Talk:Sources of ancient Tamil history

message: Can someone explain the reasoning in speedily moving this article to a GA? I would have expected at least a peer review to happen before jumping the gun. Did a review really happen? Lets try to follow some good practices here even if there is nothing defined as such.. -- ¿Amar៛Talk to me/My edits 17:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I apologise for the mistake. I just looked at the assessment scale and added GA quality forgetting the process. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 17:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree, also shouldn't it not even be A class?  It has to reach GA class first, correct? I'll look into it and change it, correct me if I'm wrong. --Banime (talk) 17:16, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I looked into their quality scale and even though I am not a part of WikiProject India, I'm going to change the rating to B-Class since it has not gone through the GA process yet.  --Banime (talk) 17:18, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Criteria for GA?

message: A Wikipedia editor other than myself has suggested that Tamil history from Sangam literature be merged into this article. I would tend to agree. Discuss. Jo7hs2 (talk) 17:51, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Tamil history from Sangam literature  is supposed to be the sub-article for the first section of this article.  I agree that it's a mess at present, but the topic as such does deserve its own sub-article.  -- Arvind (talk) 09:55, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not questioning whether that is true or not, but can you explain why you think that way? I would help in forming concensus. Jo7hs2 (talk) 11:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course. This article discusses the various sources for the history of the ancient Tamil country, not the history itself.  There ought to be an article which deals with the history itself (along the lines of the articles dealing with the industry, economy, agriculture, and religion of that period).  The main sources for the history of the period - on which most accounts are based - are early Tamil literary works (the so-called Sangam literature), although their use as sources of history is not unproblematic.  Tamil history from Sangam literature seems to be the appropriate place for an article which describes the history of the period as it appears in the poems, the extent to which other sources bear this account out (or don't), the problems of their reliability, and so on. -- Arvind (talk) 21:48, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds very reasonable. Perhaps the title of the article could be changed to better reflect that, but I'm convinced sufficiently to no longer feel a merger is warranted. Since I did not originally suggest the merger, I don't feel comfortable closing it without some additional consensus. I'll start a new section to discuss a potential name change. Jo7hs2 (talk) 22:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger proposal for Tamil history from Sangam literature

message: Per the above merger discussion, I've come to the conclusion that this article should probably be renamed. I'm going to suggest "Sangam literature as a source of Tamil history", which is longer than the original, but a little more specific. I may be totally off-base, so please discuss. Jo7hs2 (talk) 22:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, perhaps I wasn't clear enough.  This article is about all sources of Tamil history, not just Sangam literature.  The other article could perhaps be renamed.  -- Arvind (talk) 22:48, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: WHOOPS!!!: Ignore the above. I posted on the wrong talk page. Jo7hs2 (talk) 22:53, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal to rename article (WHOOPS, IGNORE)

message: . TrangaBellam (talk) 18:48, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues