This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Panaganti Ramarayaningar article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | Panaganti Ramarayaningar has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
May 24, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that
caste-based
communal reservations in
Tamil Nadu were introduced by the government of the
Raja of Panagal in August
1921? |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 19:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
I am beginning this review, and before anything formal, I just have a few, knee-jerk concerns:
In 1923, M. C. Rajah, a Justice Party leader from the Dalit community protested against the government order arguing that the act did not guarantee adequate representation of Dalits who he felt deserved 30% reservation in the administration and the services. When the Justice Party failed to respond, he resigned from the primary membership of the party
Has there been any updates to this article's review recently? It is one of the articles at GAN that has gone the longest without a review. Cheers! Gary King ( talk) 16:39, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
When I do an article review I like to provide a Heading-by-Heading breakdown of suggestions for how to make the article better. It is done in good faith as a means to improve the article. It does not necessarily mean that the article is not GA quality, or that the issues listed are keeping it from GA approval. I also undertake minor grammatical and prose edits. After I finish this part of the review I will look at the over arching quality of the article in light of the GA criteria and make my determination as to the overall quality of the article.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
I will attempt to do a final review in the next day or two (assuming everything has been addressed). I have two busy days coming up so I hope to be able to finalize it by the middle of this week. H1nkles ( talk) 16:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Though the B & C mills strike was eventually settled through the mediation of C. Natesa Mudaliar,[19] the communal riots which had accompanied it caused a severe strain on the relations between Dalits and the Justice Party
Though the B & C mills strike was eventually settled through the mediation of C. Natesa Mudaliar,[19] the communal riots which had accompanied it estranged Dalits from the Justice Party
I accessed one of your references heavily used in this section and I have some concerns. I feel as though reference 19 does not support some of the statements you cite in the article. I'll list those statements here:
The severe strain between Dalits and the Justice Party that you indicate at the end of this section should be referenced. It could be implied from reference 19 but I would try and find a source that more explicitly states the estrangement. H1nkles ( talk) 16:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I'm done with my final review. If you can take a look at that section and reference 19 that would be great. Once it's addressed I'll be happy to pass the article. Thank you for going through the process and graciously allowing me to pick apart the article. H1nkles ( talk) 16:41, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) The article looks good, I've put you through the ringer but I think that the review was a success and the article is ready to pass. It was a pleasure to work with you on this project and I do hope we can collaborate again some day. H1nkles ( talk) 17:07, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Raja of Panagal is a hereditary title,so a succession list of the Rajas of Panagal needs to be created. - ( 203.211.72.5 ( talk) 00:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)).
I've just fixed a citation that now reads {{cite book | editor1-first=V. |editor1-last=Geetha |editor2-first=S. V. |edior2-last=Rajadurai |title=Revolt - Radical Weekly in Colonial Madras |origyear=1928 |url=http://www.thamizhagam.net/thamizhagam/elibrary/Kudiyarasu/Revolt.pdf |pages=176-179 |chapter=Some Non-Brahmin Leaders |publisher=Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam |accessdate=22 July 2013}} There are various problems with using this as a source, these principally being:
Under normal circumstances, this source would be rejected as unreliable but since this is a listed Good Article (and possibly it should not be), I thought it best to check here. - Sitush ( talk) 13:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Raja of Panagal. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:06, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Panaganti Ramarayaningar article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | Panaganti Ramarayaningar has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
May 24, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that
caste-based
communal reservations in
Tamil Nadu were introduced by the government of the
Raja of Panagal in August
1921? |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 19:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
I am beginning this review, and before anything formal, I just have a few, knee-jerk concerns:
In 1923, M. C. Rajah, a Justice Party leader from the Dalit community protested against the government order arguing that the act did not guarantee adequate representation of Dalits who he felt deserved 30% reservation in the administration and the services. When the Justice Party failed to respond, he resigned from the primary membership of the party
Has there been any updates to this article's review recently? It is one of the articles at GAN that has gone the longest without a review. Cheers! Gary King ( talk) 16:39, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
When I do an article review I like to provide a Heading-by-Heading breakdown of suggestions for how to make the article better. It is done in good faith as a means to improve the article. It does not necessarily mean that the article is not GA quality, or that the issues listed are keeping it from GA approval. I also undertake minor grammatical and prose edits. After I finish this part of the review I will look at the over arching quality of the article in light of the GA criteria and make my determination as to the overall quality of the article.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
I will attempt to do a final review in the next day or two (assuming everything has been addressed). I have two busy days coming up so I hope to be able to finalize it by the middle of this week. H1nkles ( talk) 16:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Though the B & C mills strike was eventually settled through the mediation of C. Natesa Mudaliar,[19] the communal riots which had accompanied it caused a severe strain on the relations between Dalits and the Justice Party
Though the B & C mills strike was eventually settled through the mediation of C. Natesa Mudaliar,[19] the communal riots which had accompanied it estranged Dalits from the Justice Party
I accessed one of your references heavily used in this section and I have some concerns. I feel as though reference 19 does not support some of the statements you cite in the article. I'll list those statements here:
The severe strain between Dalits and the Justice Party that you indicate at the end of this section should be referenced. It could be implied from reference 19 but I would try and find a source that more explicitly states the estrangement. H1nkles ( talk) 16:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I'm done with my final review. If you can take a look at that section and reference 19 that would be great. Once it's addressed I'll be happy to pass the article. Thank you for going through the process and graciously allowing me to pick apart the article. H1nkles ( talk) 16:41, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) The article looks good, I've put you through the ringer but I think that the review was a success and the article is ready to pass. It was a pleasure to work with you on this project and I do hope we can collaborate again some day. H1nkles ( talk) 17:07, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Raja of Panagal is a hereditary title,so a succession list of the Rajas of Panagal needs to be created. - ( 203.211.72.5 ( talk) 00:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)).
I've just fixed a citation that now reads {{cite book | editor1-first=V. |editor1-last=Geetha |editor2-first=S. V. |edior2-last=Rajadurai |title=Revolt - Radical Weekly in Colonial Madras |origyear=1928 |url=http://www.thamizhagam.net/thamizhagam/elibrary/Kudiyarasu/Revolt.pdf |pages=176-179 |chapter=Some Non-Brahmin Leaders |publisher=Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam |accessdate=22 July 2013}} There are various problems with using this as a source, these principally being:
Under normal circumstances, this source would be rejected as unreliable but since this is a listed Good Article (and possibly it should not be), I thought it best to check here. - Sitush ( talk) 13:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Raja of Panagal. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:06, 16 January 2016 (UTC)