Talk:Sinhala script

Sinhala script was one of the Language and literature good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 10, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
August 25, 2007	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
October 26, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
June 26, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sinhala script article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 3 months

Writing systems High‑importance

	Writing portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sri Lanka Top‑importance

	Sri Lanka portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sri Lanka, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sri Lanka on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sri LankaWikipedia:WikiProject Sri LankaTemplate:WikiProject Sri LankaSri Lanka
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to Sri Lanka, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in to an autoconfirmed or confirmed account (usually granted automatically to accounts with 10 edits and an age of 4 days)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Section Letters > Miśra set doesn't show aspiration in the Consonants table

The table transcribes ඛ, ඝ, ඡ, ඣ, ඨ, ඪ, ථ, ධ, ඵ, භ with k, g, t͡ʃ~t͡ɕ, d͡ʒ~d͡ʑ, ʈ, ɖ, t, d, p, b, respectively, instead of kʰ ɡʱ t͡ʃʰ~t͡ɕʰ(~cʰ), d͡ʒʱ~d͡ʑʱ(~ɟʱ), ʈʰ, ɖʱ, tʰ, dʱ, pʰ, bʱ. Is this the intention, presumably to transcribe the Sinhalese pronunciation of those letters, or should it be changed to respresent the intended, Sanskrit/Pali pronunciations of the letters? Masimatutu (talk) 12:38, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Sinhala script

The following discussion 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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Close to quickfail level. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:14, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA from 2008. there's Significant unsourced material in the article. Also, the article looks like it needs a clean up or at least a major CE. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:35, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

"ඞ" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect ඞ has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 8 § ඞ until a consensus is reached. Duckmather (talk) 23:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article issues

There is far too much unsourced content. There is no way to tell if there is-----or isn't WP:original research. -- Otr500 (talk) 22:05, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to clarify several points that have been misrepresented in recent edits and talk page comments regarding the relationship between Sinhala script, Tamil-Brahmi, and Grantha. The following is based on a close reading of the very sources already cited:

Wikipedia is not a primary source. Any claims must be supported by the cited academic references, not Wikipedia summaries.
Grantha script predates medieval Sinhala. Grantha was in use from at least the 5th century CE (Pallava, Chola, Pandya inscriptions), while the first medieval Sinhala inscriptions appear only in the 8th century CE.
Grantha was a prestigious literary and administrative script. Its widespread use in South India makes it a strong candidate for influencing script developments in neighboring regions, including Sri Lanka.
The source itself confirms the derivation. One of the cited works (Diringer, David. Alphabet: A Key to the History of Mankind, 1948, p. 389) explicitly states that the medieval Sinhala script is based on the Grantha character.
There is a clear break between Sinhala-Brahmi and medieval Sinhala. The same source describes this as a "radical" graphical and linguistic shift—indicating a script replacement rather than local evolution.
Misinterpretation of timelines. Just as modern Tamil script is not counted from Tamil-Brahmi, Sinhala script is not counted from Sinhala-Brahmi. The existence of Sinhala-Brahmi doesn’t imply that the modern Sinhala script evolved from it directly.
Inconsistency in the edits. Ironically, the user defending the Sinhala-Brahmi connection is citing a source that contradicts their own claim.
Personal attacks are not acceptable. Before accusing others of not understanding, it is important to read and comprehend the sources being cited. This includes avoiding inflammatory language and sticking to content-related discussion. See the comments left on my talk page, which stem from this IP editor.

I suggest we focus on aligning the article content with what the cited academic sources actually state and avoid inserting speculative or contradictory claims based on misreadings.

Luigi Boy ルアイヂボイ^talk 15:32, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]