
    • "Sri Lankan Tamil literature, written on topics including religion and the sciences, flourished during the ..."—Remove "written and both commas.
    • What exactly is the "modern period"? This anticipates the definition further down, I suppose; it shouldn't. Be specific here ("since the blah century").
    • "themes relating to the civil war and its effects"—remove the last three words ("relating to" does it).
    • MOSLINK says not to link the names of such countries as "Britain".
    • "deathS".
    • "ALthough" would be better.
    • "created a Tamil diaspora to locations around the world". Nope.
    • I hate "It is estimated that ..."—Say it as a fact and provide the citation, or don't say it. Tony (talk) 11:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments I think the article's content in general covers all the topics that needs to be covered regarding the history of of Tamils in Sri Lanka. However, a few details need to be ironed out. I have read this article in depth before the peer review (my comments are available on the talk page). So here goes, —This is part of a comment by Dineshkannambadi (of 17:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)), which was interrupted by the following: [reply]

  • The history of Tamils in Sri Lanka spans 2000 years. Is it really necessary to focus two whole paragraphs in the lead on just the civil war that has spanned 50 odd years? Perhaps just two lines would do, because I am sure the rest has been explained in detail in the later section on civil war and "rise of militancy".
    • The Lead section reflects the four fold organization of the article. Each paragraph is synopsis of the section. History, Society, Politics and Migrations. Sri Lankan Tamil identity is a modern post colonial identity as indicated in the article hence the prominence of politics and resultant migrations section. Taprobanus (talk) 13:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • They constitute a majority in the northern region, live in significant numbers in the eastern region. I think this statement could be more specific. North and east are kind of vague. From the map I see three districts where they are a clear majority. Perhaps these districts could be named and the sentence made to appear lower in the lead. The very second line of the first paragraph is not the right place. Where as, Sri Lankan Tamil history attested from the 2nd century BCE. Most modern Sri Lankan Tamils derive their ancestry ... is where it should be.
    • Changed from region to province and linked it and moved the sentence south Taprobanus (talk) 12:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I dont see mention of some cultural and social topics-ethnic group names, food, music & dance, all of which could be put in just one paragraph of 4-6 lines. This would be a good place to introduce the reader to what follows.
    • Some of the details were pruned down (such as regional groups) as part of the FA commentary process as exessive information Taprobanus (talk) 13:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The section "Tamil-speaking communities" should appear after the "History" section and within "Society" section. The reader should first be introduced to the history as it appears in the first para of the lead.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Their literature flourished during the medieval period in the courts of the Jaffna kingdom, and in the modern period is distinguished by an emphasis on the civil war and its effects. The first part merely states literature flourished, the second part emphasises on the topic of literature, namely, civil war efects. For consistancy, the medieval literature in Jaffna kingdom should be qualified. Was the literature didactic, expositions etc. Dont worry too much about length of lead, we can very easily pull up successful FAs with lengthy leads.
Took care of it myself.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are there any contradictory/opposing views to these comment. I don't follow Sri Lankan politics what so ever and do not have an opinion on the issue as a whole.Since 1948, when Sri Lanka became independent, successive governments have adopted policies that have benefited the majority Sinhalese at the expense of the minority Sri Lankan Tamils.[120] Designed to assist the Sinhalese community in such areas as education and public employment, these policies also severely handicapped the middle class Tamil youth, who found it more difficult during the 1970s and 1980s to enter a university or secure employment.
I have made it as neutral as possible, take a look now Taprobanus (talk) 18:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed the sentene but kept the same meaning. Please ensure it now is consistant with your reference books.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 19:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • by 2007 they reported that there was escalating political killings, child recruitment, abductions, and armed clashes which created a climate of fear in the northern and eastern sections of the country. The report also specifically pointed to mass killings, such as the murder of five students in Trincomalee, the murder of 17 employees of Action Against Hunger, and the Chencholai bombing in which 51 female students died along with others.
  • The last part is unnecessary: "These dialects are also used by ethnic groups other than Tamils such as Muslims, Veddhas, and Sinhalese who consider themselves separate.

Dineshkannambadi (talk) 17:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Unnecessary detail. Just date the work in brackets. Those who are interested in getting details will click on the link page. the grammatical treatise on Tamil which is dated from 3rd century BCE to 10th CE,[72][73] with some modern scholars preferring to date it not as a single entity but in parts or layers which are estimated to have been written between the 3rd century BCE and the 5th century CE.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 19:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done ~~
  • Unnecessary detail about drummers and their occupation. Has nothing to do with language.These drummers have historically played an important role as ritual drummers at funerals and folk temples, and as heralds and traditional weavers. They also maintained the family records of their feudal lords and even practiced medicine and astrology in folk traditions.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support All issues have been resolved. The author has made a serious effort to cover a vast topic.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The article is badly written, there are long, snaking sentences, verbosity and repetition. It is very difficult to read and this is not helped by extraneous details cluttering up sentences, references to who said what, (rather than just giving the citation), and a pretentious style. I suspected a non-neutral point of view several occasions. Here are some of the snakes: —This is part of a comment by Graham Colm (of 18:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)), which was interrupted by the following: [reply]

  • There are two groups of Tamils in Sri Lanka: the Sri Lankan Tamils (or Ceylon Tamils), who are descendants of either the Tamils of the old Jaffna kingdom or those of east coast feudal divisions called Vannimais, and the Indian Tamils or Hill Country Tamils, who are descendants of bonded laborers sent from Tamil Nadu to Sri Lanka in the 19th century to work on tea plantations.
    • Dont understand the concern here, what is the violation of WP:NPOV? Beacuse these are facts Taprobanus (talk) 16:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I offered this as an example of a snake, an over long sentence that has to be read more than once to be understood. It needs to be chopped up:
There are two groups of Tamils in Sri Lanka: the Sri Lankan Tamils and the Indian Tamils. The Sri Lankan Tamils, (or Ceylon Tamils) are descendants of the Tamils of the old Jaffna kingdom or those of east coast feudal divisions called Vannimais. The Indian Tamils, (or Hill Country Tamils), are descendants of bonded laborers sent from Tamil Nadu to Sri Lanka in the 19th century to work on tea plantations.

Which is still not perfect, but better. The whole article suffers from this difficult, rambling style. The Oxford Guide to Plain English says this: More people fear snakes than full stops, so they recoil when a long sentence comes hissing across the page...What makes [them] hard work is the length and muddle, with asides and additions tagged on as they sprang into the writer's mind. Graham Colm Talk 18:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The heterogeneous origins of the current Sri Lankan people can also be read in the mythical, legendary, and historical records of Sri Lanka such as the Buddhist chronicles Mahavamsa and the medieval Tamil chronicle Yalpana Vaipava Malai, both of which mention the legend of Prince Vijaya, who, with a band of followers, landed in Sri Lanka in 543 BCE from northwest India.
  • The earliest Tamil speakers known to have traveled from Sri Lanka to foreign lands were members of a merchant guild calling itself Tenilankai Valanciyar (Valanciyar from Lanka of the South), who were discovered to have been in South I

ndia from inscriptions dated to the 13th century.

    • To use the word emigrate would be completely wrong as they were merchant guild that has left behind inscriptions in South India. This is directly from the source. Taprobanus (talk) 16:46, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These examples also illustrate the verbosity and redundancy that ruin the article. For known to have travelled from Sri Lanka to foreign lands, why not say emigrated. The article needs some radical editing, preferably by an editor fresh to it; it's a long way from FA standard. Graham Colm Talk 15:27, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional scrutiny is needed on several of the images. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 03:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looking through the current revision of the article, all the above concerns have been addressed. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 03:40, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Support and Comment The images are free and licence has been provided and the article is very well balanced and nom has very good job. See all issues raised and have been overcome .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:12, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please check [2].  Mm40 (talk | contribs)  18:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment –Black Falcon (Talk) 16:39, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Issues resolved, –Black Falcon (Talk) 21:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lead section
    • Sri Lankan Tamil history attested from the 2nd century BCE. - could be worded more clearly
    • Jaffna kingdom - is this a proper noun? If so, "kingdom" should be capitalised. I noticed that the main article is at Jaffna kingdom, but the names of political entities usually are proper nouns (e.g. "British Empire" instead of "British empire").
