Talk:Rameswaram

message: User:24.136.24.38, please do not remove the introduction sentence. And don't keep reverting me. Rameswaram is first a town in India. And then a piligrimage site. Please explain. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 01:35, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing content 

message: I'm moving most of the temple related contents to the temple article. I could revert it back, if any of the editors find it important to stay in the temple. This way, we can both talk about the town in a secular way and be able to talk about the temple in a religious way. Balajiviswanathan 20:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving content to Ramanathaswamy BILLU Temple, Rameswaram

message: Paul Theroux in The Great Railway Bazaar mentions that the purported tombs of Cain and Abel are located here. Can anyone confirm this? Brutannica (talk) 07:56, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Tombs of Cain & Abel

message: Guys , i have added description about rameswaram beach in the geography paragraph. Anyone please provide suitable links to support that. I couldn't find any references.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.196.206.222 (talk) 11:42, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  beach of rameswaram 

message: An example: "The major religion followed in Rameswaram is Hinduism. Being a Hindu pilgrimage centre, majority of the visitor to Rameswaram are Hindus. There is a minority of Christians, predominantly from the fishing community of the region"
Aside from the obvious poor English phrasing, the above is sourced to a work published in 1882, which wasn't reliable then and certainly cannot be used to verify a set of statements formed in the present tense. Worse still, the Sfn link doesn't work. - Sitush (talk) 21:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Or "With 22km of dredging remaining, the project is currently held by a Supreme Court order seeking the Government to clarify the status of the bridge as a national monument[88]." In this statement there is a WP:REFPUNCT problem, a lack of precision in stating which government, a broken Sfn and a lack of time context, such as use of the  template. The  template would probably not have been amiss either. No offence intended, but such things as these, when added to the numerous points above, make me wonder whether this should ever have passed GA. - Sitush (talk) 21:06, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The point(s) in the previous paras is addressed. The references to small towns like Rameswaram are always sparse(and historic/tourism oriented) - the base point is -  it is a Hindu religous town. I am not leaving things to assumption here, but a rough check on the visitor base with the number of state run buses and trains would prove the volume of visitors for a town with a population of 35k.  I will fix other issues pointed out. Ssriram mt (talk) 22:59, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ssriram mt, firstly, please accept my apologies. For some reason I have got drawn into two recent GAs of which you were a major contributor. It is not a witch-hunt and in fact I think that you asked me to assist with the other article in the run up to the GA nom (and I said that I didn't have the time or the expertise re: geographic articles). I really do appreciate the considerable effort that you have put into this stuff. I also note that the GA reviews for both articles involve several different people who have a decent amount of experience. I've never reviewed a GA nom and I accept that it is easy to criticise, which is perhaps how my comments come across. All of that said, and hopefully accepted, there are real problems here and at the other place. I realise that the standards are not those of featured articles but there are numerous quite serious issues per the criteria. No-one's fault as such because both articles are way, way better than once they were."Rough checks" mean nothing, especially when it involves original research of passenger statistics. And the fact that refs for small towns are sparse is not an excuse: WP:V is one of the Five Pillars - if you cannot source it reliably, it should not be here. - Sitush (talk) 23:36, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: These are rewritten - a set of references induced. Ssriram mt (talk) 13:05, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anachronisms 

message: The montage doesn't look good, especially with so much gap between the images. Any suggestions? -Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not a gap, but a skyline. I will modify it. Ssriram mt (talk) 13:06, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Montage 

message: Oops! As I said above, this seems to be another example of a recently-promoted Indic article that is full of Harvard citation errors. Using Ucucha's tool, there are swathes of red appearing. I neither have the time nor the aptitude to fix them right now but hopefully someone can resolve in order to avoid a delisting. - Sitush (talk) 02:13, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: See User:Ucucha/HarvErrors for the tool. - Sitush (talk) 02:17, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Missed to reply here - all reds have been removed. Ssriram mt (talk) 22:45, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations