This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
The result of the move request was: Renamed as uncontroversial. Ucucha 21:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC) Ucucha 21:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Ethinic groups in Delhi →
Ethnic groups in Delhi — The current page misspells ethnic as 'ethinic'.This has been corrected to 'ethnic'.--
115.252.77.66 (
talk)
13:12, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
This is an excellent article, well-written and supported by reliable and verifiable sources. The tag appears motivated by bias, indeed naked prejudice. The tag on caste information too is unfair. India has not held caste counts since 1931; inevitably therefore our knowledge comes from older sources. But this does not mean that the statistics presented are irrelevant. They depict relative proportions of various castes, not their absolute numbers -- only the latter figures have changed over time; the former are likely to have remained constant, because all castes have grown in number, not any one in particular. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.168.182.92 ( talk • contribs)
Stop engaging in vandalism! Facts that are well-known do not require citations. One would be permitted to say without any citation that Chennai is south of Delhi. The other truism about science is that good knowledge does not await the arrival of perfect knowledge. Since the earlier censuses are all that we have, their information cannot be dismissed on the grounds that it is so many decades old. If you had more recent facts to replace what is written there, then that would be fine; but you've got nothing to show.
Remember also that your own articles can be vandalised too! You don't own the Wikipedia. Learn to be tolerant and modest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.252.77.66 ( talk) 12:03, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
At any rate, I am about to begin cleaning up by removing material that is clearly unencyclopedic in tone and content and material that is not based on reliable sources. Drmies ( talk) 15:39, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Now that we've come that far, there are some interesting things to learn from the history of Ethnic groups in Delhi, Sanjay Yadav (author), Environment of Delhi, and perhaps some other articles. An SPI is next. Drmies ( talk) 15:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Passive voices: a penetrating study of Muslims in India
Gazetteer of rural Delhi-page 41
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
The result of the move request was: Renamed as uncontroversial. Ucucha 21:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC) Ucucha 21:40, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Ethinic groups in Delhi →
Ethnic groups in Delhi — The current page misspells ethnic as 'ethinic'.This has been corrected to 'ethnic'.--
115.252.77.66 (
talk)
13:12, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
This is an excellent article, well-written and supported by reliable and verifiable sources. The tag appears motivated by bias, indeed naked prejudice. The tag on caste information too is unfair. India has not held caste counts since 1931; inevitably therefore our knowledge comes from older sources. But this does not mean that the statistics presented are irrelevant. They depict relative proportions of various castes, not their absolute numbers -- only the latter figures have changed over time; the former are likely to have remained constant, because all castes have grown in number, not any one in particular. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.168.182.92 ( talk • contribs)
Stop engaging in vandalism! Facts that are well-known do not require citations. One would be permitted to say without any citation that Chennai is south of Delhi. The other truism about science is that good knowledge does not await the arrival of perfect knowledge. Since the earlier censuses are all that we have, their information cannot be dismissed on the grounds that it is so many decades old. If you had more recent facts to replace what is written there, then that would be fine; but you've got nothing to show.
Remember also that your own articles can be vandalised too! You don't own the Wikipedia. Learn to be tolerant and modest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.252.77.66 ( talk) 12:03, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
At any rate, I am about to begin cleaning up by removing material that is clearly unencyclopedic in tone and content and material that is not based on reliable sources. Drmies ( talk) 15:39, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Now that we've come that far, there are some interesting things to learn from the history of Ethnic groups in Delhi, Sanjay Yadav (author), Environment of Delhi, and perhaps some other articles. An SPI is next. Drmies ( talk) 15:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Passive voices: a penetrating study of Muslims in India
Gazetteer of rural Delhi-page 41