Talk:Nalin de Silva

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Prof Nalin Silva is a great and learned man who is working towards the development of home grown knowledge and intelligence to some; and for others he is a fool. thus the public opinion of him is extremely polarized. This article seems to be work of those who are against him, and thus does not give an unbiased view. (talk) 17:44, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Stop removing referenced material.[edit]

This article contains information that is both positive and negative about Professor De Silva. It is essentially neutral. It is all based on easily referenced material. You can't delete referenced material because you don't like it. If you want to add more referenced material that casts him a positive light then that's up to you Sanjaythelostboy (talk) 04:16, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

The material you are adding has some content that can be attributed to a reliable source, but some of it references only forums and your manner of presenting it does not conform to WP:NPOV. To take an article that says "This particular poster was put up by Veemansaka Parshadaya a registered organisation of students at the University of Kelaniya, of which I am the senior treasurer. The students consulted me before posting it and I had no hesitation in giving my approval. Thus the office bearers and others of the Veemansaka Parshadaya had acted in a very responsible manner and I take full responsibility for the ideas expressed in the poster." and use it as a reference for "the recent past he has reinvigorated his cultural purification proposals and opposed females wearing what he terms western clothing in campus and has used a student organization under him to enforce this" is not supportable. MAHEWAtalk 04:25, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Ok. Understood :) I have changed that to
In 2008 the Veemansaka Parshadaya, a student organization where De Silva is the treasurer and mentor started a campaign to ban western clothing in campus. The group put up posters on campus calling females who wore pants and skirts 'western prostitutes'. While University authorities do not endorse this ban they have been unable to take any action due to De Silva's political connections[3].Sanjaythelostboy (talk) 05:24, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm not going to keep reverting you because I think you're actually trying to do this in good faith. But I am going to tag this on the WP:BLPN for someone better equipped to look at. I would advise you to try to pull back your tone a little bit in the meantime. You can't say that he is waging a cultural purification campaign when your source never actually uses that kind of term. Okay, we cross posted. Thank you for fixing that. I would still advise you to look carefully at the language you use. The best way to think of being neutral is to look at each fact and presenting it as a detached observer, rather than looking at it more in terms of just putting good and bad things on the same page together. Best of luck .MAHEWAtalk 05:29, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Ok will do. Thanks.Sanjaythelostboy (talk) 05:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)


Can HistoryDoca and Indikak please explain why they keep removing stuff? Sanjaythelostboy (talk) 07:12, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Jathika Chinthanaya[edit]

If anyone knows more about the Jathika Chinthanaya ideology can we please add a segment here. I am looking for stuff but it's a little slow. Someone can open an section about his contribution to philosophy if we have enough material. Sanjaythelostboy (talk) 08:13, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Partiality in Impartiality....[edit]

This is a response and also an explanation for why I undid those revisions.(mainly ones by Sanjaythelostboy.) I am not responsible for what indikak has done but I'm pretty sure that his cause is same as mine... This page was initially made with an intention of enhancing the knowledge of the readers on Nalin de Silva's theories and philosophy... The very first revisions would testify for that purpose and I believe that anyone who wants to edit this page should go with that intention..... What sanjaythelostboy has done is emphasizing the rumors filled with lies upon to cover-up the works and the philosophy and the intellectuality of prof Nalin de Silva.... Let me start by citing one of the original revisions by indikak... Here it says about the PHD Research of Nalin de Silva and also says that his research was proven practically by a group of scientists. This can be easily verified by contacting the Uni of Sussex as these details are not there in the web... But Sanjaythelostboy removed it without giving any valid reason and added something about Veemansaka Parshadaya without providing any credible citations... Also about the Arsenic issue, Sanjaythelostboy throws lies upon lies. He hasn't even provided sufficient articles on the issue written by Nalin de Silva and others.. Nalin de Silva and others didn't use a new method to find arsenic in pesticides... it was to find arsenic in Rajarata water and have presented their findings at five different seminars specially at the one with the prime minister ... The research team lead by Nalin de Silva was proven right even by testing done in a foreign laboratory....

And also the sacking of Nalin de Silva from the Uni of Colombo haven't provided with enough details... It says that Nalin de Silva was thrown out due to unlawful political activities.. That was utter rubbish and an intentional attack and misleading as if that's true almost every lecturer in universities would've been sacked by now...

There is nothing called impartial writings as everybody has their personal opinions and partial to them opinions implicitly or explicitly... But there is something called ethical writing in which the writer tries to maintain the least decency of not harming the original authors' intentions. The one who started removing citations and contents is Sanjaythelostboy.. Funny thing is that though he has admitted of knowing very little about the Jathika Chinthanaya (I'm sure that's same for the 'Constructive Relativism' ) he tries to edit a wiki page on the very creator of those concepts...

So I did what I had to do to maintain the integrity of the page..... Thanks... historyDoca

Wikipedia isn't the place for you to do PR for people you like. Also on every edit page you can see this: "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." No one has to respect the wishes of the creator of the page or the intentions. Everything I added is referenced, and most of the references are from things De Silva wrote himself. If those references are not valid then what is? And on a personal note there are many things I agree with De Silva on and there are many things I disagree with him on. Not knowing him personally or being one of his students, my interest is purely academic. And if you have referenced information on Jathika Chinthanaya I suggest you add it here or make a new page for it.Sanjaythelostboy (talk) 19:18, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Unnecessary and offensive[edit]

In the introduction - This caused major embarrassment to his critics who are against any movement that is not dependent on western standards. Please don't bring your personal agenda into Wikipedia.

This particular statement seems to be biased and not verifiable. It makes many assumptions that borders on slander. These are the points that do not seem justifiable.
  1. 'Finding Arsenic caused major embarrassment to his critics' - No facts to backup this statement. This sounds like a personal opinion.
  2. 'who are against any movement that is not dependent on western standards' - Implies that his critics are purely criticizing him because of ideological differences. However, the paragraph refers to a single incident and it is hard to believe that all the criticism came because of his anti-western attitude given the context of the incident. It also implies that all his critics are pro-western and tries to bring a nationalistic aspect which is irrelevant in this context.
In summary, this statement tries to label all his critics as pro-western without any facts,references or corroborating evidence whatsoever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lasantha.fdo (talkcontribs) 16:20, 13 December 2012 (UTC)


I'd try to help rewriting some of this, but in places the English is so bad that I genuinely can't work out what's being said. For example: "In June 2011 he stated that information regarding presence of Arsenic in water claiming that the cause of Rajarata Chronic Kidney Disease had been given to him by the god "Natha"." -- (talk) 10:21, 12 February 2017 (UTC)