| This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1956 anti-Tamil pogrom 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 |
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
 | A fact from 1956 anti-Tamil pogrom appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 18 December 2008, and was viewed approximately 610 times (
disclaimer) (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on June 11, 2009, June 11, 2010, June 11, 2013, and June 11, 2016. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | On 7 May 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Gal Oya riots. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
In this article reference is made to the Gal Oya Settlement Scheme. The correct name is Gal Oya Development Board Chulalds ( talk) 08:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
side by side in the opening paragraphs need to be, I feel, reconciled . or explained.
- "and massacred minority Tamils by the hundreds. It is estimated that over 150 people lost their lives due in the violence. "
Which was it? "Hundreds" or "150." It can't really be both. Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 14:17, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- done, stick with the ciatations. Kanatonian ( talk) 14:29, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) – Material Works 15:08, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
1956 anti-Tamil pogrom → Gal Oya riots – Original title of the article and since its change to the current title, it has not been established that this was a pogrom and not a riot. Cossde ( talk) 14:43, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- What's wrong with
1956 anti-Tamil riots?
In ictu oculi (
talk) 17:40, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose, A pogrom is a riot, an organised one. These events were all pogroms with organised violence. They were not spontaneous acts of violence, but involved preparatory planning. I oppose the naming change suggestion for this reason, as the current name is more accurate.
- A. Sivanandan quote from 1984:
- "There have been no race riots in Sri Lanka since independence. What there has been is a series of increasingly virulent pogroms against the Tamil people by the Sinhala state"
- https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/030639688402600102
- https://books.google.com/books?id=GNKGAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA35&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false Oz346 ( talk) 18:44, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. The DYK [at the top of this page] from 2008 states, "Did you know... that the Gal Oya riots were the first ethnic riots that targeted the minority Sri Lankan Tamils in post-independent Sri Lanka?". Wikipedia's entry for Pogrom specifies, "A pogrom ( Russian: погро́м) is a violent riot incited with the aim of massacring or expelling an ethnic or religious group, particularly Jews." The third and fourth sentences state, "Sometimes the word is used to describe publicly sanctioned purgative attacks against non-Jewish groups. The characteristics of a pogrom vary widely, depending on the specific incident, at times leading to, or culminating in, massacres." Since the specific target in 1956 were Tamils, the main title header is thus appropriately descriptive. See Pogrom#Usage. — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 06:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose: Progrom is supported by the sources, no need to change the title. It is a word not just for Jews. Laxshen ( talk) 09:14, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose, as per Roman Spinner's comments the description of a progrom clearly reflects the events in 1956, as opposed to being described as a riot. Dan arndt ( talk) 03:16, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
@ Cossde:, I am going to be blunt, your version does not read well, and I am in no mood to get in another pointless revert war with you. Firstly, when you write large passages, please put it through a spell checker, because you constantly make spelling mistakes. Secondly, both DeVotta and Sabaratnam state that the mobs were led by Rajaratna (it's not just Sabaratnam). Thirdly, they are reliable sources, and they do not contradict each other, so they do not need explicit attribution. It does not read nicely when you word it in the way that you have. if you still disagree, then I rather take it to the a RFC or get other editors involved like @ SinhalaLion: and @ Petextrodon:. Oz346 ( talk) 02:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Your version has a lot of repetition with the separate accounts? Especially when they do not contradict each other. Is it really necessary to have such a large section for this one incident? What are your motivations for this? Oz346 ( talk) 02:08, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- The sheer number of spelling mistakes is unacceptable. You cannot expect other editors to always clean up your mistakes. Please use a spell checker and proofread your text.
Oz346 (
talk) 02:17, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- In the first week of May 1956, Prime Minister Bandaranayaka met with the Attorney General and the Legal Draftmen giving guidlines for the Lanaguage Bill. Bandaranayaka intended to honor the mandate he got by making Sinhala the only offical lanuage, while making provisions for reasonable use of Tamil in the north and east proviconces. On hearing this, Prof. J. E. Jayasuriya started a fast unto death at the parliment demanding Sinhala the only offical lanuage with no concessions granted to Tamil. Bandaranayaka gave in and had the Lanaguage Bill changed.
- Tamil journalist Sabaratnam writes that in responce to the proposed Lanaguage Bill the Working Committee of the Tamil Federal Party met in Jaffna to consider how display its opposition to the Lanaguage Bill, unanimously deciding to perform a satyagraha at the steps of parliment. its leader S. J. V. Chelvanayakam wrote to Bandaranayaka on 4 June stating their decision, to which Bandaranayaka issued a severe warring, to which Chelvanayakam stating that repressive measures would "only whet the appetite of the Tamils for freedom".
- Tarzie Vittachi writes that the riots started on 5 June 1956, while the Official language bill was debated in the Parliament in Colombo. About 200 Tamils led by 12 MPs of the Tamil Federal party conducted a silent satyagraha, a nonviolent sit-in protest, outside the parliament building.
- Sabaratnam stats that on 4 June a contingent of volunteers were brought from Jaffna, Batticoloa, Trincomalee to Colombo by train and housed om the Bambalapitiya Vinayagar Temple, who were joined by others from Colombo on the morning of 5 June. This group was breifed by V. Navaratnam and they gathered at Galle Face Green on the morning of 5 June and the satyagrahis formed double file and walked towards Parliament singing devotional songs and holding placards led by Chelvanayakam and C. Vanniasingam. They were met by a crowd of 500 Sinhalese extremists, who pounced on them, tore up the placards and used the poles to beat them up. Vannisaingham lost his national vest and was dragged some distance by his feat. C. Suntharalingam was assaluted and A. Amirthalingam was wounded in the head. Dr E. M. V. Naganathan fought back with his fists and feet. Sabaratnam states that he was told a year later by Vannisaingham, that he saw two Sinhalese parliamentarians, K. M. P. Rajaratne and Nimal Karunatilake present in the crowd and had pointed out Federal party MPs. Sabaratnam goes no to say that the mobs had been led by two Sinhalese parliamentarians.
- DeVotta writes that Federal Party's call for satyagraha in the north and east was responded to by Tamils and it orgernized a satyagraha protest on the steps of parliament with deligations traveling from the north and east. The satyagraha protest congregated outside the parliament after the government decided to close the parliamentary debate to the public and barricade the building. The Sinhala Basha Arakshaka Madalaya (Sinhala Langauge Protection Council) had threatened to counter the FP's protest with a protest of its on with L. H. Mettananda claiming to meet force to force. Mettananda further called for a boycot of Tamil professionals and buisnesses. With communal passions running high, Bandaranayaka aware of the looming danager tried to get Chelvanayakam to cancel the satyagraha demonstartion, FP and its supporters saw no reason to cancel. On 5 June over two hunderad Tamils assembled at Galle Face Green and were attacke by Sinhalese protestors led by the Junior Minister Rajaratne. The satyagrahis were beaten and pelted with stones and atleast one Tamil protestor thrown into the Beira lake, while another had his ear bitten off. The protest was called off at 1PM. Several Tamils were hospitalized and some of the wounded included parliamentarians. The police stood by as observers having been ordered not to intervene unless the themselves were attacked. Other sources claim that some of the Tamil protestors including Dr Naganathan and Navaratnam were thrown into the Beira lake.
Oz346 (
talk) 02:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- and why are you calling T.Sabaratnam a Tamil journalist? Why dont you call Tarzie a Sinhala journalist by the same token? What is this double standard?
Oz346 (
talk) 02:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for pointing these out and I have corrected them. And thank you for not engaging in a revert war, I am open to disscuss. I saw no reason to add details on Tarzie since there was a WP page on him which was linked too. If you feel that he should be mentioned as a Sinhala journalist you may do so. The sources provided here i.e. DeVotta, Sabaratnam and Vittachi given diffrent narratives with some contradictions. For example Sabaratnam says that he was told a government MP pointed out FP MPs to the mob, in another source of Sabaratnam he says two government MPs lead the mob, yet doesnt give the names. My objecitve was to present the facts as these are without interpreation.
Cossde (
talk) 03:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see any contradictions between any of the various accounts, Can you please point out the contradictions between sources.
Oz346 (
talk) 13:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- @ Oz346, the sources don't agree on who lead the mob. One says it was Sinhalese extremists, while the other says its an organization called Sinhala Basha Arakshaka Madalaya. One says was a silent protest, while the other says it was an demonstration with placards. And it goes on. Cossde ( talk) 13:53, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see any contradictions between any of the various accounts, Can you please point out the contradictions between sources.
Oz346 (
talk) 13:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for pointing these out and I have corrected them. And thank you for not engaging in a revert war, I am open to disscuss. I saw no reason to add details on Tarzie since there was a WP page on him which was linked too. If you feel that he should be mentioned as a Sinhala journalist you may do so. The sources provided here i.e. DeVotta, Sabaratnam and Vittachi given diffrent narratives with some contradictions. For example Sabaratnam says that he was told a government MP pointed out FP MPs to the mob, in another source of Sabaratnam he says two government MPs lead the mob, yet doesnt give the names. My objecitve was to present the facts as these are without interpreation.
Cossde (
talk) 03:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- and why are you calling T.Sabaratnam a Tamil journalist? Why dont you call Tarzie a Sinhala journalist by the same token? What is this double standard?
Oz346 (
talk) 02:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
| This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1956 anti-Tamil pogrom 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 |
| The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
|
| A fact from 1956 anti-Tamil pogrom appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 18 December 2008, and was viewed approximately 610 times (
disclaimer) (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| |
|
| A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on June 11, 2009, June 11, 2010, June 11, 2013, and June 11, 2016. |
|
| This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
| On 7 May 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Gal Oya riots. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
In this article reference is made to the Gal Oya Settlement Scheme. The correct name is Gal Oya Development Board Chulalds ( talk) 08:49, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
side by side in the opening paragraphs need to be, I feel, reconciled . or explained.
- "and massacred minority Tamils by the hundreds. It is estimated that over 150 people lost their lives due in the violence. "
Which was it? "Hundreds" or "150." It can't really be both. Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 14:17, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- done, stick with the ciatations. Kanatonian ( talk) 14:29, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) – Material Works 15:08, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
1956 anti-Tamil pogrom → Gal Oya riots – Original title of the article and since its change to the current title, it has not been established that this was a pogrom and not a riot. Cossde ( talk) 14:43, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- What's wrong with
1956 anti-Tamil riots?
In ictu oculi (
talk) 17:40, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose, A pogrom is a riot, an organised one. These events were all pogroms with organised violence. They were not spontaneous acts of violence, but involved preparatory planning. I oppose the naming change suggestion for this reason, as the current name is more accurate.
- A. Sivanandan quote from 1984:
- "There have been no race riots in Sri Lanka since independence. What there has been is a series of increasingly virulent pogroms against the Tamil people by the Sinhala state"
- https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/030639688402600102
- https://books.google.com/books?id=GNKGAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA35&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false Oz346 ( talk) 18:44, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. The DYK [at the top of this page] from 2008 states, "Did you know... that the Gal Oya riots were the first ethnic riots that targeted the minority Sri Lankan Tamils in post-independent Sri Lanka?". Wikipedia's entry for Pogrom specifies, "A pogrom ( Russian: погро́м) is a violent riot incited with the aim of massacring or expelling an ethnic or religious group, particularly Jews." The third and fourth sentences state, "Sometimes the word is used to describe publicly sanctioned purgative attacks against non-Jewish groups. The characteristics of a pogrom vary widely, depending on the specific incident, at times leading to, or culminating in, massacres." Since the specific target in 1956 were Tamils, the main title header is thus appropriately descriptive. See Pogrom#Usage. — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 06:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose: Progrom is supported by the sources, no need to change the title. It is a word not just for Jews. Laxshen ( talk) 09:14, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose, as per Roman Spinner's comments the description of a progrom clearly reflects the events in 1956, as opposed to being described as a riot. Dan arndt ( talk) 03:16, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
@ Cossde:, I am going to be blunt, your version does not read well, and I am in no mood to get in another pointless revert war with you. Firstly, when you write large passages, please put it through a spell checker, because you constantly make spelling mistakes. Secondly, both DeVotta and Sabaratnam state that the mobs were led by Rajaratna (it's not just Sabaratnam). Thirdly, they are reliable sources, and they do not contradict each other, so they do not need explicit attribution. It does not read nicely when you word it in the way that you have. if you still disagree, then I rather take it to the a RFC or get other editors involved like @ SinhalaLion: and @ Petextrodon:. Oz346 ( talk) 02:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Your version has a lot of repetition with the separate accounts? Especially when they do not contradict each other. Is it really necessary to have such a large section for this one incident? What are your motivations for this? Oz346 ( talk) 02:08, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- The sheer number of spelling mistakes is unacceptable. You cannot expect other editors to always clean up your mistakes. Please use a spell checker and proofread your text.
Oz346 (
talk) 02:17, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- In the first week of May 1956, Prime Minister Bandaranayaka met with the Attorney General and the Legal Draftmen giving guidlines for the Lanaguage Bill. Bandaranayaka intended to honor the mandate he got by making Sinhala the only offical lanuage, while making provisions for reasonable use of Tamil in the north and east proviconces. On hearing this, Prof. J. E. Jayasuriya started a fast unto death at the parliment demanding Sinhala the only offical lanuage with no concessions granted to Tamil. Bandaranayaka gave in and had the Lanaguage Bill changed.
- Tamil journalist Sabaratnam writes that in responce to the proposed Lanaguage Bill the Working Committee of the Tamil Federal Party met in Jaffna to consider how display its opposition to the Lanaguage Bill, unanimously deciding to perform a satyagraha at the steps of parliment. its leader S. J. V. Chelvanayakam wrote to Bandaranayaka on 4 June stating their decision, to which Bandaranayaka issued a severe warring, to which Chelvanayakam stating that repressive measures would "only whet the appetite of the Tamils for freedom".