    • Shouldn't the province names be capitalised? It's the same issue as above (proper nouns).
    • The society is also classified by caste divisions. - the sentence seems out-of-place
    • Their literature - consider modifying the piped link to Sri Lankan Tamil literature; see Wikipedia:Piped link#Intuitiveness
    • Piped links to riots in 1958, 1977, and 1981 - same as above
    • and the enforced disappearance of a large number of people - specify a number (even a general one, such as "thousands more") or remove altogether
    • Avoid the unintuitive piped link [[White Van Abductions in Sri Lanka|people]]
  • History section:
    • Why do the subsections ("Pre-Historic period", "Historic period", and "Medieval period") use bolding as opposed to standardsection heading syntax?
    • By 850 CE, the local Tamils were a factor in the political dynamics of Anuradhapura, the capital city. - the capital city of which political entity?
      • Removed that sentence but explianed whose capital A'pura was earlier Taprobanus (talk)
    • The caste structure of the majority Sinhalese has also accommodated the recent Hindu immigrants from South India - how "recent"? If possible, specify a century.
    • There are two instances of "including what is today Tamil Nadu" in the History section. Are they necessary (do they add to the section)? This is more of a question than a request to remove the phrases, since whether their inclusion is necessary and/or appropriate depends on the sources.
      • I removed the two occurrence of the words as they do not offer too much in terms of content - most know that south India includes Tamil Nadu. Watchdogb (talk) 20:50, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why is Image:Dakkhinatupa.jpg part of a hidden comment?
      • This particular image was used to illustrate the history of Tamil people in Sri Lanka. It has now been replaced by a picture which portrait the same message. I feel that the other image might be a bit more controversial than the current image. Furthermore, Dakkhinatupa image interferes with the text. Watchdogb (talk) 20:50, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • The issue of images and templates interfering with text is one that could possibly be resolved by moving some images to the left side of the page. If the Dakkhinatupa is not needed, I'd suggest removing the hidden notice; if it's simply a matter of space, it could potentially be worked in. –Black Falcon (Talk) 21:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tamil-speaking communities section:
    • stripped the Indian Tamils of their citizenship, including their right to vote - suffrage is rarely (never?) available without citizenship; drop everything after the comma or reword to "stripped the Indian Tamils of their citizenship and suffrage" (with a link to suffrage).
    • This was opposed by S. J. V. Chelvanayakam, the leader of Tamil nationalist Federal Party and most Tamil people - in the absence of a comma after "Party", the sentence claims that Chelvanayakam was the leader of most Tamil people. Can that claim be legitimately (i.e. considering WP:V and WP:NOR) made? If not, add a comma after "Party".
    • According to an agreement between the Sri Lankan and Indian governments in the 1960s - do we have an article about the agreement? If so, link to it. Also, consider rewording to "Under the terms of an agreement reached between the Sri Lankan and Indian governments in the 1960s". Is a more precise date (year) available?
      • Done - I have added your suggestion as it is the clear version. There is no article on this subject and the date is therefore not readily available. I will look to find the exact year. Watchdogb (talk) 19:39, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • about 40 percent of the Indian Tamils were granted Sri Lankan nationality - this should be "citizenship", correct?
