![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 8 December 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was Relist separately (see the Closed AFD, by permalink) after the closing admin acknowledged not realising this article formed part of the discussion - see User talk:Bwilkins#AfD closure. |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This list-article is under construction. It seems to me to be an obviously beneficial list for Wikipedia, and creating it is meant by me to facilitate improvement of related list-article List of Indian castes, which has heretofore included many scheduled caste items which more properly belong here, I believe. I am open to discussion, including about renaming this list, and to development of this list.
Question: Is the Indian constitution in the public domain, or is it otherwise justified to copy-paste from it the list of 1,108 scheduled castes. I think it would not be a copyrightable passage, based on extension from my understanding of U.S. copyright law, which holds that any mere list not reflecting creativity is not copyrightable. I would like to proceed by copying in the list from the 1950 constitution already referenced in this article, and keep it organized by the 25 regions, but would be happy to receive comments. -- do ncr am 19:47, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
I'll try to give you a primer but you'll be getting it in a few chunks. Feel free to query as things go along.
Firstly, there are presently 35 units immediately below the national unit that is India. They comprise 28 States and 7 Union Territories, and it is a federal system of government. I'll call them "regions" henceforth - less of a mouthful. The difference between this figure and the 25 that you note above is due mainly to the Linguistic division of states in 1956 and subsequent similar legislation. More changes are expected with, for example, the Telangana movement gaining a lot of attention at national level. The names and boundaries of a fair few of the regions have changed also, eg: Uttaranchal is now Uttarakhand, and of course some of them are disputed, including Jammu and Kashmir.
Each region has its own legislation wrt the Scheduled groups, and those pieces of legislation change from time to time. I'll compile a list for you in the next hour or so.
As far as your copyright concern is, erm, concerned, I think it would be best to speak with Moonriddengirl. - Sitush ( talk) 20:51, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
As at 2001, for Scheduled Castes (it can be different for Scheduled Tribes). Names as they were then:
- Sitush ( talk) 21:19, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Within each region there may be areas where the scheduling does not apply and those areas are not necessarily the same for all the communities, although often they are. Equally, not all of any community might be scheduled. - Sitush ( talk) 21:21, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
India is, of course, a huge country. It has a population of something like 1.2 billion and numerous languages. It also has pretty poor literacy rates, especially outside the major cities. This causes problems with identification, especially since names are being transliterated into English: there are often numerous English variants of a given name and also so many problems with spelling in the native scripts that the en-WP India project introduced WP:INDICSCRIPT. Consequently, an English transliteration that gives the Goud community of Andhra Pradesh also gives the completely unrelated Gouds of Goa/Kerala. If, as often happens, the full qualifier is omitted - Goud (Gowd/Gowda etc) Saraswat Brahmin - then you need to know the background. Worse still is when the names are truly identical: there are, for example, several communities called Mon but they are unrelated. We have numerous articles where a full set of redirects do not exist either, ie: there are many names for a given community but we have either no redirects from those names to the chosen article title or we are lacking all of them. Different regions may refer to a community under a different name when in fact they are the same community. - Sitush ( talk) 21:51, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
India is a pretty corrupt country and it is also chaotic. In fact, I've had quite a few Indian contributors tell me that the endemic corruption and chaos is more depressing than the well-known issue of poverty. This chaos is reflected in official websites, which often host vague or outdated or undated or contradictory statements and documents. The standard required for entry to the Indian Civil Service is extremely high but the levels of corruption are such that civil servants are often bound by their terms of service to move to a different region and department every couple of years: there is little continuity that would enable the chaos to subside.
It is also a country where social position and respect is a huge importance, even today. Various communities form, disappear, split and rename themselves, seemingly almost at the drop of a hat. Much of this is intended to boost their social standing, either by disassociating themselves from a group or by associating themselves with another group. One of our best articles that discusses this is probably Nair. And note that as far as modern academics are concerned, Nair/Nayar is not a caste, just as Yadav is not a caste ... but you will see many lazy references to them being a caste. It was and still is the case that entire communities arrive or disappear between censuses. The enumerator's handbook for the 2011 census should give you some sense of the issues (pages 24-26). I know that you may think this to be irrelevant but it is something that you really need to understand if you are to work your way through the issues. - Sitush ( talk) 22:12, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Is there any complaint about sourcing or anything else? None at all? Then why is an editor seeking to open a second AFD. It is an article built from official government sources only, what is there to dispute? -- do ncr am 05:19, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
I thought that there was agreement that there is much danger in linking lists such as this to various Indic community articles and that this applies as much to redlinks as to bluelinks. For example, we set up redlinks here for community A in Punjab and, later, someone who is unaware of this list creates an article for a community called A but in Tamil Nadu - the link will turn blue even though the communities may not be the same. - Sitush ( talk) 22:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
It appears to me that this is intended to be a list just of the Scheduled Castes, but the reference in the lead sentence to Scheduled Tribes leads me to wonder. IMO, it's important for the lead section of a list to clearly define the list scope. Can this one be clarified further? -- Orlady ( talk) 17:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 8 December 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was Relist separately (see the Closed AFD, by permalink) after the closing admin acknowledged not realising this article formed part of the discussion - see User talk:Bwilkins#AfD closure. |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This list-article is under construction. It seems to me to be an obviously beneficial list for Wikipedia, and creating it is meant by me to facilitate improvement of related list-article List of Indian castes, which has heretofore included many scheduled caste items which more properly belong here, I believe. I am open to discussion, including about renaming this list, and to development of this list.
