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

Sri Lankan Tamil people

Nominator(s): Taprobanus (talk)

• Featured article candidates/Sri Lankan Tamil people/archive1
• Featured article candidates/Sri Lankan Tamil people/archive2

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)

• Comment - Ref 76 is broken. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 09:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

It is now fixed. Watchdogb (talk) 13:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• 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.
• 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)

Kensplanet^Talk_E-mail^{Contributions} 10:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Ref 6 and 19 are used per consensus. Watchdogb (talk) 13:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Ref134 is now fixed with another reference. Watchdogb (talk) 13:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Ref40 is now fixed to point to a popular English newspaper from Sri Lanka. Watchdogb (talk) 13:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Ref49 is a link to an archived page.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)

Comments

• Concur with questioning the reliablity of http://www.tamilnet.com/.
• http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~sala23/abstracts/A17.doc deadlinks
• What makes http://www.joshuaproject.net/index.php a reliable source? Looks to be a Christian Mission service from Colorado...
• http://www.island.lk/2002/03/20/midwee02.html is a book review. Im not sure its the best source for information, wouldn't it make more sense to use the actual book?
• http://nelc.osu.edu/news/folklore/yr2004/vol20num3/010DissertationAbstracts.cfm#South is an abstact of a dissertation, you need to use the actual dissertation.
• http://www.uthr.org/Reports/Report8/chapter3.htm#b What makes this a reliable source? It doesn't list its sources
• http://vedda.org/seligmann-coastal-veddas.htm is a reprint of a book published in 1911, correct? If so, it needs to be formatted as a book, with just a courtesy link to the online hosting of it.
• Current ref 66 (Country study)>.. the publisher is the Library of Congress, not Robert Ross.
• Current ref 96, the publisher is the Hindu newspaper, and it should be formatted as a newspaper article
• http://ebooks.ebookmall.com/title/sri-lanka-spencer-ebooks.htm is a book summary on a ebook seller. What makes this a reliable source? And who is the publisher of the book, is it self-published?
• Current ref 115 (http://countrystudies.us/sri-lanka/25.htm) published by the Library of Congress... not Robert Ross
• Same for current ref 117 (Tamil Alientaion) and current ref 126 (Tamil Militant Groups)
• 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)