Talk:Sri Lankan place name etymology

Kularatnam's source

Hi Sebastian, you might want to look at Kularatnam (Geography Prof)'s article and send some comments after taking with the Toponymics people at your place. Some of it is probably OK but most of it seems speculative - Bodhi

Biased Article

This is a completely biased and ideologically motivated entry. It is intended to deny the Tamil historic presence in the North East and to indicate that the Sinhalese Buddhist presence is some how anterior to and in some sense more legitimate from a historical perspective. This is not a neutral encyclopedic entry. It should not even be included in Wikipedia. Much of the conclusions are dubious and far fetched. I dispute the neutrality of this highly speculative entry. It is out of material such as this that much of 20th century Sinhalese nationalism is derived.--Dipendra2007 14:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Dipendra. The references provided in support of the alleged etymology are unproven and far fetched. This has more to do with a nationalist interpretation of the past and not with serious academia. I vehemently dispute the neutrality of this article.--MrinaliniB 20:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I would like to add that the references used for this article are mostly Geocities personal websites. One reference links to a pro sinhala movement site siting destruction of Sinhala shrines in the North. I am going to check out the other book references which also seem to be questionable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.145.229 (talk) 22:48, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Under "Interaction between Sinhala and Tamil forms" The second paragraph references 2 sources [3 and 4]. Reference 4 is to a journal entry whose abstract clearly points out that the image which is being referenced had south indian sculpural traditions and hence proves otherwise the case for the Vellipuram Buddha Image. Reference 3 is a personal website. Not to mention that it is a hate based website. This paragraph will be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sujan Saundara (talk • contribs) 00:24, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

All items that source a personal page such as geocities will be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sujan Saundara (talk • contribs) 00:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Removed sources

Per WP:SLR agreement on sources, I have removed the personal website that was used to cite most of the facts in this article. If you disagree with it, take it to SLR, ANI or the RS sources notice board. I am sure, we dont write an encylopedia with personal websites. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 19:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

This site is run by Peradeniya, Colombo University and Kerala/Tamil-nadu academics who use a geocities website because they do not want hidden funding. In fact Geocities websites have this advantage of being an independent study groups, and accepted if the authoirship is not hidden. There are some websites where etymological material is presented with hidden authorship.The authors of the placee-names webste are attached to University of Peradeniya, Colombo, Kerala-TamilNadu,Australia etc. Names of contributors to the website are clearly mentioned and not hidden. It is based on the work of Paul E Peires, Horsburgh, Medhananda, Suppiah, Devendran, Karthigesu Indrapala et al. These earlier authors (like Paul E Peries) and more recent authors have published in JRAS, international journals on linguistics, publications at the University of Sussex and other places. The research material here had been commissioned by the Mahaveli board in the 1970, in regard to the Mahaveli basin, long before the Vadukoddei (Batakotte) resolution with its home-land politics. If you read their write up, you see that they have included articles from a variety of sources including TamilNet, articles by Kularatnam etc. That it goes against the Tamil politically motivated. The Homelands concept is a political issue which cannot be settled here. If that is the basis of this revision THEN IT PROVES THAT it is politically motivated. For these reasons we are going to putting it back. If you disagree, BEFORE you delete it, pleasae take to the SLR, ANI or the RS sources notice board. ThanksBodhi dhana (talk) 12:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Please read WP:RS. We are writing an encylopedia not some website here. Take it to WP:ANI, WP:SLR and specifically Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard. Also dont attribute reasons for my actions. IT is called WP:AGF and WP:NPA. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 14:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Als see here. The source is clearly classified as a non reliable source. Good luck with your persnal website but in wikipedia we will insist on using realible sources. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 14:45, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Taprobanus .The source is questionable please take it Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

It is already decided in SLR see here. The only other option is to take it to Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard. Infact I will take it there myself. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 15:45, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Here it is go for itTaprobanus (talk) 16:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I took off two reference. First on is from a blog , named tripod, and is not RS and clearly violates WP:RS. Second, a paper called "Sarandipity" is not RS either. Sarandip is a sinhala name to Sri Lanka. This article is POV, non-notable and is not RS. Furthermore, I have added various fact tags, please add citation to them or it could be removed Watchdogb (talk) 13:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

The discussion now moved to WT:SLR#Place names in North and East of Sri Lanka, but apparently nobody bothered to write a notice here. I am sorry, this was not a model case of how this should be handled. Anyway, please check out the discussion there. Sebastian (talk) 16:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Language of Sri Lanka

