This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Extreme points of India on FLC nom =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
There is ongoing discussion on the talk page for the Manual of Style (including a series of polls) aimed at achieving consensus on presenting dates in American (August 15, 1947) or International (15 August 1947) format on an article by article basis. The poll gives full instructions, but briefly the choices are:
If you wish to participate or review the progress of discussion, you may follow this link. -- Pete ( talk) 09:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Back in June 2007 there was an Afd for TREAMIS World School, with an outcome that it would be saved to User:Jayvdb/Saved pages/TREAMIS World School, as I expected that more sources would arrive after the launch. Sadly I havent seen any news, or useful Indian webpages. The school has recently been approved for Cambridge International Examinations [1], so the school is definitely real and functioning; it just lacks reliable sources post-launch. John Vandenberg ( chat) 01:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I thought this AfD might benefit from the opinion of someone with specific knowledge of entertainment in the region and/or access to potential sources in order to counter any potential systematic bias. Guest9999 ( talk) 01:11, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I have put up a proposal to merge the article India (cat) with George W. Bush. Editors interested in expressing their opinion regarding the merger can comment at Talk:India (cat). Thank you. -- Ragib ( talk) 21:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello all...
An image used in the Mishing article, specifically Image:Assam popu div.jpg, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back when the rules around image uploading were less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploader was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.
You have your mission, take your camera and start clicking.-- Jordan 1972 ( talk) 22:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
There's wayyy too much bad news on the main page regarding India these days. I hope everyone's near and dear ones are fine. — Lost (talk) 15:44, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello Indian Wikipedians.
If you see my last edit I replaced the names Khalistan with India. This is because there's no country called "Khalistan" and Punjab stated there are today in India. Although many Sikhs fought for "Khalistan" there's no such thing as a land called that, or there has never been. Moreover the flag next to it is an Indian flag. These people will just revert my edits and I'm new here. Can you please help? There's misinformation in Wikipedia. Any unfamiliar reader would think where's Khalistan. It's only a conceptualized state. Please look into it. Thx. 218.111.28.100 ( talk) 18:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I would like to call for attention of all interested parties towards the article for Bigg Boss (Season 2) show, which is essentially an Indian remake of the international Big Brother (UK) format of reality shows. The article has been put into some shape and size (cf here) recently. However, in interest of quality content it could surely use some help from experienced editors and/or regular followers of the show. The wiki entry on the previous season Bigg Boss (Season 1) doesn't seem to help much, and surely doesn't set a benchmark, rather the vice versa may be true.
This article really needs the attention of someone who undertands Mughal history well. The tone of the article has changed tremendously over the past year. There is a concerted attmept being made to put forth the view that Akbar was a religious fanatic whereas what we have learnt in shcools is that he was very tolearnt. Could someone please take a look. -- Deepak D'Souza 10:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Hullo friends, I am working with Madras Presidency article. I was able to obtain census data and details of export, import, etc. for the period 1871-1901 from The Imperial Gazetteer of India of the year 1908. But, I don't have the data for the period 1911-1941. I need your help in this matter.If you do have district-wise census details for the Madras Presidency please add them to the table here.Thanks- Ravichandar My coffee shop 14:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello all...
An image used in the article, specifically Image:IMGP0134.JPG, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back when the rules around image uploading were less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploader was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.
You have your mission, take your camera and start clicking.-- Jordan 1972 ( talk) 21:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
User:Fundamental_metric_tensor is moving Indian place articles from "Place_name" to "Place_name,Indian state" format. Is it advisable to move them to this format unless there are more than one place with the same name ? I couldnt find a related guideline at Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Indic) . Comments ? -- Tinu Cherian - 11:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Someone has moved it to SRKV, which seems to be name of a college in Coimbatore. Can someone please undo it? Thanks. -- GDibyendu ( talk) 19:46, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
59.92.191.254 ( talk · contribs) has raised the issue of copyvio on Basawon Singh. [2] Could someone who is more knowledgeable than me about the topic (and the sources in question) look into this serious claim? Apparently, User:KickahaOta created the article for an anonymous user in July 2006, [3], but the copyvio in question may have been introduced by 202.78.167.30 ( talk · contribs) [4] in November. It's possible that reverting the additions of 202.78.167.30 may solve the problem, but I'm not sure. Thanks for any help you folks can offer. Viriditas ( talk) 08:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
L. Athira Krishna created by Infospeak and edited by Infospeak and Askdolly needs copy-edit. In my opinion, the editors are doing a dis-service to the artist, while probably thinking that they are doing a good job in putting as much information as they can gather from the web.
I have left messages on their talk pages, but they seem intent on removing the intro needed and copy-edit tags without any changes to the page. Can some of you help? VasuVR ( talk, contribs) 03:18, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that on Talk:Anant_Pai the template's "An appropriate infobox needs to be added to this article, or the current infobox needs to be updated. Please refer to the list of India-related infoboxes for further information." tag does not "nest" itself with the rest of the infobox. This may need to be fixed. WhisperToMe ( talk) 07:55, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Based on the various "Indo-other states relations" pages, I was wondering if anyone thought having an article India's relations with the Muslim world would be a good idea? I wrote a paper in school once about this. We can easily cover the Arab World, Central Asia and South East Asia. Then sub-saharan Africa can come up, and perhaps Albania/Bosnia at some point too.
As for the title what would be more appropriate "Indo-Islamic world realtions" or "Indo-Muslim world realtions"? Or perhaps "Relations between India and the Islamic world," or something to that effect? Lihaas ( talk) 14:24, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
There is some significant growth here with India's relations with the Islamic world. It is even more imporant in the light of a religious-based partition. You say "India has different views when it comes to troubled states like Pakistan and Bangladesh but friendly relations with Iran and Egypt to almost blank relations with central asian states;" but relations don't have to be positive, they could very well be negative. Also there is a burgeoning growth with the former-Soviet Central Asian states (it's got a decent amount in my paper). There is also institutional relationship. But I think instead of having seperate articles on small states that isn't going to be too big we could clump it into this as a section. Then the title for "Indo-XXX relations" can link to this. The same thing has been done for Iranian-Arab relations.
I'm not surw what the old thread said, but if we can agree on a name, then I can work on this. Lihaas ( talk) 20:35, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I think this is redundant, and also a bit POV-ish. Are their articles such as "India-Christian World relations"? "India-African relations"? We do have articles on relations with specific countries, and such info can be summarized into Foreign relations of India. India's relation with Maldives has little to do with her relations with Mauritania, so lumping together these into "relation with Islamic world" would be an artificial construct. Rather than making up "India's relation with <insert group name here>", I think the individual country specific articles should be developed. -- Ragib ( talk) 02:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Are you arguing about the semantics of the name or the concept? If it's the former, we can come up with something else, as I asked on here. If it's the latter, then I don't see how it can conflict with some of them. There are various Muslim countries where India has relations (although it is not always politics, by definition and in the article, as economic and other ties also constitute relations. even if the state doesn't work strongly on ties, there are natural ties that enhanced relations because of the presence of Indians, which in turn acts an impetus for the Indian state to strengthen relations (soft power, in a sense)). Again see the "Iran-Arab relations" page to understand what I'm saying. For the same reasons you are opposing this idea you would also oppose that, but the idea works. Where you have small countries it's not worth having a whole new page for a couple of lines.
And in what sense do you say there is very little politically with bangladesh? it's probably stronger (read: positive), at least at one point, than with pakistan. Lihaas ( talk) 01:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Kargil War has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
Hi all, there is an edit war regarding Bajrang Dal, Shiv Sena and Vishva Hindu Parishad. I believe, they are not declared militant parties. There are some users continuously reverting them and declaring as militant parties. I need a third opinion on it. Could you please say your words? Thanks, Shyam ( T/ C) 13:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
I will duplicate what I said on the Talk page, the word 'militant' is being used on the article in the sense of aggressiveness in speech and actions by the group members. Their actions fit the definition of militant, and there are sources for this too. Its not meant to present them as blood-thirsty terrorists. Just aggressive. Maybe is there a milder word we can use instead of militant? -- Abhishek Talk 14:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Just restore this version and end the discussion. Thank You. 59.95.112.145 ( talk) 15:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
I agree with other that 'militant' should not be overdramatized. However, in the case of the Bajrang Dal article, i don't see the absolute need to have it in the opening sentence. Having it mentioned in the lead is ok by me. If the term is removed altogether, with what should it be replaced? ' Communal'? -- Soman ( talk) 15:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Yes, there is, especially, first on raw numbers yes, secondly, taking into the account the records of the people involved in this debate, most of the people who are against calling it militant in Wikipedia's voice have a strong record of contribution, while the main dissenter, you, have engaged in sockpuppetry in the past to push POV. YellowMonkey ( click here to choose Australia's next top model!) 06:08, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Please pay attention to Reliable sources. According to the definition of militant, if an individual or party engaged in aggressive physical or verbal combat, they are called militant group. In this case, these parties are involved in many violence and communal/religious attacks in India. The recent attacks in Orissa, Karnataka and other South Indian states further underline their aggressive role as militant. Therefore, it is not a big issue or cause for much dispute in this case to use it in the intro itself which gives a clear image about them. -- Googlean Results 02:24, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Looks like Googlean ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) was blocked by YM for "persistent reverting on a variety of pages despite consensus at WT:INB." I guess here he was reverting a reliable source (?) part which was removed by a possibly a SPA editor named Blondlottswires ( contribs ) . I think it we should have better discussed before the block. -- Tinu Cherian - 06:39, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
More 'heads ' roll down :) on these articles. User:Knownot and User:The Firewall are indefinite blocked . Strangely User:Googlean had been also blocked by User:Wknight94 hastily until the mistake was rectified by Nishkid . Another admin error hah? . Finally YM protected Bajrang Dal indefinitely. -- Tinu Cherian - 05:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Friends,I observed that most of the caste-lists in Wikipedia are made of POV. Most of the names in such lists don't abide by Wikipedia:Notability.
Hence, I propose that only names of individuals who have Wikipedia articles be listed. I found an implementation of this thing in List of Parsis and found it to be good. I've implemented it in List of Iyers and to some extent in List of Iyengars. I am waiting for your nod before implementing it in other articles. Thanks- Ravichandar My coffee shop 17:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Operation Meghdoot, Siachen Glacier and Siachen conflict are frequently vandalised by PAKISTANIs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.77.61 ( talk) 18:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
I wish to highlight the outstanding actions by User:JuJube for reverting Pro-Pakistani vandalism on operation meghdoot n siachen conflict. -- 60.50.70.65 ( talk) 11:40, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Please read the so-called 'anti-Christian violence' articles. Users Recordfreenow, Vvarkey, Lihaas, Gabrielthursday, Otolemur_crassicaudatus, Googlean, SkyWalker, Honest_skeptic, Innocent_editor, Pk1122, have been using these Articles for blatant anti-India propaganda. They are backed by some Admins as well. It is likely that being Christian priests and missionaries, they have financially contributed to Wiki and so, Wiki cannot act against them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.68.98.197 ( talk) 19:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated the above AfD as WP:OR & WP:HOAX. Comments from project members are welcome here. -- GPPande talk!
Our List of Indian districts has recently lost FL status, and I am trying to revive it. I created this page: User:Nichalp/districts with all the data. But the number of districts are not tallying with the official number 610. Can anyone help verify the missing/redundant districts for each state? =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:53, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I was proposing a merger between the insignificant common minimum programme (in terms of content) and United Progressive Alliance. If you anyone has opinions can you discuss them on the UPA talk page? Lihaas ( talk) 20:46, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Sarvagnya ( talk · contribs) has been repeatedly adding the following links accompanied with the template
to States Reorganisation Act and Marathi nationalism. The above mentioned user has been reverted by User:Utcursch, User:BillCJ and me. But they have been re-added. Are they applicable per WP:EL? Comments?-- KnowledgeHegemony Part2 08:52, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
I've just been trying to clean up Fundamental Rights in India, which was listed as a GA and then had someone complain there were seven fundamental rights listed, rather than the more popularly accepted six...
Unfortunately, I've got to the point where my not having any background in the topic is a bit problematic. I've corrected the worst bits, and tried to patch up the confusion over quite what the 86th Amendment did, but I'm still at a loss as to what to do with sections like this. It might potentially need rolled back to the GA version and working forward again... anyone with expertise in the area feel up to the task? Shimgray | talk | 09:31, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Bhumihar-- Tznkai ( talk) 13:35, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
This page ( Battle of Longewala) is being vandalised by Pakistani editors. Information being removed. Please keep an eye on it. Regards, Joe.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.73.46 ( talk • contribs)
In lines of
Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads , I propose to start WP:Indian Roads and Transport, a workgroup of WP:INDIA. Thoughts ? Any one interested ?
This will be a common workgroup for Indian roads, highways, transport, railways , transportation in India etc --
Tinu
Cherian - 07:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I like the sound of the proposal but why not just WP:Indian Transport to begin with? Once this grows then it would be sensible to create further task forces such as roads or railways The Bald One White cat 16:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Given the size of India even a project on Indian railways is massive one in scope so I'm all for it, providing there are enough editors to sustain it in the long term. Good luck with that The Bald One White cat 19:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
What about ?
--
Tinu
Cherian - 08:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
-- Tinu Cherian - 08:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
-- Tinu Cherian - 11:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
2 more: Sports (to take care of hockey, basketball etc) and Science (ISRO, BARC etc.) =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:57, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Which is better ? Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian education or Wikipedia:WikiProject Education in India ?? I feel Wikipedia:WikiProject Education in India is better.
-- Tinu Cherian - 06:23, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Another other name changes needed? Ganeshji / help me with the {{ WP India}} parameters -- Tinu Cherian - 11:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
-- Tinu Cherian - 14:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
I am working on the creation of the workgroups except the one with there is no naming consensus yet.
-- Tinu Cherian - 09:03, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Happy Diwali to all! =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:50, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Recently noticed some red category links in some talk pages and followed it up. Found that there are some categories created with capitalization issues, while the template {{ WP India}} associates the talk pages with slightly different category name. This lead to some clean-up (speedy renames of categories) to bring them in line with templates' auto processing. A common difference is in the word "Unknown" in categories like B-Class Indian television articles of Unknown importance, the category for which is created with unknown (lower case u). Hence the category stays empty, while the articles get associated with non-existing category with capital U.
Another key difference I found is in the Category-Class categories, like Category:Category-Class Tamil Nadu pages. There is no such category, but all the 91 Tamil Nadu pages get associated with it (as of 28 October, 9:30 AM GMT). There is a category Category:Category-Class Tamil Nadu articles, which does not have any pages in it. On further search for other Category-Class categories, I found that most other projects in Wikipedia use articles, like say Category:Category-Class Adelaide articles, (probably based on which our categories were created), but our templates populate the pages category as shown above in example of Tamil Nadu.
Pages seem more appropriate, as such Categories are not articles - they are list of categories automatically associated for the Indian Wikiproject. Conformance with other Wikiproject conventions would mean that our templates be modified to associate Category-class tagged talk pages with articles instead of pages (is this simple or not - experienced Wikipedia editors would know, I guess). The easier alternative is to stick to pages and just Speedy rename the Category-class categories that end with articles to pages. Please repl with your viewpoints and consensus will help the project team to address appropriately.
As an aside, for those who are not familiar with these and see other Indian categories in the Wanted categories list, like Category:WikiProject India (sports) articles, please see the Template:WP India. These are normal and for gathering statistics before creating new sub-groups, like the Sports sub-group being created by Tinucherian this week. VasuVR ( talk, contribs) 11:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
The two templates {{ Indianmusic}} and {{ Indian Music}} have very similar names, but quite different content. The second one seems to be oriented towards Classical music only and hence name is misleading. Rename to something like {{ Indian classical music}} ? VasuVR ( talk, contribs) 16:44, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
A fellow is going around adding all these things along the lines of "Padma Shri Rahul Dravid" and "Bharat Ratna Sunil Gavaskar" and what have you. Are they proper prefix titles like "Sir Donald Bradman" or "Sir Syed Ahmed Khan" or just the name of an award. After all, if someone wins a world title we aren't going to call them "World Champion Vishwananathan Anand" at the top of the page. YellowMonkey ( click here to choose Australia's next top model!) 05:40, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Article 18 prohibits the State to confer titles on anybody....exemption in case of military and academic distinctions....
The Supreme court has held that these awards(BR, PV, PB, PS etc) are not titles within the meaning of article 18 and if any awardee uses the award as a title by suffixing or prefixing it with his or her name , he should forfeit ht award(Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC770)
Kiruba Shankar, a Chennai blogger, is organizing a Wikipedia Academy at Chennai on 22 November 2008. This is similar to the iCommons Academy at Johannesburg. From the website, "Wikipedia Academy is an initiative to encourage Wikipedia readers to contribute back to the online encyclopedia by editing and writing. Less than 0.1% of wikipedia users edit or add information and this is an initiative to encourage more users to actively contribute. As part of the initiative, we start off with a two hour, hands-on workshop taught by people experienced in Wikis."
If you are intestered, please sign up here. I hope this concept will spread to other cities and increase the awareness of wikipedia in India. Regards, Ganeshk ( talk) 13:23, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Abhinav Bharat and Islamic Security Force-Indian Mujahideen are starting to show some potency. Heck, the former is more than 50 years old, founded originally by Savarkar, then disbanded in 1952 (or so it is said), and coming up again this. See the west india and guwahati bombings for these two, Template:Campaignbox India terrorism Lihaas ( talk) 09:49, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Some people (example: Paxse) are disambiguating Indian weirdly, for example, in Johnny Lever article, to Indian (film). Within last few days, I saw someone changing '[[India]]n state of x' to '[[Indian (disambiguation)|Indian]] state of x'. Since, a lot of changes like these have been made now, I thought that it is important to bring this to the notice of this project.-- GDibyendu ( talk) 05:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
The scoping of what constitutes British India (vis-a-vis British Raj etc) is ongoing at Talk:British India. Please weigh in if you have opinions on the scope. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I recently stumbled upon Virachilai. I think it is talking about a real place in India, but it needs a lot of work. Any help is appreciated. Dragons flight ( talk) 01:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Just a head's up: Delhi will be on the main page tomorrow. I'm sure we are going to get a lot of comments on the talk. =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:20, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Wow, this is great. Delhi will finally be in the main page. Will try to keep an eye, as much as possible. Thanks Nichalp for the info. I have not read the whole article for many months. Really don't well how it has evolved since it became FA.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 15:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I have started a thread here to check if Filmfare Awards can be made recurring items on ITN as Grammy Awards & Academy Awards. Please pen down your thoughts. -- GPPande talk! 10:45, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
I assumed that BE is the standard for India-related articles as mentioned on the India project page style manual itself. The Delhi article, however, is replete with Americanisms. I would like to have a clarification on the issue. Maquahuitl talk! 07:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Do we have pages for these? I haven't seen it for the recent ones. I think we certainly can. I could start some, but for the historical elections we can tag it on to the main page of WP India as a to do. (that certainly helped getting the LS pages up) Lihaas ( talk) 08:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Can someone shed some light on how to do this? Recently {{ Hdeity infobox}} was vandalized. I have removed the additional text. How long does it take for pages to show the latest version? Is there some way to force related pages' caches to be refreshed? Any other Do and Don't in such scenarios? Thank you in advance. VasuVR ( talk, contribs) 04:38, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
I want to use one of these photographs here in the "Transport and Communication" section in the article on Madras Presidency. The photograph is of Chennai bus at a petrol pump and was taken in 1920. The photo would be of great value to the article.However, when i click the photo open I find a copyright notice in the name of Vintage Vignettes despite the fact that the photo is in public domain according to Indian copyright laws. Is it permissible to use the image?
I als wish to know if it is permissible to use images from the Hindu Photo Library which are in public domain as per Indian copyright laws. Thanks- Ravichandar My coffee shop 07:13, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Template:Discrimination Bihar has been nominated for deletion and been relisted again to generate more discussion. Kindly participate in the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Cheers Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 13:47, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Please do add your knowledge of the best words that the language you speak offers, to this page: User:Lupin/badwords. Now there, I can see a smile on everyone's face. :) =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:18, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Dear colleagues, Russian Wikipedia edition is planning a week of India on Nov 7-17, 2008. During this period, the Theme Week project participants and other Wikipedia users will try to cover as many India-related topics as possible. Your contribution to this project would be very much appreciated. The Deceiver ( talk) 08:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
NIIT article was deleted shortly by an admin. I feel it might be a relevant article for WP:IND, any suggestions? -- STTW (talk) 13:17, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
This article Sikh extremism is under attack from religious zealots. Inspite of having so many references, the version of article is riddled with tags in order to make it look bad and uncredible: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sikh_extremism&oldid=250653732
I have cleaned up the article, but I'm afraid that this version won't long last as Canadian gaddars would vandalize it: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sikh_extremism&oldid=250677918
Requesting all secular editors to keep a watch. 59.164.100.127 ( talk) 17:23, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Back in September 2008, somebody nominated this article to FAR without notifying this project. The article was subsequently demoted due to lack of supporting editors as can be seen from here. Only 2 votes came in and both were to remove the FA status. Article is currently unassessed. I feel the article is quite elaborate and with little more help from editors it's former glory can be restored. -- GPPande talk! 12:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I request all Indian editors to keep a watch on these extremist Canadian Gaddar (Khalistani) editors:
Atulsnischal ( talk) 06:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Special:Contributions/Roadahead —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.164.186.29 ( talk) 16:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
The ip also tagged Citedfrequently ( talk · contribs) as user:Hkelkar's suspected sockpuppet. -- KnowledgeHegemony Part2 16:34, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
I apply for A class for this failed FA candidate, currently GA. I did not know where else to apply? I have addressed issues about the reliability of references, simply by replacing them with other references. User:Alastair Haines and User:Anishshah19 have graciously agreed to look into the article for refining the text and doing a great job there. I would love to hear from Project India, about the what improvement is needed in the article (especially if the references used now can be considered RS) and welcome anyone who wants to improve the article herself/himself. After the copyedit, i am rethinking a FAC.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Redtigerxyz ( talk • contribs) 13:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Indian Railways has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured quality. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Dabomb87 ( talk) 23:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Asked this question in district workgroup discussion page, but nobody replied so far. So, asking it here. The articles like "Districts of X" (where X is a state/UT of India): shouldn't they be like list-type articles(compare: List of counties in Arizona, which is an FL)? In that case, should we move "Districts of X" to "List of districts of X" or similar? Thanks.-- GDibyendu ( talk) 07:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I came across the article Mannargudi Raju Sastri, which is desperately in need of help from someone familiar with Hinduism topics. I suspect large portions of the article are plagiarized (I removed the blatant stuff that I was able to find), and aside from that, the article is just very poorly written, completely unreferenced, and not wikified. I have tagged it with cleanup templates and left some grumpy notes at Talk, but that's about all I can do, because I'm very unfamiliar with the subject; if anyone is willing to come rescue this article, it would be greatly appreciated. — Politizer talk/ contribs 08:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Hindu terrorism has been unfairly deleted citing CSD G4 as the reason.
However, CSD G4 is invalid since it was very different from the version that was deleted earlier. It was not substantially identical to the deleted version (which is a necessary condition for deletion). The term "Hindu terrorism" has become very common after the arrests of Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and http://www.google.co.in/search?q=Lieutenant+Colonel+Srikant+Purohit. Here is the proof: http://news.google.co.in/archivesearch?q=%22hindu+terrorism%22&hl=en&ned=in&sa=N&sugg=d&as_user_ldate=2008&as_user_hdate=2008&lnav=d0&ldrange=1990,2007
Requesting all secular editors to keep a watch. 59.164.100.127 ( talk) 17:26, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I think the deletion is good. I read the article on Islamic terrorism, and it mentions that that Islamic terrorism is religious terrorism by those whose motivations are rooted in their interpretations of Islam. Do we have similar sources for a similar interpretation that merits a "Hindu terrorism" by seeking justification in religious books? Too premature to list such an article at this stage. Hindu extremism on the lines of Islamic Extremism might be a more apt title. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:09, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
According to Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#POV_forks,
A POV fork is an attempt to evade NPOV policy by creating a new article about a certain subject that is already treated in an article, often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts. This is generally considered unacceptable. The generally accepted policy is that all facts and major points of view on a certain subject are treated in one article.
So this extremist aspect can be described in Hindutva/ Hindu nationalism, that is, all facts and major points of view on a certain subject are treated in one article. -- KnowledgeHegemony Part2 12:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I thought 'Hindu Terrorism' was a POV fork. But then I see this in the New York Times this morning. I'm not sure it deserves a separate article, yet, but the term seems to exist independently now, and does need a paragraph somewhere - in Hindu nationalism for example. One has to be careful how though. By putting Hindu Terrorism into Hindu Nationalism you end up associating the two terms and nationalism and terrorism do mean different things. Perhaps a separate section that deals with the extreme elements of Hindu Nationalism (I'm not sure if the Violence subsection is appropriate because sporadic violence and terrorist cells are different things). -- Regents Park ( bail out your boat) 15:21, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Lemme see if I get this correct:
Correct? -- Deepak D'Souza 04:41, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
See here.-- GDibyendu ( talk) 09:32, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi - I'm working with User:Nichalp on restoring FA status for this article and I have started a peer review - I request all to review the article and help improve it. Thank you, Shiva (Visnu) 07:24, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I believe this list has now a potential to be an FL soon. Need comments/suggestions to understand what it may be lacking and what other improvements may be required. Please see here: peer review. Thanks. -- GDibyendu ( talk) 09:46, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I was wondering if any editors who have time on their hands can weigh in on the discussion here? The article is currently protected and I've been trying to start a discussion in the talk page to improve it. My changes (mainly surrounding cleaning up grammatical and spelling mistakes, and removing the more glaring NPOV/OR/PEACOCK violations) were being consistently reverted and I've tried to get a dialogue going on the talk page. However I'm being constantly accused by a few editors there of having a hidden agenda amongst some other things, and no one seems to be inclined to actually discuss improvement to the article. One of the main issues is that certain sentences (which seem POV, but are actually referenced) have been inserted into the article. They are definitely referenced but provide no information other than fluff. I think some of these could be rewritten, or just removed outright. Any input and help will be appreciated! Thanks! -- vi5in [talk] 19:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
I have updated the task force assessment stats table to show the task forces row-wise. You can see it here Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Assessment/Statistics. The table is now sortable; sort the FA column to see who is generating the most FAs. Thanks GDibyendu for the suggestion. Regards, Ganeshk ( talk) 12:54, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Somebody created an article by this title, which I think may be about the Cheraman Juma Masjid, which we already have an article about. Can anyone confirm that the Tamil-language article is indeed about this particular mosque? If so, we can transwiki the Tamil article to the Tamil Wikipedia and leave a redirect here. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:22, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Hope this helps. Probably it should have been posted to Tamil Wikipedia, if it does not exist there? VasuVR ( talk, contribs) 09:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
There are several issues with Template:Middle kingdoms of India - the biggest problem is that it does not properly represent kingdoms which lasted for long periods of time. I've flagged this issue up on the the talk page. I'd be grateful for input on how the issue can be addressed. -- Arvind ( talk) 15:40, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
I hope all our brethren in Mumbai are safe. Shiva (Visnu) 23:47, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi friends, I need the Telugu transliteration of Panaganti Ramarayaningaru in the article Raja of Panagal. Could anyone help???- Ravichandar My coffee shop 02:24, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Jimmy Wales and two other wikimedia foundation members will be in Thiruvananthapuram in connection with the 2nd International conference on Freedom in Computing, Development and Culture being held there. Re-Posting the invitation that was made in the mailing list by User:Jyothis:
All,
We would like to let you all know that Jimmy wales and two other wikimedia foundation members will be in Thiruvananthapuram this December as a part of fsfs conference. The fsfs and space-kerala organizers has provided an opportunity for malayalam wikipedians to participate, conduct a session/panel discussion and meet Jimmy soon after. We would like to welcome if anyone is interested in joining. We may even plan an indian wiki meet there, if there is enough participation from other wikipedias.
Thanks,
Jyothis.
-- thunderboltz (TALK) 18:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
I suspect that Sunil R Nair is an article on a non-notable personality - also, all its major contributors are a new user and an IP; couldn't see substantial Google hits for the notability either. Could someone please investigate this and PROD or SPEEDY or AFD this? Have been away for too long from WP :( and hence do not know the current guidelines for investigating deletion. -- Gurubrahma ( talk) 18:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
I started the article Gangadhar Appa Burande. There are two Marathi articles online, which I think have some useful material for the wikiarticle, but I can't read them, http://www.esakal.com/esakal/10012008/TajyabatmyaMaharashtraMumbaiPuneNationalInternationalAurangabad3B748B8FCF.htm?article and http://maharashtratimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3548246.cms . Any help would be appreciated, for example was October 1, 2008 the date of death? -- Soman ( talk) 11:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
List of states and union territories of India by population is nominated at Featured list candidate. You may leave your comments here -- GPPande talk! 14:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Why is the project not using the C class rating? By skipping this rating, articles will wind up being correctly classed as 'C' by other projects that have an interest while this project would be rating them as start. That is confusing. Vegaswikian ( talk) 18:41, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Any further thoughts on having the C-class rating? Further debate solicited. =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
<reindent> These are my reasons why we need to have a C-class:
To conclude, I strongly believe we must assess the requirements of a C-class article for the needs of WP India, rather than digressing from the topic by making irrelevant conclusions without the availability of factual data. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:54, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Here are my ratings:
Grade | Details | Example |
---|---|---|
FA | All our articles should be FA class eventually | India |
A | Criteria: Has undergone a formal peer review, and comments have been addressed. A-grade articles can also be self-assessed by experienced FA writers (>4 FAs) for articles currently on FAC. Ideally, the article should progress from a GA. Usually, the only thing separating a A-class from FA is the quality of prose. A class articles also have suitable media (such as charts, photographs, and maps) that help in the understanding of the subject. | Vithoba |
GA | Meets all B class criteria. Reviewed independently by GA assessors. | Fundamental Rights in India |
B | Meets the six basic criteria for encyclopaedicness. Contentious claims in the article are referenced, has no grammatical issues, has a definite flow, and touches on all topics expected for a reader to gain an understanding of the subject. In addition, it touches on all sections recommended by a task force such as Indian cities. All infoboxes and tables are present. | History of Mumbai |
C | The article is not comprehensive, suffers from poor prose, but has the relevant information to gain an overview of the subject. The article needs a general clean-up, and needs sources to progress to B-class. A rewrite is necessary to focus on encyclopedicity. | Indian Army, Agra, Nagaland |
Start | In proportion to the availability of sources and scoping, a start class article may vary in length. A start class article might for example only talk about the history and geography of a place. The article may need infoboxes, templates, tables and pictures. | Gateway of India |
Stub | Basic information on the topic. See WP:STUB | various |
Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 10:38, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
<reindent>
Section break inserted bu User:G.A.S to facilitate easier editing]] Well the fact that WP:AUS has 110 FAs and 176 GAs doesn't necessarily mean that it is because of any particular administrative structure in place, eg a C-class assessment. If India wins this week, that doesn't mean that that Cricket Australia should engage in the type of hte politics that the BCCI does. Anyway, if this reasoning is going to be used, then don't use C-class because the rate of growth in FA-Class Australia articles has slowed up since C-class was introduced. I think the real reason that the FA production slowed down is because 4-5 authors have been responsible for about 60% of the FAs this year and they have all slowed down on writing recently, for differing reasons. YellowMonkey ( click here to choose Australia's next top model!) 06:51, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Why not start a seperate A-class review department for such articles which are midway between GA and FA. Like the PR department, Assesement department etc...I had also given an article ( Mangalore) for A-class status before which was a GA and a failed FAC. But the procedure and the reasons for not promoting it to A-status was not very much appreciated by me. The next time I gave it for FAC, it got promoted to FA with almost no changes at all. But it was not promoted to A-class. Kensplanet Talk Contributions 13:27, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Where to come in? I have been arguing the toss over this at mil hist, as a visitor. To try to sum up what I think are their views, they are mostly concerned with articles they consider of high quality, and potential candidates for same. As I have seen it argued, they are not concerned that the current system means most articles end up as 'stub' or 'start', with a lot of quite usefull and informative articles ending as 'start'. My own view is that this does not help visitors to wiki, or even us. Wiki needs a good grading system for the benefit of readers: it is no good having any system which lumps most of the articles in the same category.
Mil hist, and others of like mind, have made matters worse by continuously pushing up required standards for a grade. They currently insist upon more severe criteria than the assessment team. I think this is daft. Firstly, the assessment team created standards for their own purposes in sorting articles. Having said what they wanted, they asked others to help. Deciding to use a different standard then theirs is just unhelpfull complication. Secondly, the reason for introducing a C grade seems to have a lot to do with this 'grade inflation', because more and more articles are being pushed out of B downwards. So, to satisfy those who want a stricter B, someone introduced C. But now having created the problem, some are opposing the proposed solution. The system currently is top-heavy with high grades. In a system Fa A GA B Start Stub, you might expect stub was the bottom 20%, start the next 20%, and so forth. A quick look at your statistics says you have stub 75%, start 24%, B 2% , top four grades 0.4% combined (approximately, yes I know it doesn't add up). This also says that you should be looking to find C class articles amongst ths 'start' block, not by demoting any currently in 'B'. A better solution would very probably be a radical downwards re-definition of the criteria for the top five grades. Your own statistics show that even B, the lowest current grade with any meaningfull differentiation, is very hard to reach. Wholesale change may not be practicable, but for the present a C grade is a helpfull addition. Riddle me this: If the top five grades are only 2.5% of wiki, how does this help a reader know if what he is reading is a good article? 97.5% of articles are being listed as bad. (And I know perfectly well some of those are pretty good. For example, mil hist is littered with good articles which have been failed for lack of references) At present, the greatest number of articles usefull to readers are in the 'start' or even 'stub' section. Does that seem sensible? Sandpiper ( talk) 20:07, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Re: adoption of C-class in WP Aus My view is that using C class has been an underwhelming yawn. At first I opposed the idea on it just complicating things for no good reason and I still feel this is true. At the same time I am slowly rating some articles with C class, especially when they don't have appropriate citations from reliable sources.
Using C class doesn't provide any quick fixes so it is difficult to discern any real benefits. At first there was a lot of confusion about criteria. There is still of lot of inconsistency between types and many articles rated start are probably C class. However other editors who do more assessing or work on specific sub projects that I am not familiar with, may find may find good reasons and have other opinions contrary to mine. So in summary, adopting C class might have some benefits and probably some confusion. You might want to look at WP:VG/A, who also adopted C class. - Shiftchange ( talk) 22:48, 2 November 2008 (UTC) Reproduced from my talk page. Ncmvocalist ( talk) 02:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Copied from WP AUS =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:42, 3 November 2008 (UTC) <begincopy>
</endcopy>
I held off jumping into this discussion, as I'm deep in work on the Version 0.7 release. So, please forgive me, I've only glanced over the above comments, but I wanted to give you something of the "big picture" impression from the 1.0 team perspective. Prior to the vote, I did not have strong opinions one way or the other - I could see the value of C-Class, but I also wondered if the change was worth the trouble. I'm now in favour of C-Class.
Overall, my own prediction is that within a few years all projects will be using C-Class anyway. I may be wrong, but I think having a uniform system benefits everyone. And as the number of offline releases begins to take off - I expect us to be producing dozens of different releases by 2011 - I think projects will want to make sure they reap the full benefit of that. Walkerma ( talk) 17:33, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm following up on a request of a user for the opinion of MilHist people to comment on this debate. The issue that others have brought up concerning the use of C-Class stems from the wide range of articles that the project encompasses. Many articles have a gap in the eyes of some people. Others view this gap as an area for improvement to an article. The use of the C-Class has also been viewed as another thing to muddle up the project as evidenced in the debate. There is an small majority against the use of it, as evidenced by the debate that lasted a matter of months. In the end, it seems that the C-Class proposal could eventually pass as more people are realizing that there are many benefits to having it. Personally, I'm all for the use of the class, as I was one who helped to start the most recent debate. Good luck in the debate and I will happily answer any questions that anyone might have. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 23:08, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
We'll we've got inputs from proponents of the C-class and against the usage of C-class. In addition, we have got inputs from WP:1.0. No further significant inputs have been added for a while, so I think we need to make a decision while the issue is still ongoing. Please indicate your choice based on your understanding of the comments above.
Result: Seems majority support C class addition for WP:IND project. Can somebody tell how to close this poll and take this forward to implement in WP:IND? -- GPPande talk! 09:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Clearly, we're not in a position of strong consensus to support the original proposal. So it's time to consider alternative proposals so that we have a strong consensus for something.
One of the concerns is that an undue amount of time will be spent on assessment through C-class, while one of the other concerns was that a lack of C-class is not in line with other projects. We should consider a broader measure then.
Rather than use the editorial team's vague criteria for C-class, let's try a different approach. Currently our start article criteria is as follows. The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element. For example an article on Africa might cover the geography well, but be weak on history and culture. Has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including the following: multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic, a subheading that fully treats an element of the topic, multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article, a particularly useful picture or graphic (optional).
Implementing a C-class that uses the following criteria would be useful: The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should be free from major grammatical errors, and have a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. It should also contain supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams, and a section dedicated to providing references to sources of information used.
Our B-class could stay similar to what it is currently without requiring a full checklist: Commonly the highest article grade that is assigned outside a more formal review process, but requires some further work to reach Good Article standards. Satisfies all C-class criteria, but also has a majority of the material needed for a comprehensive article. At minimum, it should also have some references to reliable sources. Nonetheless, it has some gaps or missing elements or references, needs editing for language usage or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright, Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) or No Original Research (NOR).
GA criteria would then add four extra criteria in addition to coverage: namely, MOS compliance, in-line citations, references to all sources, and NPOV. Thoughts? Ncmvocalist ( talk) 09:00, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I've opened this section early; if there's no further comments in the above section, I think we're ready to get the ball rolling on the alternate proposal. Ncmvocalist ( talk) 12:45, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
i just created Indo-Palestinian relations and Indo-Irish relations but I have no pic in ths regard. First of all it would be great to create a map. But then some sort of relation with the countries would be great. maybe eamon de valera or yasser arafat in india. Lihaas ( talk) 02:56, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Big thumbs up for Nichalp ( talk · contribs) to get this to FA status. This seems to be the shortest FA nomination to pass successfully. :-) -- GPPande talk! 14:30, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Kingdom of Mysore for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Cary Bass with Wikimedia Foundation had posted the following message to the Wikimediaindia-l list:
Hello everyone,
Sue Gardner is going to be in India next week for several things, Bangalore and Chennai, and would like to get in touch with some local Wikimedians in and near those areas for meeting and meetup. We are especially interested in those who are interested in the chapter but anyone with any involvement is welcome.
If you would respond to me off list ( Special:Emailuser/Cary_Bass ) I would be most grateful, whether yourself or other Wikimedians you may know.
