Talk:Indian Tamils of Sri Lanka

Quality?

This History section reads like it was written by a three year-old - improper capitalization, essentially a lack of punctuation, and incorrect grammar. I am not qualified to alter it due to my unfamiliarity with the subject, but can someone please look at this and fix it? Given recent events, it is essential that this section be reliably written. I, myself, will go elsewhere until it is fixed.--slaman 18:06, 19 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slaman (talk • contribs)

Rename?

• This article describes Indian Tamils in Sri Lanka; should the article be renamed as Sri Lankan Tamils, Tamils of Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka Tamil people, etc? Then have Indian Tamil redirected to Tamil people?--Confuzion 18:06, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Agreed I have cread a dissamb. page called Sri Lanka Tamils RaveenS 13:51, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... I'm not sure what I think about this move. The Hill-Country Tamils are a pretty distinctive group, who are not the same as - for example - the professional class of Tamils of recent Indian origin in Colombo. I think the Hill-Country Tamils at the very least should have an article of their own, as they did until the move, which focuses on their special culture and history. -- Arvind 21:13, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I am glad someone is watching these articles, what I am concerned is that somehow the term Sri Lankan is corned by one group of Tamils versus others. Like User:Confuzion says all Tamils of Sri Lanka are are Sri Lanka Tamils, one claiming to be native and other self identifying as Indian origin (not Citizen) but neverthless proud to be Sri Lankans.

How do we reconsile these differences. Both are Sri Lankan Tamils. About the professional class of Indian Tamils (along with Indian Telugus, Marathis....)in Colombo of recent years, they are not different than any expatriate Indian community in any country such as Dubai, Singapore (where thre are 3 distinct Tamil comunities apart from these expatriates). This current revision of the article is based on an extensive original research by V. Radhakrishnan, a Sri lankan of Indian Tamil origin. He self identifies the community as Tamils of Indian origin. We non Sri Lankan Tamils of Indian origin might want to call them Upcountry Tamils, Indian Tamils.... but what do they want to be identified as ? See discussion on Vedda page as to the current title of this page for similar arguments.

RaveenS 20:57, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, if we're going to look at how they self-identify, let's keep in mind that their party is the "Upcountry People's Front". And in Tamil, Malaiyakam tamilar is by far the most common name (which is why I placed the article under "Hill country tamils").

Also, the professional Colombo Tamils of Indian origin I was talking about are not quite the same as the Singapore and Dubai Tamils - there was some movement to Colombo and other parts of Sri Lanka, particularly from southern TN, in the colonial period, and it's their descendants I'm thinking of. They, too, are "of Indian origin", but are culturally quite different from the Malaiyakam Tamils. -- Arvind 10:18, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Couple of things, the official census categories are Sri Lankan Tamils and Indian Origin Tamils. There is anecdotal evidence that more and more Indian origin Tamils are marking themselves as Sri Lankan Tamils. Second they are proud of their Indian origin, third they destroyed their Indian passports as a protest. How do we classify these people? Anyway, writing this article made me see how their social structure is very similar to the so called Sri Lankan Tamil structure. Another fact is that they have fought hard to be Sri Lankans as opposed to most Sri Lankan Tamils, who fight not to be Sri Lankans:))). I wish we get some of them to comment here. Also look at Indian Malaysian, Indo-Fijian, Indo-Trinidadians….RaveenS 12:25, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Census categories shouldn't be a guide - the Indian census uses "Scheduled Castes", but the main wiki article uses Dalits as it rightly should. Otherwise I don't really disagree with your points. As I see it, the issue is what people who identify as Malaiyakam Tamils (as opposed to those who've tried to assimilate into the Ceylon Tamil or Sinhalese communities) call themselves. That, if anything, is what the article on them should be under. -- Arvind 14:36, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Belated but done Taprobanus (talk) 20:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Prominent Hill Country Tamils

I think the list in the page is far from complete. May have to add some Academicals like prof. Mookaiyaha etc. Trengarasu 06:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Recent reverts

I see that taprobanus has reverted much of my edits, removed references to important works by Jane Russsell, Chatopadya and other distingusihed historians. It basically brought the article back to the condition it was before we worked on it, with out giving his reasons and the logic behind it. The present artcile contains wrong facts as well as less facts, and less references. Some references had been added by other people like vanDort and they have also been rmoved The article now discusses the citizenship act without evn telling us what was in the act! So I will have to put this article back to academic standards.Bodhi dhana (talk) 15:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

What academic standards? Entire sections on so called Malabar Tamils indicate not one ounce of academic standrads by such prominent historians from Sri Lanka such as K.M De Silva and K. Indrapala. I have both the acdemic books with me. Let's talk about the citations for the Malabar Tamils ? Who or what is the citations ? Is it some personal beliefs ? or from the Academic newspaper Th Island ? I would start from reading WP:ORTaprobanus (talk) 23:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I have opened an topic reagrding this in WP:SLR here. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 00:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Added back deleted content in revert back that was supported by references. See here. Taprobanus (talk) 20:27, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Current Status

The article says, "In 1984-5, to stop India intervening in Sri Lankan affairs, the UNP government eventually granted citizenship right to all stateless persons," yet the intro says "By 1990’s most of these have been given Sri Lankan citizenship". Which is right?--Jack Upland (talk) 01:40, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

[Reply] Actually in 1985/86 period, the government decided to grant citizenship to all stateless people. But it required some paper work and there was much red tape and unwillingness on part of the government machinery it took couple of years to grant citizenship to most of the Stateless people.

Rename

I would suggest to rename this page as "Up-Country Tamils in Sri Lanka" or "Hill Country Tamils in Sri Lanka". Indian Tamils in Sri Lanka name is used in the past because that time citizenship hasn't been granted to this group. But later slowly Sri Lankan government give citizenship to 50%. Now all are cleared and all of Tamils are Sri Lankan. Some of the people trying to show superiority over up-country Tamils by restricting editors to use only discriminative Indian Tamils of Sri Lanka name. Tamils in Sri Lanka , Sri Lanka. [1 and 2. I can handle those 2 thing since I am the one who included details about hill country tamils to the page.

Now Hill Country Tamils doesn't needs discriminative name to introduce them self. I know they trying to use above 2 names to get rid from introducing them self as Indians. Up-country Tamils of Sri Lanka is most often used by them self. I suggest to move content from this page to one of non-discriminative name and use this page as redirect to page which included content. --Himesh84 (talk) 12:43, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Discrimination, apparent or imagined, isn't a valid reason to re-name the article. In accordance with WP:COMMONNAME, you need to show the most common name for this group of people before re-naming it. Until then the article stays as it is.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 16:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Indian Tamils of Sri Lanka. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080320050247/http://www.iccsus.org/IstConf/111.html to http://www.iccsus.org/IstConf/111.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080529221016/http://www.flonnet.com/fl1816/18160950.htm to http://www.flonnet.com/fl1816/18160950.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111113175023/http://www.statistics.gov.lk/abstract2010/chapters/Chap2/AB2-10.pdf to http://www.statistics.gov.lk/abstract2010/chapters/Chap2/AB2-10.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.refugeesinternational.org/content/article/detail/4002/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080320050247/http://www.iccsus.org/IstConf/111.html to http://www.iccsus.org/IstConf/111.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080529221016/http://www.flonnet.com/fl1816/18160950.htm to http://www.flonnet.com/fl1816/18160950.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:56, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Indian Tamils of Sri Lanka. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080305161622/http://www.fulbrightsrilanka.com/sl_overview.html to http://www.fulbrightsrilanka.com/sl_overview.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:54, 15 January 2018 (UTC)