Question: Is the Indian constitution in the public domain, or is it otherwise justified to copy-paste from it the list of 1,108 scheduled castes. I think it would not be a copyrightable passage, based on extension from my understanding of U.S. copyright law, which holds that any mere list not reflecting creativity is not copyrightable. I would like to proceed by copying in the list from the 1950 constitution already referenced in this article, and keep it organized by the 25 regions, but would be happy to receive comments. -- do ncr am 19:47, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
I'll try to give you a primer but you'll be getting it in a few chunks. Feel free to query as things go along.
Firstly, there are presently 35 units immediately below the national unit that is India. They comprise 28 States and 7 Union Territories, and it is a federal system of government. I'll call them "regions" henceforth - less of a mouthful. The difference between this figure and the 25 that you note above is due mainly to the Linguistic division of states in 1956 and subsequent similar legislation. More changes are expected with, for example, the Telangana movement gaining a lot of attention at national level. The names and boundaries of a fair few of the regions have changed also, eg: Uttaranchal is now Uttarakhand, and of course some of them are disputed, including Jammu and Kashmir.
Each region has its own legislation wrt the Scheduled groups, and those pieces of legislation change from time to time. I'll compile a list for you in the next hour or so.
As far as your copyright concern is, erm, concerned, I think it would be best to speak with Moonriddengirl. - Sitush ( talk) 20:51, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
As at 2001, for Scheduled Castes (it can be different for Scheduled Tribes). Names as they were then:
- Sitush ( talk) 21:19, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Within each region there may be areas where the scheduling does not apply and those areas are not necessarily the same for all the communities, although often they are. Equally, not all of any community might be scheduled. - Sitush ( talk) 21:21, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
India is, of course, a huge country. It has a population of something like 1.2 billion and numerous languages. It also has pretty poor literacy rates, especially outside the major cities. This causes problems with identification, especially since names are being transliterated into English: there are often numerous English variants of a given name and also so many problems with spelling in the native scripts that the en-WP India project introduced WP:INDICSCRIPT. Consequently, an English transliteration that gives the Goud community of Andhra Pradesh also gives the completely unrelated Gouds of Goa/Kerala. If, as often happens, the full qualifier is omitted - Goud (Gowd/Gowda etc) Saraswat Brahmin - then you need to know the background. Worse still is when the names are truly identical: there are, for example, several communities called Mon but they are unrelated. We have numerous articles where a full set of redirects do not exist either, ie: there are many names for a given community but we have either no redirects from those names to the chosen article title or we are lacking all of them. Different regions may refer to a community under a different name when in fact they are the same community. - Sitush ( talk) 21:51, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
India is a pretty corrupt country and it is also chaotic. In fact, I've had quite a few Indian contributors tell me that the endemic corruption and chaos is more depressing than the well-known issue of poverty. This chaos is reflected in official websites, which often host vague or outdated or undated or contradictory statements and documents. The standard required for entry to the Indian Civil Service is extremely high but the levels of corruption are such that civil servants are often bound by their terms of service to move to a different region and department every couple of years: there is little continuity that would enable the chaos to subside.
It is also a country where social position and respect is a huge importance, even today. Various communities form, disappear, split and rename themselves, seemingly almost at the drop of a hat. Much of this is intended to boost their social standing, either by disassociating themselves from a group or by associating themselves with another group. One of our best articles that discusses this is probably Nair. And note that as far as modern academics are concerned, Nair/Nayar is not a caste, just as Yadav is not a caste ... but you will see many lazy references to them being a caste. It was and still is the case that entire communities arrive or disappear between censuses. The enumerator's handbook for the 2011 census should give you some sense of the issues (pages 24-26). I know that you may think this to be irrelevant but it is something that you really need to understand if you are to work your way through the issues. - Sitush ( talk) 22:12, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Is there any complaint about sourcing or anything else? None at all? Then why is an editor seeking to open a second AFD. It is an article built from official government sources only, what is there to dispute? -- do ncr am 05:19, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
I thought that there was agreement that there is much danger in linking lists such as this to various Indic community articles and that this applies as much to redlinks as to bluelinks. For example, we set up redlinks here for community A in Punjab and, later, someone who is unaware of this list creates an article for a community called A but in Tamil Nadu - the link will turn blue even though the communities may not be the same. - Sitush ( talk) 22:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
It appears to me that this is intended to be a list just of the Scheduled Castes, but the reference in the lead sentence to Scheduled Tribes leads me to wonder. IMO, it's important for the lead section of a list to clearly define the list scope. Can this one be clarified further? -- Orlady ( talk) 17:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)