Would "Languages of Sri Lanka" be a relevant "See also" link for this article? Black Falcon ^(Talk) 19:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I think so, I will do it Taprobanus (talk) 19:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Uncited section

Most of the article now is cited with WP:RS but this whole paragraph is uncited. Sinhalese place names are found throughout the island. As discussed by Sri Lankan historians such as Paul E Peiris, Karthigesu Indrapala and others, pre-Christian stone inscriptions of Sri Lanka point to the extensive use of the Sinhala language in local administration. Toponymists like Ven. Ellavala Medhananda have examined the origin of present day place names. Much of the information for tracing the old place names comes from etymology, written texts, many stone inscriptions which are in Sinhala and dating back to pre-Christian times, as well as the more recent colonial records. It should be cited or removed. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 12:51, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Removed uncitable rest is easily defendable factsTaprobanus (talk) 20:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Bodhi Dhana

I have been absent from the Wiki acitivity for a short while and vast changes have been made in that short time. I woke up to it when I was sent a message sent to the director of the project by by Prof. Michael Roberts, who had heard from Raveen S. (I presume known here under the pseudonym "Taprobanus") . Prof. Roberts had communicated with Prof. Dharma-wardana who has been directing this project since the mid 1970s.

Please take note of the following points:

1. Tme main motivation given by Taprobanus and his associates is that the article contravenes their "Tamil Homelands Concept". In effect, THIS IS AN ADMISSION OF A POLITICAL AGENDA. That is, they are dismanteling articles because they are preceived to be contraray to their politics (POV), and not related to facts. However, they have expressed other concerns, delat with below.

2.Taprobanus and friends claim that the geocities website could not be cited because "it is a presonal website". I have infomed the Professors about it, and they have informed me that the website could be hosted by an academic department of a University eventually. They note that even the website of the Biritsh Toponymic association is a "private" website, and they cannot be driven by Wikpedia's needs. However, we hae no problem in giving original sources to defend our write ups instead of usaing the website. The website was a convenient entry into the reference material. If you wish to deny the readers of Wikipedia this advanatage, we will correct it.

3. Prof. Kularatnama (an old geographerer) whose ONLY contribution to toponymics is this article at a meeting sponsored by a political group in Kuala Lampur. In the article he admits that he is "not an expert", in the subject, and I know personally thast he was coxed into making this contribution. It is many years ago, but I might be able to get some Peradeniya academics to confirm this. So the Kularatnam artcile is dubious, not peer reviewed, and should not cited. Surprisingly, The discussions on Tamil place names by K. Indrapala, K. Suppiah, Fr. Gnanapraksar, Horsburg, Lewis etc. have NOT been mentioned in the new article because the new article is strongly BIASED. Thus the contents of the article are dubious. The article does not discuss any Tamil palce names or Sinhala place names and give any clear well sourced illustrations. This makes the article relatively USELEE to readers.

4. Taprobanus objects to Gerald Peries who is a geographer, but accepts Kularatnam who is a geographer!

5. Taprobanus and others claim that I myslef (Bodhi Dhanapala) is involed in the geocites website and hence I have no right to cite the website. This is nonesense., since the the website says clearly that my job is merely dealing with Wikipidia and publicity issues. Unlike Taprobanus and his friends, we work openly, with our names up front and visible, and not under pseudonyms.

6. What are Prof. Gerald Peiris's, or Robert's contributions? The toponymics groups e-newsletter has carried many updates giving Prof. Peiris's suggestions, as well as suggestions from others like Prof. Meegaskumbura, etc. The website itself lists speciofic comments from Roberts regarding material from the Indrapala Thesis. Similarly, prof. J. B. Dissnayake is a leading Linguist (Professor of Lingusitics at COlombo University till recently), and he has certainly been consulted, mainly by correspondance. Late Prof. J. K. P. Ariyaratne provided maps etc. However, once the website is moved to an University academic department, these isssues can be sorted out. Prof Iyakutti is an expert on Kannada and Drividian languages, but being an older person, does not use computers and not accessible on e-mail. Prof. Dissanayake is in the same league.

7. Finally, the origin of a placenamec CANNOT be determined purely from etymology. It requires a review of Stone Inscriptions, Literary sources, So the whole approach is outdated and incorrect. That is why you need a TOPONYMIC approach. It would be very transparently wrong to call this a "good article" !!!!Bodhi dhana (talk) 16:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)