Yours very truly
Cary Bass Volunteer Coordinator Wikimedia Foundation
Posting here for wider audience. Regards, Ganeshk ( talk) 02:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I need a picture of the Raja of Panagal for incorporation in the Raja of Panagal article. I have searched all over the net and was not able to find a single one. If at all someone here has a picture in his/her personal collection, we humbly request you to contribute to the project. Thanks- Ravichandar My coffee shop 15:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Extreme points of India on FLC nom =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
There is ongoing discussion on the talk page for the Manual of Style (including a series of polls) aimed at achieving consensus on presenting dates in American (August 15, 1947) or International (15 August 1947) format on an article by article basis. The poll gives full instructions, but briefly the choices are:
If you wish to participate or review the progress of discussion, you may follow this link. -- Pete ( talk) 09:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Back in June 2007 there was an Afd for TREAMIS World School, with an outcome that it would be saved to User:Jayvdb/Saved pages/TREAMIS World School, as I expected that more sources would arrive after the launch. Sadly I havent seen any news, or useful Indian webpages. The school has recently been approved for Cambridge International Examinations [1], so the school is definitely real and functioning; it just lacks reliable sources post-launch. John Vandenberg ( chat) 01:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I thought this AfD might benefit from the opinion of someone with specific knowledge of entertainment in the region and/or access to potential sources in order to counter any potential systematic bias. Guest9999 ( talk) 01:11, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
I have put up a proposal to merge the article India (cat) with George W. Bush. Editors interested in expressing their opinion regarding the merger can comment at Talk:India (cat). Thank you. -- Ragib ( talk) 21:08, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello all...
An image used in the Mishing article, specifically Image:Assam popu div.jpg, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back when the rules around image uploading were less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploader was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.
You have your mission, take your camera and start clicking.-- Jordan 1972 ( talk) 22:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
There's wayyy too much bad news on the main page regarding India these days. I hope everyone's near and dear ones are fine. — Lost (talk) 15:44, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello Indian Wikipedians.
If you see my last edit I replaced the names Khalistan with India. This is because there's no country called "Khalistan" and Punjab stated there are today in India. Although many Sikhs fought for "Khalistan" there's no such thing as a land called that, or there has never been. Moreover the flag next to it is an Indian flag. These people will just revert my edits and I'm new here. Can you please help? There's misinformation in Wikipedia. Any unfamiliar reader would think where's Khalistan. It's only a conceptualized state. Please look into it. Thx. 218.111.28.100 ( talk) 18:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I would like to call for attention of all interested parties towards the article for Bigg Boss (Season 2) show, which is essentially an Indian remake of the international Big Brother (UK) format of reality shows. The article has been put into some shape and size (cf here) recently. However, in interest of quality content it could surely use some help from experienced editors and/or regular followers of the show. The wiki entry on the previous season Bigg Boss (Season 1) doesn't seem to help much, and surely doesn't set a benchmark, rather the vice versa may be true.
This article really needs the attention of someone who undertands Mughal history well. The tone of the article has changed tremendously over the past year. There is a concerted attmept being made to put forth the view that Akbar was a religious fanatic whereas what we have learnt in shcools is that he was very tolearnt. Could someone please take a look. -- Deepak D'Souza 10:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Hullo friends, I am working with Madras Presidency article. I was able to obtain census data and details of export, import, etc. for the period 1871-1901 from The Imperial Gazetteer of India of the year 1908. But, I don't have the data for the period 1911-1941. I need your help in this matter.If you do have district-wise census details for the Madras Presidency please add them to the table here.Thanks- Ravichandar My coffee shop 14:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello all...
An image used in the article, specifically Image:IMGP0134.JPG, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back when the rules around image uploading were less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploader was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.
You have your mission, take your camera and start clicking.-- Jordan 1972 ( talk) 21:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
User:Fundamental_metric_tensor is moving Indian place articles from "Place_name" to "Place_name,Indian state" format. Is it advisable to move them to this format unless there are more than one place with the same name ? I couldnt find a related guideline at Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Indic) . Comments ? -- Tinu Cherian - 11:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Someone has moved it to SRKV, which seems to be name of a college in Coimbatore. Can someone please undo it? Thanks. -- GDibyendu ( talk) 19:46, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
59.92.191.254 ( talk · contribs) has raised the issue of copyvio on Basawon Singh. [2] Could someone who is more knowledgeable than me about the topic (and the sources in question) look into this serious claim? Apparently, User:KickahaOta created the article for an anonymous user in July 2006, [3], but the copyvio in question may have been introduced by 202.78.167.30 ( talk · contribs) [4] in November. It's possible that reverting the additions of 202.78.167.30 may solve the problem, but I'm not sure. Thanks for any help you folks can offer. Viriditas ( talk) 08:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
L. Athira Krishna created by Infospeak and edited by Infospeak and Askdolly needs copy-edit. In my opinion, the editors are doing a dis-service to the artist, while probably thinking that they are doing a good job in putting as much information as they can gather from the web.
I have left messages on their talk pages, but they seem intent on removing the intro needed and copy-edit tags without any changes to the page. Can some of you help? VasuVR ( talk, contribs) 03:18, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that on Talk:Anant_Pai the template's "An appropriate infobox needs to be added to this article, or the current infobox needs to be updated. Please refer to the list of India-related infoboxes for further information." tag does not "nest" itself with the rest of the infobox. This may need to be fixed. WhisperToMe ( talk) 07:55, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Based on the various "Indo-other states relations" pages, I was wondering if anyone thought having an article India's relations with the Muslim world would be a good idea? I wrote a paper in school once about this. We can easily cover the Arab World, Central Asia and South East Asia. Then sub-saharan Africa can come up, and perhaps Albania/Bosnia at some point too.
As for the title what would be more appropriate "Indo-Islamic world realtions" or "Indo-Muslim world realtions"? Or perhaps "Relations between India and the Islamic world," or something to that effect? Lihaas ( talk) 14:24, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
There is some significant growth here with India's relations with the Islamic world. It is even more imporant in the light of a religious-based partition. You say "India has different views when it comes to troubled states like Pakistan and Bangladesh but friendly relations with Iran and Egypt to almost blank relations with central asian states;" but relations don't have to be positive, they could very well be negative. Also there is a burgeoning growth with the former-Soviet Central Asian states (it's got a decent amount in my paper). There is also institutional relationship. But I think instead of having seperate articles on small states that isn't going to be too big we could clump it into this as a section. Then the title for "Indo-XXX relations" can link to this. The same thing has been done for Iranian-Arab relations.
I'm not surw what the old thread said, but if we can agree on a name, then I can work on this. Lihaas ( talk) 20:35, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I think this is redundant, and also a bit POV-ish. Are their articles such as "India-Christian World relations"? "India-African relations"? We do have articles on relations with specific countries, and such info can be summarized into Foreign relations of India. India's relation with Maldives has little to do with her relations with Mauritania, so lumping together these into "relation with Islamic world" would be an artificial construct. Rather than making up "India's relation with <insert group name here>", I think the individual country specific articles should be developed. -- Ragib ( talk) 02:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Are you arguing about the semantics of the name or the concept? If it's the former, we can come up with something else, as I asked on here. If it's the latter, then I don't see how it can conflict with some of them. There are various Muslim countries where India has relations (although it is not always politics, by definition and in the article, as economic and other ties also constitute relations. even if the state doesn't work strongly on ties, there are natural ties that enhanced relations because of the presence of Indians, which in turn acts an impetus for the Indian state to strengthen relations (soft power, in a sense)). Again see the "Iran-Arab relations" page to understand what I'm saying. For the same reasons you are opposing this idea you would also oppose that, but the idea works. Where you have small countries it's not worth having a whole new page for a couple of lines.
