This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Neelum River. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:56, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi @ Uanfala: while I have agreed to some of your reverts of the link, I do not agree with this [1] revert. I understand the AK is linked before but why revert the Pakistan administered Kashmir link that is in the article body. FYI Pakistan-administered Kashmir is no longer a redirect but an article now. -- DBig Xrayᗙ 14:24, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Uanfala, I am not sure why the Devnagari script has been included for the names in this article. Other than WP:IS, Urdu is the official languages on both the sides of Kashmir as far as I know. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 07:14, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Muzaffarabad is an integral part of India. Plz change that, otherwise this will not be good. Change it immediately Nkvishnoi2912 ( talk) 07:12, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@
Uanfala:I understand that you
have reverted my edit removing the non-latin script from the article’s infobox per
WP:NOINDIC because you believe the article is “mostly related to Pakistan.” But of the 250 kilometres long course of the
transboundary river, almost a third fourth is within Indian territory or along the line of control—the de facto India-Pakistan border in Kashmir (about a fifth in only Indian territory). About a third of the river’s basin is located inside India. Comparable with
Ravi and
Jhelum. Wouldn’t this mean that the river is significantly within the scope of Wikiproject India, even if not mostly or entirely? The article itself doesn’t seem to be written in a way that would make it seem like it is mostly related to Pakistan.
UnpetitproleX (
talk)
12:43, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
I have engaged in this topic area quite a bit, and can safely say that where script clutter arises removing them all is the best option and what is/should be generally followed. That was the intention of INDICSCRIPTS and its spirit extends beyond the India Project area.
As to the above comments when are where INDICSCRIPTS can be used: where the topic is not wholly/mostly India specific they can be including where other scripts are being so used (e. g. geo articles covering multiple countries such as here); but from what I have seen the best case usage (preventing script clutter) is to not use non-English scripts at all. Gotitbro ( talk) 13:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Neelum River. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:56, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi @ Uanfala: while I have agreed to some of your reverts of the link, I do not agree with this [1] revert. I understand the AK is linked before but why revert the Pakistan administered Kashmir link that is in the article body. FYI Pakistan-administered Kashmir is no longer a redirect but an article now. -- DBig Xrayᗙ 14:24, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Uanfala, I am not sure why the Devnagari script has been included for the names in this article. Other than WP:IS, Urdu is the official languages on both the sides of Kashmir as far as I know. -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 07:14, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Muzaffarabad is an integral part of India. Plz change that, otherwise this will not be good. Change it immediately Nkvishnoi2912 ( talk) 07:12, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@
Uanfala:I understand that you
have reverted my edit removing the non-latin script from the article’s infobox per
WP:NOINDIC because you believe the article is “mostly related to Pakistan.” But of the 250 kilometres long course of the
transboundary river, almost a third fourth is within Indian territory or along the line of control—the de facto India-Pakistan border in Kashmir (about a fifth in only Indian territory). About a third of the river’s basin is located inside India. Comparable with
Ravi and
Jhelum. Wouldn’t this mean that the river is significantly within the scope of Wikiproject India, even if not mostly or entirely? The article itself doesn’t seem to be written in a way that would make it seem like it is mostly related to Pakistan.
UnpetitproleX (
talk)
12:43, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
I have engaged in this topic area quite a bit, and can safely say that where script clutter arises removing them all is the best option and what is/should be generally followed. That was the intention of INDICSCRIPTS and its spirit extends beyond the India Project area.
As to the above comments when are where INDICSCRIPTS can be used: where the topic is not wholly/mostly India specific they can be including where other scripts are being so used (e. g. geo articles covering multiple countries such as here); but from what I have seen the best case usage (preventing script clutter) is to not use non-English scripts at all. Gotitbro ( talk) 13:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC)