Talk:Balangoda Man

NPOV

vandalism by lionlanka "It is not determined which languages these tribes spoke, but the general consensus is that they were using a tamil dialect due to the widespread usage of the classical language at the time." -Lionlanka please provide relevant sources .which scinetist proof early sri lankans spoke tamil dialects. i am not wonder if you said tribes were in Nile were used Tamil dialects !.please discuss it here Eeriyaka (talk) 23:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

First draft of a complete rewrite

Hi all,

First of all: excellent initiative to start this article! In my opinion it is an extremely important subject. I have spent almost 2 weeks reading all the references in the original article and finding new credible sources from top journals and researchers working in the field. I have kept all the references in the original article and also the original content/facts as much as possible, except where the associated citations were not credible (e.g. there was reference to a newspaper article which was claiming 37,000 BP for the skeletal remains, but this newspaper story seemed to be claiming too much too early, and I could not find any associated journal/conference scientific publication). But I have kept some of the old text commented out until we find credible references - so when you view the latest source text of the article you will see some commented out text.

The version I have uploaded is only a first draft; it would be great if we can get it into GA quality. And I think that with just a bit more work we will get there.

Best regards, Ldesilva (talk) 00:10, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Balangoda Man/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: SlimVirgin (talk · contribs) 20:52, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	The article is very nicely written. Minor tweaks: "sea shell based beads" --> seashell-based beads or beads made from seashells; "dental differences including somewhat ..." needs a comma before including. Question and probably a preference issue: should "Balangoda Man" be written with a capital M? The usual thing on WP would be to use lower-case, and looking around on Google Books I see some of the sources do that too. I've just had a look; yes, they do also say "Balangoda man" in many books. I'll leave it as "Balangoda Man" for now, though, to be consistent with Kennedy--a well-known researcher in the field. He also consistently refers to the Indian skeleton as "Narmada Man" (e.g. see his book "God-apes and Fossil Men: Paleoanthropology of South Asia"). Personally, however, I am OK with either.Ldesilva (talk) 13:37, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.	I'm taking on good faith that the article contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	It seems to be a little top heavy. I'm not familiar with the topic so I can't judge to what extent this is necessary, but it does feel as though there's a lot to read before we get to discussing Balangoda Man.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	I'm taking on good faith that the article fairly covers majority and significant-minority views.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	It's a well-written and interesting article, one that clearly meets the GA criteria.

Undoing recent changes to the 'Vedda' picture's caption

I will be undoing the recent changes to the Vedda caption. The original caption was the following:

"A group of Veddas on a pilgrimage from Muttur to Kataragama."

This was changed recently to the following:

"A group of Vedar or Veta Vellalar(Ethnic Tamil pilgrims) on a pilgrimage from Muttur(A village near Trincomalee in Northeastern province)Muttur to Kataragama."

Some of the reasons for undoing the new caption is as follows. First of all, the new caption breaks the original reference-link to the 'Muttur' Wikipedia article. Secondly, the additional details about 'Muttur' included in the new caption can be seen on clicking the 'Muttur' article/link anyway. (Also if such additional details are included for 'Muttur' we would need to do the same for 'Kataragama'.) Third, the alternatives 'Vedar' and 'Veta Vellalar' are suddenly introduced in this caption with no mention of them in the actual article text; since we have been using the term 'Vedda' throughout the article, I believe that it is best to stick to this term for consistency.

Since the article is a GA article, please discuss any further changes to the caption here before editing the article. Thanks! Ldesilva (talk) 04:29, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

agreed with, the "Vedda" picture not relevant to this article, this article is about native sri lankan lived in 10-15 thousand years ago in Sri Lanka, not any reference or valid argument made over "Vadda" pilgrims and Balangoda manawaya. (Eeriyaka (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 07:58, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

I originally wrote this article, seems to be now more political side has been added to this. i am removing this Pilgrim story from this article as its not relevant to it. Pilgrimages were never exist in Sri Lanka, there were original from India. this is utterly not make sense. I will remove this this part in 30 days, any objections please discuss it here. Eeriyaka (talk) 14:44, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Misnamed photo

I'm pretty sure the photo of "natives" captioned as Veddahs is no such thing. The Veddah community never dressed as shown in the picture, and few do even today. This photo has no place in this article, and I vote it be removed. - ක - (talk) 14:13, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Veddahs c.1890s.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:37, 17 March 2020 (UTC)