This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Unnao gold treasure incident article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A fact from Unnao gold treasure incident appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 8 November 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
This article may be include soon in template: superstitions. Namo says Goverment starts digging after someone dreamt. I think its not the dream what kalam said. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.107.175.156 ( talk) 05:46, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Daundiya Kheda, Uttar Pradesh is still going to be there when Unnao gold treasure incident stops being news. Just my ₹ 0.02. Pete aka -- Shirt58 ( talk) 10:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Sections are created to group relevant info.
the lower 3/4 of the article is still full of statements like "He was rich landlord and a gold trader" which are not proper English. I have restored the cleanup tag on this basis. μηδείς ( talk) 16:22, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
This is not only bad English, it's garbled synthesis. This article is not about who founded the town. It's being in the text will prevent the DYK nomination from passing. I suggest the editor adding this material do so on the talk page before causing problems with the article. Reverting to prior ungrammatical sentences that have been corrected and removing tags is irresponsible editing. Adding substandard material and telling someone else to fix it is not only against policy--it's rude. μηδείς ( talk) 21:30, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
When the name of an article is the name of a natural thing, like fish, we use it in bold in the title. But when an article has a name we give it, we don't force the name into the title. We don't say an incident refers to an event. Titles refer to events. Incidents just happen, they don't refer to anything. In this case no bold title is used or desired. See WP:BOLDTITLE. μηδείς ( talk) 18:28, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Having said all the above, I'd be quite happy if the article was placed under the village name (whichever one is preferred by the district's government). You'll likely find more significant problems than MOS issues if you start digging through sources, in particular given the nature of the Indian press and of Raj sources. - Sitush ( talk) 18:47, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
I've just removed this 1857-related event. It is sourced to The Times of India (quite frequently referred to on WP as The Toiletpaper of India (!)). The ToI in turn is referring to an obscure book written by a seemingly equally obscure local historian.
There were many minor events during the 1857 rebellion and, of course, there were many local rulers, a decent few of whom took pseudo-royal titles/self-identified as royalty etc (a practice that still goes on today). The event in question has only a tangential relationship to the village and the royal who is named appears to be a minor among the minors. Of course, 1857 was a significant event and there is a tendency for people to try to get some reflected glory from it, just as they do with interminable arguments concerning the caste of A, B or C. I'd happily see the info reinstated in some form if it can be shown that the event has been covered by one of the many decent books that cover 1857, and that it had something more than a "someone hid in my village" significance, but I'm pretty sure that it is not. - Sitush ( talk) 19:12, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
The current title is pretty clunky ("gold treasure"?) and it is unclear what the "incident" exactlyrefers to (the dream? the GSI survey? the excavation?). How about ranaming it to " Unnao gold hunt" as per the cited India Today article. Other suggestions welcome, especially if the Indian press has already given the farce a catchy title. Abecedare ( talk) 21:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Sounds more like criticism, since all of those critics/comments sounds absurd compared to the research of Geological Survey of India. I think, such section can be removed. Bladesmulti ( talk) 04:21, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Unnao gold treasure incident article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A fact from Unnao gold treasure incident appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 8 November 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
This article may be include soon in template: superstitions. Namo says Goverment starts digging after someone dreamt. I think its not the dream what kalam said. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.107.175.156 ( talk) 05:46, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Daundiya Kheda, Uttar Pradesh is still going to be there when Unnao gold treasure incident stops being news. Just my ₹ 0.02. Pete aka -- Shirt58 ( talk) 10:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Sections are created to group relevant info.
the lower 3/4 of the article is still full of statements like "He was rich landlord and a gold trader" which are not proper English. I have restored the cleanup tag on this basis. μηδείς ( talk) 16:22, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
This is not only bad English, it's garbled synthesis. This article is not about who founded the town. It's being in the text will prevent the DYK nomination from passing. I suggest the editor adding this material do so on the talk page before causing problems with the article. Reverting to prior ungrammatical sentences that have been corrected and removing tags is irresponsible editing. Adding substandard material and telling someone else to fix it is not only against policy--it's rude. μηδείς ( talk) 21:30, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
When the name of an article is the name of a natural thing, like fish, we use it in bold in the title. But when an article has a name we give it, we don't force the name into the title. We don't say an incident refers to an event. Titles refer to events. Incidents just happen, they don't refer to anything. In this case no bold title is used or desired. See WP:BOLDTITLE. μηδείς ( talk) 18:28, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Having said all the above, I'd be quite happy if the article was placed under the village name (whichever one is preferred by the district's government). You'll likely find more significant problems than MOS issues if you start digging through sources, in particular given the nature of the Indian press and of Raj sources. - Sitush ( talk) 18:47, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
I've just removed this 1857-related event. It is sourced to The Times of India (quite frequently referred to on WP as The Toiletpaper of India (!)). The ToI in turn is referring to an obscure book written by a seemingly equally obscure local historian.
There were many minor events during the 1857 rebellion and, of course, there were many local rulers, a decent few of whom took pseudo-royal titles/self-identified as royalty etc (a practice that still goes on today). The event in question has only a tangential relationship to the village and the royal who is named appears to be a minor among the minors. Of course, 1857 was a significant event and there is a tendency for people to try to get some reflected glory from it, just as they do with interminable arguments concerning the caste of A, B or C. I'd happily see the info reinstated in some form if it can be shown that the event has been covered by one of the many decent books that cover 1857, and that it had something more than a "someone hid in my village" significance, but I'm pretty sure that it is not. - Sitush ( talk) 19:12, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
The current title is pretty clunky ("gold treasure"?) and it is unclear what the "incident" exactlyrefers to (the dream? the GSI survey? the excavation?). How about ranaming it to " Unnao gold hunt" as per the cited India Today article. Other suggestions welcome, especially if the Indian press has already given the farce a catchy title. Abecedare ( talk) 21:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Sounds more like criticism, since all of those critics/comments sounds absurd compared to the research of Geological Survey of India. I think, such section can be removed. Bladesmulti ( talk) 04:21, 24 October 2013 (UTC)