The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Cirt (talk) 07:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History of Sri Lanka: pre-Colonial era (500 BC - 1505 AD)[edit]

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

The history of Sri Lanka does not only include the periods of the pre-Colonial era and the post-Colonial era when there have been many different stages of the history of Sri Lanka such as prehistory, ancient history, medieval history, colonial history and twentieth century history. Plus this is just a copy of all the information related to the page taken from the History of Sri Lanka page. Blackknight12 (talk) 02:12, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete if the content is indeed just a copy, possibly with a redirect if pertinent and/or a merge if the content of the new article differs/includes extra information. Zelse81 (talk) 02:41, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just took a brief look at the colonial one (and I do emphasize, brief), comparing some passages to others. Seems to indeed be a compilation from various articles, but I'd urge people to take a closer look! Zelse81 (talk) 02:44, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 02:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. On a short inispection it becomes obvious that the article is not a copy of the material at history of Sri Lanka, but are a s spinnout article fronm that article going into greater depth of description of the topic. This is completely standard practice. It does need expansion, but there is no policy based reason to delete.·Maunus·ƛ· 08:29, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it was before I created Ancient history of Sri Lanka and Medieval history of Sri Lanka because Sri Lankan History is more complex than just pre and post colonial eras. Currently there is no need for this article because all the information is properly seperated into the articles I had made.--Blackknight12 (talk) 00:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep appropriate spinout article, as for the history of everywhere else. Many of the sections seem to be already expanded. The rest should be, and helping do that would have made more sense than this nomination. DGG ( talk ) 01:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rescope if scholarly sources encourage a different break-off point. This is a proper spinout due to it's length. Them From Space 04:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.