- Tarzie Vittachi writes that the riots started on 5 June 1956, while the Official language bill was debated in the Parliament in Colombo. About 200 Tamils led by 12 MPs of the Tamil Federal party conducted a silent satyagraha, a nonviolent sit-in protest, outside the parliament building.
- Sabaratnam stats that on 4 June a contingent of volunteers were brought from Jaffna, Batticoloa, Trincomalee to Colombo by train and housed om the Bambalapitiya Vinayagar Temple, who were joined by others from Colombo on the morning of 5 June. This group was breifed by V. Navaratnam and they gathered at Galle Face Green on the morning of 5 June and the satyagrahis formed double file and walked towards Parliament singing devotional songs and holding placards led by Chelvanayakam and C. Vanniasingam. They were met by a crowd of 500 Sinhalese extremists, who pounced on them, tore up the placards and used the poles to beat them up. Vannisaingham lost his national vest and was dragged some distance by his feat. C. Suntharalingam was assaluted and A. Amirthalingam was wounded in the head. Dr E. M. V. Naganathan fought back with his fists and feet. Sabaratnam states that he was told a year later by Vannisaingham, that he saw two Sinhalese parliamentarians, K. M. P. Rajaratne and Nimal Karunatilake present in the crowd and had pointed out Federal party MPs. Sabaratnam goes no to say that the mobs had been led by two Sinhalese parliamentarians.
- DeVotta writes that Federal Party's call for satyagraha in the north and east was responded to by Tamils and it orgernized a satyagraha protest on the steps of parliament with deligations traveling from the north and east. The satyagraha protest congregated outside the parliament after the government decided to close the parliamentary debate to the public and barricade the building. The Sinhala Basha Arakshaka Madalaya (Sinhala Langauge Protection Council) had threatened to counter the FP's protest with a protest of its on with L. H. Mettananda claiming to meet force to force. Mettananda further called for a boycot of Tamil professionals and buisnesses. With communal passions running high, Bandaranayaka aware of the looming danager tried to get Chelvanayakam to cancel the satyagraha demonstartion, FP and its supporters saw no reason to cancel. On 5 June over two hunderad Tamils assembled at Galle Face Green and were attacke by Sinhalese protestors led by the Junior Minister Rajaratne. The satyagrahis were beaten and pelted with stones and atleast one Tamil protestor thrown into the Beira lake, while another had his ear bitten off. The protest was called off at 1PM. Several Tamils were hospitalized and some of the wounded included parliamentarians. The police stood by as observers having been ordered not to intervene unless the themselves were attacked. Other sources claim that some of the Tamil protestors including Dr Naganathan and Navaratnam were thrown into the Beira lake.
Oz346 (
talk) 02:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- and why are you calling T.Sabaratnam a Tamil journalist? Why dont you call Tarzie a Sinhala journalist by the same token? What is this double standard?
Oz346 (
talk) 02:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for pointing these out and I have corrected them. And thank you for not engaging in a revert war, I am open to disscuss. I saw no reason to add details on Tarzie since there was a WP page on him which was linked too. If you feel that he should be mentioned as a Sinhala journalist you may do so. The sources provided here i.e. DeVotta, Sabaratnam and Vittachi given diffrent narratives with some contradictions. For example Sabaratnam says that he was told a government MP pointed out FP MPs to the mob, in another source of Sabaratnam he says two government MPs lead the mob, yet doesnt give the names. My objecitve was to present the facts as these are without interpreation.
Cossde (
talk) 03:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see any contradictions between any of the various accounts, Can you please point out the contradictions between sources.
Oz346 (
talk) 13:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- @ Oz346, the sources don't agree on who lead the mob. One says it was Sinhalese extremists, while the other says its an organization called Sinhala Basha Arakshaka Madalaya. One says was a silent protest, while the other says it was an demonstration with placards. And it goes on. Cossde ( talk) 13:53, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see any contradictions between any of the various accounts, Can you please point out the contradictions between sources.
Oz346 (
talk) 13:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for pointing these out and I have corrected them. And thank you for not engaging in a revert war, I am open to disscuss. I saw no reason to add details on Tarzie since there was a WP page on him which was linked too. If you feel that he should be mentioned as a Sinhala journalist you may do so. The sources provided here i.e. DeVotta, Sabaratnam and Vittachi given diffrent narratives with some contradictions. For example Sabaratnam says that he was told a government MP pointed out FP MPs to the mob, in another source of Sabaratnam he says two government MPs lead the mob, yet doesnt give the names. My objecitve was to present the facts as these are without interpreation.
Cossde (
talk) 03:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- and why are you calling T.Sabaratnam a Tamil journalist? Why dont you call Tarzie a Sinhala journalist by the same token? What is this double standard?
Oz346 (
talk) 02:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)