And in what sense do you say there is very little politically with bangladesh? it's probably stronger (read: positive), at least at one point, than with pakistan. Lihaas ( talk) 01:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Kargil War has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
Hi all, there is an edit war regarding Bajrang Dal, Shiv Sena and Vishva Hindu Parishad. I believe, they are not declared militant parties. There are some users continuously reverting them and declaring as militant parties. I need a third opinion on it. Could you please say your words? Thanks, Shyam ( T/ C) 13:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
I will duplicate what I said on the Talk page, the word 'militant' is being used on the article in the sense of aggressiveness in speech and actions by the group members. Their actions fit the definition of militant, and there are sources for this too. Its not meant to present them as blood-thirsty terrorists. Just aggressive. Maybe is there a milder word we can use instead of militant? -- Abhishek Talk 14:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Just restore this version and end the discussion. Thank You. 59.95.112.145 ( talk) 15:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
I agree with other that 'militant' should not be overdramatized. However, in the case of the Bajrang Dal article, i don't see the absolute need to have it in the opening sentence. Having it mentioned in the lead is ok by me. If the term is removed altogether, with what should it be replaced? ' Communal'? -- Soman ( talk) 15:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Yes, there is, especially, first on raw numbers yes, secondly, taking into the account the records of the people involved in this debate, most of the people who are against calling it militant in Wikipedia's voice have a strong record of contribution, while the main dissenter, you, have engaged in sockpuppetry in the past to push POV. YellowMonkey ( click here to choose Australia's next top model!) 06:08, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Please pay attention to Reliable sources. According to the definition of militant, if an individual or party engaged in aggressive physical or verbal combat, they are called militant group. In this case, these parties are involved in many violence and communal/religious attacks in India. The recent attacks in Orissa, Karnataka and other South Indian states further underline their aggressive role as militant. Therefore, it is not a big issue or cause for much dispute in this case to use it in the intro itself which gives a clear image about them. -- Googlean Results 02:24, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Looks like Googlean ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) was blocked by YM for "persistent reverting on a variety of pages despite consensus at WT:INB." I guess here he was reverting a reliable source (?) part which was removed by a possibly a SPA editor named Blondlottswires ( contribs ) . I think it we should have better discussed before the block. -- Tinu Cherian - 06:39, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
More 'heads ' roll down :) on these articles. User:Knownot and User:The Firewall are indefinite blocked . Strangely User:Googlean had been also blocked by User:Wknight94 hastily until the mistake was rectified by Nishkid . Another admin error hah? . Finally YM protected Bajrang Dal indefinitely. -- Tinu Cherian - 05:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Friends,I observed that most of the caste-lists in Wikipedia are made of POV. Most of the names in such lists don't abide by Wikipedia:Notability.
Hence, I propose that only names of individuals who have Wikipedia articles be listed. I found an implementation of this thing in List of Parsis and found it to be good. I've implemented it in List of Iyers and to some extent in List of Iyengars. I am waiting for your nod before implementing it in other articles. Thanks- Ravichandar My coffee shop 17:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Operation Meghdoot, Siachen Glacier and Siachen conflict are frequently vandalised by PAKISTANIs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.77.61 ( talk) 18:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
I wish to highlight the outstanding actions by User:JuJube for reverting Pro-Pakistani vandalism on operation meghdoot n siachen conflict. -- 60.50.70.65 ( talk) 11:40, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Please read the so-called 'anti-Christian violence' articles. Users Recordfreenow, Vvarkey, Lihaas, Gabrielthursday, Otolemur_crassicaudatus, Googlean, SkyWalker, Honest_skeptic, Innocent_editor, Pk1122, have been using these Articles for blatant anti-India propaganda. They are backed by some Admins as well. It is likely that being Christian priests and missionaries, they have financially contributed to Wiki and so, Wiki cannot act against them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.68.98.197 ( talk) 19:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated the above AfD as WP:OR & WP:HOAX. Comments from project members are welcome here. -- GPPande talk!
Our List of Indian districts has recently lost FL status, and I am trying to revive it. I created this page: User:Nichalp/districts with all the data. But the number of districts are not tallying with the official number 610. Can anyone help verify the missing/redundant districts for each state? =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:53, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I was proposing a merger between the insignificant common minimum programme (in terms of content) and United Progressive Alliance. If you anyone has opinions can you discuss them on the UPA talk page? Lihaas ( talk) 20:46, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Sarvagnya ( talk · contribs) has been repeatedly adding the following links accompanied with the template
to States Reorganisation Act and Marathi nationalism. The above mentioned user has been reverted by User:Utcursch, User:BillCJ and me. But they have been re-added. Are they applicable per WP:EL? Comments?-- KnowledgeHegemony Part2 08:52, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
I've just been trying to clean up Fundamental Rights in India, which was listed as a GA and then had someone complain there were seven fundamental rights listed, rather than the more popularly accepted six...
Unfortunately, I've got to the point where my not having any background in the topic is a bit problematic. I've corrected the worst bits, and tried to patch up the confusion over quite what the 86th Amendment did, but I'm still at a loss as to what to do with sections like this. It might potentially need rolled back to the GA version and working forward again... anyone with expertise in the area feel up to the task? Shimgray | talk | 09:31, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Bhumihar-- Tznkai ( talk) 13:35, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
This page ( Battle of Longewala) is being vandalised by Pakistani editors. Information being removed. Please keep an eye on it. Regards, Joe.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.73.46 ( talk • contribs)
In lines of
Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads , I propose to start WP:Indian Roads and Transport, a workgroup of WP:INDIA. Thoughts ? Any one interested ?
This will be a common workgroup for Indian roads, highways, transport, railways , transportation in India etc --
Tinu
Cherian - 07:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I like the sound of the proposal but why not just WP:Indian Transport to begin with? Once this grows then it would be sensible to create further task forces such as roads or railways The Bald One White cat 16:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Given the size of India even a project on Indian railways is massive one in scope so I'm all for it, providing there are enough editors to sustain it in the long term. Good luck with that The Bald One White cat 19:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
What about ?
--
Tinu
Cherian - 08:48, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
-- Tinu Cherian - 08:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
-- Tinu Cherian - 11:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
2 more: Sports (to take care of hockey, basketball etc) and Science (ISRO, BARC etc.) =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:57, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Which is better ? Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian education or Wikipedia:WikiProject Education in India ?? I feel Wikipedia:WikiProject Education in India is better.
-- Tinu Cherian - 06:23, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Another other name changes needed? Ganeshji / help me with the {{ WP India}} parameters -- Tinu Cherian - 11:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
-- Tinu Cherian - 14:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
I am working on the creation of the workgroups except the one with there is no naming consensus yet.
-- Tinu Cherian - 09:03, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Happy Diwali to all! =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:50, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Recently noticed some red category links in some talk pages and followed it up. Found that there are some categories created with capitalization issues, while the template {{ WP India}} associates the talk pages with slightly different category name. This lead to some clean-up (speedy renames of categories) to bring them in line with templates' auto processing. A common difference is in the word "Unknown" in categories like B-Class Indian television articles of Unknown importance, the category for which is created with unknown (lower case u). Hence the category stays empty, while the articles get associated with non-existing category with capital U.
Another key difference I found is in the Category-Class categories, like Category:Category-Class Tamil Nadu pages. There is no such category, but all the 91 Tamil Nadu pages get associated with it (as of 28 October, 9:30 AM GMT). There is a category Category:Category-Class Tamil Nadu articles, which does not have any pages in it. On further search for other Category-Class categories, I found that most other projects in Wikipedia use articles, like say Category:Category-Class Adelaide articles, (probably based on which our categories were created), but our templates populate the pages category as shown above in example of Tamil Nadu.
Pages seem more appropriate, as such Categories are not articles - they are list of categories automatically associated for the Indian Wikiproject. Conformance with other Wikiproject conventions would mean that our templates be modified to associate Category-class tagged talk pages with articles instead of pages (is this simple or not - experienced Wikipedia editors would know, I guess). The easier alternative is to stick to pages and just Speedy rename the Category-class categories that end with articles to pages. Please repl with your viewpoints and consensus will help the project team to address appropriately.
