Talk:History of the Jaffna kingdom

Opinionated content
This is regarding an edit to the removal of a tomfoolery paragraph from the article matched with dubious sources.

The links to the three sources are:, ,.

None of the three sources, has any reputation accurate nor verification in dealing with topics regarding medieval history. The first and the third are nothing much more than views of two unknown folks and the second is clearly stated as an OPINION at the bottom of the page and not a fact of matter or anything else.

Moreover all the three sources are by pro-Sinhalese authors have seemed to excessively relied upon extremely opinionated and questionable myths like the Mahavamsa and a single dubious inscription to quote their statements.

The three sources never mind what they are discussing(ultimately all three being Sinhala heritage) use only one dubious inscription unearthed from an ancient Tamil-Buddhist hamlet as the sole basis to air their opinionated views.

These claims are thoroughly contradicted and disproved by the four references we have in the article:.

Nāga Nadu(The Kingdom of Nagas) was an autonomous administrative entity of the Tamil Kingdom and Vallipuram, Kandarodai, Maanthai were ancient centers of Tamil Buddhism much prior to the development of Buddhism among the Sinhalese.So that absolutely rules out any possibility of the Jaffna Kingdom coming under any Sinhalese rule. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coppercholride (talk • contribs)
 * I just want to add an administrative note here: one of those (the Daily Mirror) is an opinion article, and thus generally cannot be cited as a source for factual information. The third, Funday Times, is obviously not a reliable source for Wikipedia, since it appears to be a Sri Lankan version of Funday Times--i.e., a magazine directed at kids, which we would assume vastly over simplifies things, at best. We don't allow high school textbooks as reliable sources, and only sometimes allow college textbooks. So a magazine for kids obviously won't cut it. The first, the "infolanka" appears to be a personal blog. Unless someone could show that the author is some sort of respected academic on the Jaffna Kingdom (or a similar historical field), that also would not be allowed; even if we can establish it as such, we'd need to attribute the statement--something like "According to historian X, ...". But one more thing, Coppercholride--I think that if you had said, in your first revert "These sources do not meet WP:RS" instead of just saying "Fake", that might have helped Blackknight know why you were objecting more clearly. Thank you, though, for now explaining, as your explanation sure makes it clear that said edit has no business being in WP per our policies. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on History of the Jaffna Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081123061821/http://www.newstodaynet.com/2007sud/may07/110507.htm to http://www.newstodaynet.com/2007sud/may07/110507.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)