    • There is a significant Tamil speaking Muslim population in Sri Lanka... - consider making this a separate paragraph so that the shift in topic is not so unexpected
      • I have moved this sentence towards the beginning of the discussion of the Tamil community. Is this better or worst ? 20:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Regional groups section:
    • Negombo Tamils, or Puttalam Tamils, is the term commonly used for native Sri Lankan Tamils who live in the western Gampaha and Puttalam districts. It does not apply to Tamil immigrants in these areas who have come from other parts of the island. - rephrase to avoid the dictionary definition expression "is the term commonly used for". Also, should "The" be added prior to "Negombo Tamils"? If so, add it; if not, remove the "The" from The Negombo Tamils have shown....
    • there was a substantial ethnic Tamil population until the first two decades of the 20th century, most of whom were Catholics, the rest Hindus - reword for better flow. One option is to remove "most of whom were Catholics, the rest Hindus"; another option is to place it immediately after "ethnic Tamil population" (with commas) and to reword "most of whom were Catholics, the rest Hindus" for better flow.
    • enabling that the Tamil language survives as a lingua franca - clarify, perhaps use "ensuring..."
    • toward Puttalam - not clear; perhaps change to "near Puttalam" if that's still accurate or "in Puttalam" if it's a reference to the district.
    • Today, most of those... - remove "Today" per guidance to avoid statements that are likely to become out-of-date over time
    • most of those who value their Tamil identity are Hindus who live in... - replace "value" with a word with a more neutral word with fewer normative undertones (e.g. "adhere to", "declare", etc. - depending on the source)
    • Composite or hybrid place names are also seen in these districts - replace "seen" with another word, such as "present"
    • Split the long paragraph about Eastern Tamils into 2-3 shorter paragraphs
    • Eastern Tamils inhabit a region that is presently divided into the Trincomalee District, the Batticaloa District, and the Ampara District - avoid using "presently" (readers don't know when the text was written) and try to shorten, for instance: "Eastern Tamils inhabit an area that spans the Trincomalee, Batticaloa, and Ampara districts.", piping the links to the district articles.
    • After the 1500s - try to be more specific, as "after the 1500s" could refer just as well to 1650 or 1950. Would "In the 1500s" be accurate, per the source?
    • dominated by the Mukkuvar caste - which caste system does the Mukkuvar caste dominate? If it's the caste system of the Eastern Tamils, then place the phrase immediately after "the Eastern Tamils follow a caste system". As worded, it could be understood that the Mukkuvar caste dominates the South Indian or Dravidian kinship system.
    • It also allows control of the places of worship, which are Hindu temples. - in what way, or what type of control? Clarify, please.
    • A hidden comment contains the sentence: "The kuti system is also found among the Tamil speaking Muslims of Batticaloa." Why is it hidden?
      • Trying to find a non copy vivo citation, I will write the note Taprobanus (talk) 12:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Currently, however, such restrictions do not apply. - reword to avoid using time-sensitive phrasing (similar issue as with the use of "today" and "presently")
    • What is the purpose of the following piped link: [[Vanni District|Vanni districts]]? Why not use [[Vanni District]], or why is "districts" in the plural?
    • collectively known as Panchamar (group of five) - is "group of five" a translation of Panchamar? Clarify or remove, since the next sentence identifies the five castes.
    • Consider making everything starting from People in the Vanni districts... a new paragraph.
  • Religion section:
    • The Hindu elite follow the religious ideology of Shaiva Siddhanta (Shaiva school) while others practice folk Hinduism - would it be correct to change "others" to "the masses", so that there is a contrast with "the Hindu elite"?
  • Language section:
    • It has undergone considerable morpho-syntactic convergence with spoken or colloquial Sinhala as a consequence of this contact. It is not entirely clear to what "this contact" refers. Also, since the subject of this sentence (the Negombo Tamil dialect) is not the same as the subject of the preceding sentence (bilingual fishermen in the Negombo area), it would be clear to avoid starting the sentence with It has.... Perhaps combined the two sentences: ...use the Negombo Tamil dialect, which has undergone....
    • The last two sentences of the second paragraph both start with "It also". Try to combine It also has its own distinctive vocabulary. into another sentence.
    • Change physical isolation of Tamils of Jaffna to physical isolation of the Tamils of Jaffna (added "the") or physical isolation of Jaffna's Tamils.
  • Literature section:
    • Medieval period Tamil literature was produced in the courts of the Jaffna Kingdom on medicine, mathematics and history. - reword for clarity (e.g. "Medieval period Tamil literature, on subjects of medicine, mathematics and history, was produced in the courts of the Jaffna Kingdom.) or remove "on medicine, mathematics and history".
    • Is it necessary to note the dates of birth/death of Kavirajar and Navalar in this article? After all, the articles on the individuals are linked, and the birth/death information is available there.
    • The modern period of literature - should this say "of Tamil literature"?
    • dated between 3rd century BCE to 6th century CE - is there ambiguity or controversy regarding the dating of the Sangam period? If not, then replace with 3rd century BCE – 6th century CE.
    • in a library called Saraswathy Mahal - reword to avoid using "called"; for instance: "in the Saraswathy Mahal library"
      • I have clarified the sentence and fixed it. Watchdogb (talk) 16:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • It now reads: This academy collected and manuscripts of ancient works are preserved in the Saraswathy Mahal library. There seems to be a word missing after "collected", or perhaps it was a copy-paste/edit conflict error?
  • Cuisine section:
    • Rice and curry refers to a range of Sri Lankan Tamil dishes distinct from Indian Tamil cuisine - avoid using the dicdef phrasing "refers to".
    • with a perfectly round soft crust in the middle - in this context, is "perfectly" a subjective evaluation or a descriptive statement to the effect that the crust is supposed to be perfectly circular? I'd suggest removing "perfectly", since any clarification is probably too detailed to merit inclusion.
      • I agree since I have see not-so-round crusts before :). "Perfect" is deleted. Watchdogb (talk) 16:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Politics section:
    • Consider combining the {{main}} and {{see also}} templates.
    • In July 2008 alone over 60,000 additional people were displaced in new offensives. - specify "by the government", simple remove "in new offensives", or replace with an alternate phrase.
    • In July 2008 alone over 60,000 additional people were displaced in new offensives. - remove the entire sentence as recentism (it seems out-of-place in the general paragraph) or move it to the end of the "Rise of militancy" section and reword.
    • the disappearance of a large number of people - be more specific: an approximate number would be ideal, but something like "the disappearance of thousands more" would work
    • Avoid the easter egg link to White van abductions in Sri Lanka; if necessary, use "(see White van abductions in Sri Lanka) instead.
  • Before independence section:
    • The arrival of Protestant missionaries on a large scale beginning in 1814 was a primary contributor to the development of political awareness among the Tamils. - Clarify by replacing "the Tamils" with a more specific expression. If this refers only to Sri Lankan Tamils, then use "Sri Lankan Tamils". If it refers to all Tamils in Sri Lanka (including Indian Tamils), use "Sri Lanka's Tamils".
    • between Sri Lanka's two largest ethnic groups, the Sinhalese and the Tamils - seems to repeat information that has already been stated; suggest dropping either "Sri Lanka's two largest ethnic groups" or "the Sinhalese and the Tamils".
    • which was dangled between the Tamils and the Sinhalese - "dangled" in what way?
    • the Donoughmore Commission strongly rejected communal representation and brought in universal franchise - "strongly" is probably unnecessary; "brought in" could be replaced with "introduced" or "implemented".
    • But under section 29(2) of the constitution formulated by the commissioner, additional protection was provided to minority groups. - what protection? Also, the sudden "but" breaks the flow of the text. Reword for clarity and improved flow; rewording this sentence may make it necessary to reword the one after it (Further, ...).
  • After independence section:
    • Ceylon citizenship act of 1948 - official acts are generally capitalised (e.g. Treason Act of 1842); is the formal name of the act "Ceylon Citizenship Act" or is that just a description?
      • It is called Ceylon Citizenship Act, No. 18 of 1948Taprobanus (talk) 20:55, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rise of militancy section:
    • These groups were the voice of intergenerational tensions as well as caste and ideological differences. - suggest removal as that's a fairly vague/subjective statement
  • External links section:
    • Is {{sisterlinks}} necessary at this time? With the exception of the category on Commons, which is linked to via {{commons}}, none of our other sister projects seem to have any content that is directly relevant to the subject.
      • I had the exact same question. It is now removed with only commons being linked. Watchdogb (talk) 18:12, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - It is an informative article that offers comprehensive coverage of the topic, is well-referenced, and well-written. The comments opposing promotion to FA seem to focus primarily on two issues related to prose: poor and repetition. Since August 20, the article has received nearly 200 edits, most of which were aimed at fixing problems with expression. Also in that time, the article's length has been cut by more than 1,200 words (18%). At this time, my only remaining suggestions are to arrange the images so as to avoid gaps in the article text and delete or incorporate the various hidden comments and images. The latter is not a major issue (the text in question is, after all, hidden from readers), and the former is something that varies depending on screen resolution, so I'm not sure whether a 'perfect' solution is possible. –Black Falcon (Talk) 22:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • For the sake of disclosure: I've made in excess of 40 edits to the article, but they were mostly minor edits involving copy-editing. –Black Falcon (Talk) 22:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - references are not formatted consistently. Secondly, 1a, per Tony and Graham. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Could you point out one or more of the inconsistencies in refernce formatting? I'd be willing to try to correct that issue. Thanks, –Black Falcon (Talk) 02:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • 1 (a) well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard; I think it has come a long way since Tony made that comment Taprobanus (talk) 12:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • references are not formatted consistently - I have tried to look for and remedy this situation. Do you have any other examples Taprobanus (talk) 15:17, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I meant that the usage of "p" and "pp" and using dots or no dots and spaces or no spaces are not consistent. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:32, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • I fixed it, I think. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:55, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Should there be a period at the end of citations (for instance, compare refs #86 and #87)? –Black Falcon (Talk) 01:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • From my experience, full citations need a period and a citation that comes afterwards and just has a page number does not. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:27, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I've read through the whole thing and learned a lot. Any problems seem to be easily addressed and not enough of a concern to not support. I don't see anything large or outstanding. I made a few minor copy edits here and there, but couldn't determine anything that was really fundamentally wrong. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, 1a. Below, I cite some of the reasons this is not ready. Overall, there are quite a lot of text glitches, inconsistency, and organizational problems. Prevalent passive voice obscures or eliminates the subject from sentences. It really needs attention from two people: a copyeditor and someone familiar with the topic. There are prose issues that a copyeditor can fix, and there are structural/topical issues. Unfortunately longer articles tend to sap a lot of strengh so many times multiple copyeditors are needed or multiple passes from one good copyeditor.
    • "The majority of Sri Lankan Tamils are Hindus and the rest are Christians." This implies there are no non-religious Tamils. Do your sources back up this claim? It is not stated clearly in the article.
      • It is almost impossible to claim that all Sri Lankan Tamils are followers of a religion. I have reworded the sentence. Watchdogb (talk) 14:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "During the modern period, it is distinguished by an emphasis on themes relating to the civil war..." What civil war? It is a rhetorical question, but we have not been told about it anywhere yet.
      • It is not linked to the proper article. Watchdogb (talk) 14:00, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Sri Lankan Tamil dialects are noted for their archaism and retention of words not in every day use in neighboring Tamil Nadu state in India." Grammar... surely the neighboring?
    • "The ensuing civil war has resulted in the death of more than 70,000..." Sorry, but 70,000 what? Tamils? Sri Lankans? Fighters?
