Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
- [[User:R5bckv|R5bckv]] ([[User talk:R5bckv|talk]]) 06:20, 9 October 2020 (UTC) |
- [[User:R5bckv|R5bckv]] ([[User talk:R5bckv|talk]]) 06:20, 9 October 2020 (UTC) |
||
:{{ping|R5bckv}}: This is nothing but racism. Just because Tamilnet is a Tamil media source it is instantly discounted. Whereas Sinhalese and European media sources get a pass. For example, during the war time Tamilnet was the only English media source covering the war crimes and atrocities committed by the Sri Lankan state, case in point: |
|||
https://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=18447 |
|||
International media and Sinhalese media refused to cover these crimes, partly due to media censorship, and also due to bias as most European governments were involved in the war against the Tamils: |
|||
http://www.ptsrilanka.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/britains_dirty_war.pdf |
|||
And if they did say anything, they parroted the racist Sinhala government lies covering up countless atrocities. During the final stages of the war in 2009 it was only Tamilnet which released the evidence of the mass atrocities, but no Europeans or Sinhalese gave it any credibility because of racism. Lo and behold years after when a European media source says the same things in their killing fields documentaries and No fire zone movie, it now become truth. |
|||
"publishing unverifiable claims" |
|||
Please tell me how the Vankalai massacre is unverifiable? I see a clear massacre of men, women and children. And the thousands of other murders which Tamilnet bravely covered when no one else would. Please tell me how these crimes can be documented on wikipedia when ONLY Tamil sources document them all. |
|||
As user :{{ping|obi2canibe}}: says it's a WP:RS and should not be removed, just because of Anti-Tamil racism.[[User:Oz346|Oz346]] ([[User talk:Oz346|talk]]) 10:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC) |
Revision as of 10:24, 9 October 2020
Sri Lanka Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Very biased and lacks factual, historical sources
All the sources in this article (except for Library of Congress's country studies article and the article from Jaffna University Teacher's Association) are from pro-seperatist and political groups with extreme biases and disputed historical accuracy.
Some of the words used in the article, such as "colonization" and "traditionally-Tamil lands" are controversial and are considered by some as "allegations". The casual use of such terms does not address or explain the politically sensitive nature of the controversy.
The article also leaves out important sociopolitical and historical facts pertaining to the issue such as economic conditions of the country at the time, whether the resettled land had previously been occupied, the economic status of the settlers, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Max Vohra (talk • contribs) 20:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
More Info to Expand Article
I just came across this page, there is a lot of info here that will be helpful in expanding it. I will try to do so myself when I get a chance, but in the mean time here is the link http://www.atimes.com/ind-pak/CK17Df01.html --Realstarslayer 19:42, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Adding some supporting links here for further reading and citation:
http://www.uthr.org/bulletins/bul4.htm
economic reasoning
While important to the grand scheme of things in relation to the SL situation, this article solely relies on the perceived intentions to state sponsored colonisation and not the economic reasoning behind it.
traditionally ??
i think the preson should first check the dictionary and the read a couple of histocal books about our history..Well, iam highly interested to see the evidence for those traditionally tamil lands or tamil-homelands as they say. thanks--Iwazaki 22:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Mulative /Kilinocchi
The heartland of LTTE is the area around Mulative and Killinocchi..Ironically both these districts were newly created and government encouraged tamils who were living in densly areas in jaffna to settle there.Esp during the time of DS Senanayake this colonization took place,and as a result these districts became (more)inhabited.Editors of this article have left this part, also totally ignored the economic aspect of this decisions. I will add this information as soon as i get my details ready. --Iwazaki 01:54, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Please Delete This page
Some of the Tamils who live out side of Sri Lanka try to mislead the world with the word Traditional. Sri Lanka had it's own developed civilizations since 500BC. The kingdom of Rajarata (UNESCO World heritage site - whc.unesco.org/en/list/200/ ) ruled the Island more than 1700 years (543Bc to 1200). Where were those Traditional land owners in that era when Kingdom of Rajarata ruled Island from northern part ? Kingdom of Jafna start to exist when Tamil invader Kalinga Magha invaded and destroyed Kingdom of Rajarata in 1215 and hide from heavy vanni forest from Pollonnaruwa due to native resistance started from Dambadeniya kingdom. Kingdom of Jafna established when Malik Kafur exiled last South Indian : Pandyan king in 1323 and annexed Madurai to powerful Dilhi Sultan administration. When 1323 Tamils too withdrawn from Vanni since they lost help from Pandyan. After losing Pandyan help Jafna Kingdom was very weak. After 100 years of establishment , in 1450 Sinhala King Parakramabahu6 invaded Jafna and re unified the Island. Then again it was exist another 125 years until Portuguese invaded in 1600. When British started Tamil Colonization in Vanni in 1905, Vanni was a vacant area. Now it has been a traditional Tamil land for some Tamils who live out side of Sri Lanka. This page is a joke. These people trying to spread a myth against a UNESCO world heritage site which ruled Northern part of Lanka over 1700 years(543BC-1215). Pandyan ruled Vanni for 100 years (1215-1323). It was ruled by Kingdom of Kandy for 200 years. British ruled Sri Lanka 150 years. It was under Sri Lankan government since 1948. . How long Jafna kingdom which exist 250 years ruled Vanni? --Himesh84 (talk) 06:00, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- I added the Delete template but not sure what to do. The page is too biased and have too many Tamilnet Citations and Taminet is not reliable and only shows things strictly from the perspective of Pro-Ealam.Admins should take care of the rest...I guess UMDP (talk) 14:54, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Apparently, part of the global campaign supporting ltte terrorists
Facts in this article and many other articles related to Sri Lankan Tamils seem to be manipulated by pro tamil eealm diaspora members in an organized attempt. Seems to be part of their global campaign to mislead the world on the their socalled traditional lands. This lacks credibility and obviously written in a biased manner, highlighted ONLY THE FACTS showing discrimination towards Sri Lankan Tamils but intentionally hiding the separatist movements and the acts committed by those. Navaka Navaratne — Preceding undated comment added 03:30, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
TamilNet
Is the site TamilNet a trusted reference? --Lee (talk) 02:53, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
- It's a WP:RS.--obi2canibetalk contr 14:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Removal of unreliable and biased sources
Greetings!
I have removed references in the article from Tamilnet and a PDF document hosted at sangam.org published by the "LTTE Peace Secretariat". I believe a source from a designated "terror group" can hardly be considered unbiased. Tamilnet historically has been allegedly providing a front for the LTTE and other separatist movements whilst publishing unverifiable claims about the war and its aftermath. However, If you do find unbiased sources to back up the claims please feel free to add them and leave a note here. You can check my changes here. Thank you.
- R5bckv (talk) 06:20, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- @R5bckv:: This is nothing but racism. Just because Tamilnet is a Tamil media source it is instantly discounted. Whereas Sinhalese and European media sources get a pass. For example, during the war time Tamilnet was the only English media source covering the war crimes and atrocities committed by the Sri Lankan state, case in point:
https://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=18447
International media and Sinhalese media refused to cover these crimes, partly due to media censorship, and also due to bias as most European governments were involved in the war against the Tamils:
http://www.ptsrilanka.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/britains_dirty_war.pdf
And if they did say anything, they parroted the racist Sinhala government lies covering up countless atrocities. During the final stages of the war in 2009 it was only Tamilnet which released the evidence of the mass atrocities, but no Europeans or Sinhalese gave it any credibility because of racism. Lo and behold years after when a European media source says the same things in their killing fields documentaries and No fire zone movie, it now become truth.
"publishing unverifiable claims"
Please tell me how the Vankalai massacre is unverifiable? I see a clear massacre of men, women and children. And the thousands of other murders which Tamilnet bravely covered when no one else would. Please tell me how these crimes can be documented on wikipedia when ONLY Tamil sources document them all.
As user :@Obi2canibe:: says it's a WP:RS and should not be removed, just because of Anti-Tamil racism.Oz346 (talk) 10:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC)