|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
Material was placed into this article in this edit which duplicates previously published text from this source. that material archives to January 2007. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- I applaud your clean-up efforts Moonriddengirl, I can not believe I missed this one (copyright violation). I have noticed from reviewing both the history for the article itself and the discussion pages that this entire topic and/or article is a highly controversial one and one that on the whole, is improperly supported and/or justified in many of the claims that are made. I looked at similar pages for other South Asian ethnic groups and noticed that they were far more thoroughly and comprehensively supported and with the article being far shorter and more concise and neutral.
- Several users seem to have complained (multiple times over multiple different occasions and re: different situations) that this article (or aspects of it) violates WP:NPOV and WP:RS and now WP:C as well (copyright infringement) - the last of which is very serious and the former 2 raise some red flags re: this article's credibility as a whole and whether it merits and independent article or if it should be clumped into another similar / related one. After reading the original article I completely agree that the whole thing violates WP:NPOV, WP:RS and WP:C (despite repeated calls for clean-up).
- I hate to say it but it seems that it would be for the greater good that this entire article is permanently deleted as it has repeatedly failed to meet Wikipedia's quality standards and consistently makes sloppy and poor edits that are reflected by poor judgment. I also noticed this article is a target for vandalism and has received far more of this than anything constructive (which is very unfortunate).
- I am going to recommend this article for speedy deletion but users are welcome to make a case against here.DavidIsaiah (talk)
- Deletion is not necessary to clean the copyright problem, and this article does not seem to qualify for any of the speedy deletion criteria. If the copyrighted text is not permitted or revised by the time the seven day listing period runs out, I will revert to an earlier version in history before it was introduced. (Given that the contributor who placed it is currently indefinitely blocked, I am also quite willing to go ahead and do that now, if the contributors to this article would prefer.) Other issues need to be dealt with through normal dispute resolution processes or through deletion debate. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 10:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I undid revision by 296286909 by Blackknight12.
Considering Sri Lanka's geographical position in the world and it's stratigically important seaways and trading routes, which have been established for over thousands of years, Sri Lanka has received a constant influx of people from all corners of the globe, mainly from the Middle East and Europe and obviously India. This influx of people have made the population of Sri Lanka into a more diverse and multi ethnic one, and over time these ethnicities have become similar, resulting in the Sinhalese having being able to trace back there genetic history to many places.
The study you linked does not say "Sri Lanka has recieved a constant influx of people from all corners of the globe, mainly middle east and Europe". The evidence shows the Sinhalese have the greatest genetic contribution from South Indian tamils, then begalis. Any immigration into a county will make it more diverse and multi ethnic. There is no need to mention that. "Ethnicities" don't become more similar. There gene pool would become more similar. Most people can trace their genetic history to many places, due to the likelihood of intermixing over hundreds of thousands of years of human history - This is also unnecessary.
It is not generally accepted the Sinhalese are from North India and Orissa. This is only accepted by those who believe in the legend. Among the scientific community, it is generally accepted the Sinhalese are from South India and Bengal (See the article for the copious evidence). Which is what the previous revision said, with references and evidence. Everything in this revision was already mentioned in the previous revision, with the exception of the false/unsubstantiated claims.