    • "It is estimated that..." Strongly prefer active voice to identify who estimates.
      • Would this concern be fixed if the sentence is written as An estimated 800,000 Tamils have been displaced within Sri Lanka, and many have left the country for destinations such as India, Canada, and Europe. Watchdogb (talk) 14:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article lacks consistency in hyphenation. Ex. "Tamil speaking" and "Dravidian language-speaking"
      • Tamil is a single language and Dravidian refers to a group of language (including Tamil). Since there is an awkward change in grammar a hyphen is necessary. Watchdogb (talk) 14:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "It is believed that cultural diffusion..." More passive voice obscures subject.
    • "Archaeologists have noted cultural similarities in burial practices in South India and Sri Lanka as early as 10th century BCE. " Badly worded—reads like the archaeologists performed the action in the 10th century.
    • "However, Indian/south Indian history/archaeology" Avoid this use of slashes.
    • "The Sri Lankan Tamils (or Ceylon Tamils) are descendants of the Tamils of the old Jaffna Kingdom and east-coast feudal divisions called Vannimais." Unclear how one can be a descendant of a feudal division.
    • "Most Sri Lankan Tamils live in the Northern and Eastern provinces and in the capital Colombo, whereas most Hill Country Tamils live in the central highlands." You have introduced "Sri Lankan Tamil" and "Indian Tamil" as parallel terms previously.. but this is not parallel usage.
    • "Today, both Tamil communities have a greater sense of solidarity and are more supportive of each other as a result of the ethnic conflict between the Sinhalese and Tamil populations." This sentence seems strangely interjected into an unrelated discussion and there is no supporting text. How? Why?
      • Moved the sentence up, do we have to explain why ? It simply says that although historically seen as seperate, they are in the process of merging as one community. Taprobanus (talk) 20:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Negombo Tamils have shown a continuous cultural assimilation..." Strange word choice.. how do you "show" an assimilation?
    • "This has been facilitated by caste myths..." Avoid beginning sentences with "this" in reference to a previous idea. Restate.
    • "It is estimated that the Negombo dialect is spoken..." Passive.
      • Would the following fix the problem ? Negombo dialect is spoken by an estimated 50,000 people who otherwise identify themselves as Sinhalese Watchdogb (talk) 14:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Most of those who identify as ethnic Tamils live in the coastal village Udappu.[48] There are also some Tamil Christians, chiefly Roman Catholics, who have preserved their heritage in the major cities such as Negombo, Chilaw, Puttalam, and also in villages such as Mampuri." Again, oddly interjected into a paragraph about place names.
    • "Eastern Tamils inhabit a region that spans into the Trincomalee, Batticaloa, and Ampara districts." Spot the extra word.
      • I assume you are referring to the. It has been removed. Watchdogb (talk) 14:00, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • "With a largely agrarian-based society..." Is an agrarian society different from an agrarian-based society? --Laser brain (talk) 04:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Some of your concerns for more information are found from passages from the lead, which would not have context, as they are a summary of key points, and need to be kept minimized. Also, your comment like - "oddly interjected into a paragraph about place names" - doesn't reflect that the topic is Negombo Tamils, not place names. Your copy-edit points are important, but some of the rest you should reconsider. Ottava Rima (talk) 13:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, ref #115 (http://web.amnesty.org/report2003/Lka-summary-eng), takes me to Amnesty's homepage. D.M.N. (talk) 08:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support, I am willing to support this article in its nomination. It is well written and extensively researched. Though there have been previous issues, these have all been resolved, and it is my opinion that this article is ready for FA status. Well done to the article's creator and contributors for their hard work. J.T. Pearson (talk) 14:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Closing note, with four editors now asking for a copyedit, work may proceed better off-FAC, so I'm going to close the nom. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks with Micheal Devore willing to do copy edit, this can only improve with time Taprobanus (talk) 16:11, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Sri_Lankan_Tamil_people/archive1&oldid=1088821848"