As an aside, for those who are not familiar with these and see other Indian categories in the Wanted categories list, like Category:WikiProject India (sports) articles, please see the Template:WP India. These are normal and for gathering statistics before creating new sub-groups, like the Sports sub-group being created by Tinucherian this week. VasuVR ( talk, contribs) 11:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
The two templates {{ Indianmusic}} and {{ Indian Music}} have very similar names, but quite different content. The second one seems to be oriented towards Classical music only and hence name is misleading. Rename to something like {{ Indian classical music}} ? VasuVR ( talk, contribs) 16:44, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
A fellow is going around adding all these things along the lines of "Padma Shri Rahul Dravid" and "Bharat Ratna Sunil Gavaskar" and what have you. Are they proper prefix titles like "Sir Donald Bradman" or "Sir Syed Ahmed Khan" or just the name of an award. After all, if someone wins a world title we aren't going to call them "World Champion Vishwananathan Anand" at the top of the page. YellowMonkey ( click here to choose Australia's next top model!) 05:40, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Article 18 prohibits the State to confer titles on anybody....exemption in case of military and academic distinctions....
The Supreme court has held that these awards(BR, PV, PB, PS etc) are not titles within the meaning of article 18 and if any awardee uses the award as a title by suffixing or prefixing it with his or her name , he should forfeit ht award(Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC770)
Kiruba Shankar, a Chennai blogger, is organizing a Wikipedia Academy at Chennai on 22 November 2008. This is similar to the iCommons Academy at Johannesburg. From the website, "Wikipedia Academy is an initiative to encourage Wikipedia readers to contribute back to the online encyclopedia by editing and writing. Less than 0.1% of wikipedia users edit or add information and this is an initiative to encourage more users to actively contribute. As part of the initiative, we start off with a two hour, hands-on workshop taught by people experienced in Wikis."
If you are intestered, please sign up here. I hope this concept will spread to other cities and increase the awareness of wikipedia in India. Regards, Ganeshk ( talk) 13:23, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Abhinav Bharat and Islamic Security Force-Indian Mujahideen are starting to show some potency. Heck, the former is more than 50 years old, founded originally by Savarkar, then disbanded in 1952 (or so it is said), and coming up again this. See the west india and guwahati bombings for these two, Template:Campaignbox India terrorism Lihaas ( talk) 09:49, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Some people (example: Paxse) are disambiguating Indian weirdly, for example, in Johnny Lever article, to Indian (film). Within last few days, I saw someone changing '[[India]]n state of x' to '[[Indian (disambiguation)|Indian]] state of x'. Since, a lot of changes like these have been made now, I thought that it is important to bring this to the notice of this project.-- GDibyendu ( talk) 05:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
The scoping of what constitutes British India (vis-a-vis British Raj etc) is ongoing at Talk:British India. Please weigh in if you have opinions on the scope. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I recently stumbled upon Virachilai. I think it is talking about a real place in India, but it needs a lot of work. Any help is appreciated. Dragons flight ( talk) 01:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Just a head's up: Delhi will be on the main page tomorrow. I'm sure we are going to get a lot of comments on the talk. =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:20, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Wow, this is great. Delhi will finally be in the main page. Will try to keep an eye, as much as possible. Thanks Nichalp for the info. I have not read the whole article for many months. Really don't well how it has evolved since it became FA.-- Dwaipayan ( talk) 15:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I have started a thread here to check if Filmfare Awards can be made recurring items on ITN as Grammy Awards & Academy Awards. Please pen down your thoughts. -- GPPande talk! 10:45, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
I assumed that BE is the standard for India-related articles as mentioned on the India project page style manual itself. The Delhi article, however, is replete with Americanisms. I would like to have a clarification on the issue. Maquahuitl talk! 07:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Do we have pages for these? I haven't seen it for the recent ones. I think we certainly can. I could start some, but for the historical elections we can tag it on to the main page of WP India as a to do. (that certainly helped getting the LS pages up) Lihaas ( talk) 08:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Can someone shed some light on how to do this? Recently {{ Hdeity infobox}} was vandalized. I have removed the additional text. How long does it take for pages to show the latest version? Is there some way to force related pages' caches to be refreshed? Any other Do and Don't in such scenarios? Thank you in advance. VasuVR ( talk, contribs) 04:38, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
I want to use one of these photographs here in the "Transport and Communication" section in the article on Madras Presidency. The photograph is of Chennai bus at a petrol pump and was taken in 1920. The photo would be of great value to the article.However, when i click the photo open I find a copyright notice in the name of Vintage Vignettes despite the fact that the photo is in public domain according to Indian copyright laws. Is it permissible to use the image?
I als wish to know if it is permissible to use images from the Hindu Photo Library which are in public domain as per Indian copyright laws. Thanks- Ravichandar My coffee shop 07:13, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Template:Discrimination Bihar has been nominated for deletion and been relisted again to generate more discussion. Kindly participate in the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Cheers Wiki San Roze †αLҝ 13:47, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Please do add your knowledge of the best words that the language you speak offers, to this page: User:Lupin/badwords. Now there, I can see a smile on everyone's face. :) =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:18, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Dear colleagues, Russian Wikipedia edition is planning a week of India on Nov 7-17, 2008. During this period, the Theme Week project participants and other Wikipedia users will try to cover as many India-related topics as possible. Your contribution to this project would be very much appreciated. The Deceiver ( talk) 08:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
NIIT article was deleted shortly by an admin. I feel it might be a relevant article for WP:IND, any suggestions? -- STTW (talk) 13:17, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
This article Sikh extremism is under attack from religious zealots. Inspite of having so many references, the version of article is riddled with tags in order to make it look bad and uncredible: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sikh_extremism&oldid=250653732
I have cleaned up the article, but I'm afraid that this version won't long last as Canadian gaddars would vandalize it: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sikh_extremism&oldid=250677918
Requesting all secular editors to keep a watch. 59.164.100.127 ( talk) 17:23, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Back in September 2008, somebody nominated this article to FAR without notifying this project. The article was subsequently demoted due to lack of supporting editors as can be seen from here. Only 2 votes came in and both were to remove the FA status. Article is currently unassessed. I feel the article is quite elaborate and with little more help from editors it's former glory can be restored. -- GPPande talk! 12:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I request all Indian editors to keep a watch on these extremist Canadian Gaddar (Khalistani) editors:
Atulsnischal ( talk) 06:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Special:Contributions/Roadahead —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.164.186.29 ( talk) 16:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
The ip also tagged Citedfrequently ( talk · contribs) as user:Hkelkar's suspected sockpuppet. -- KnowledgeHegemony Part2 16:34, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
I apply for A class for this failed FA candidate, currently GA. I did not know where else to apply? I have addressed issues about the reliability of references, simply by replacing them with other references. User:Alastair Haines and User:Anishshah19 have graciously agreed to look into the article for refining the text and doing a great job there. I would love to hear from Project India, about the what improvement is needed in the article (especially if the references used now can be considered RS) and welcome anyone who wants to improve the article herself/himself. After the copyedit, i am rethinking a FAC.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Redtigerxyz ( talk • contribs) 13:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Indian Railways has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured quality. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Dabomb87 ( talk) 23:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Asked this question in district workgroup discussion page, but nobody replied so far. So, asking it here. The articles like "Districts of X" (where X is a state/UT of India): shouldn't they be like list-type articles(compare: List of counties in Arizona, which is an FL)? In that case, should we move "Districts of X" to "List of districts of X" or similar? Thanks.-- GDibyendu ( talk) 07:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I came across the article Mannargudi Raju Sastri, which is desperately in need of help from someone familiar with Hinduism topics. I suspect large portions of the article are plagiarized (I removed the blatant stuff that I was able to find), and aside from that, the article is just very poorly written, completely unreferenced, and not wikified. I have tagged it with cleanup templates and left some grumpy notes at Talk, but that's about all I can do, because I'm very unfamiliar with the subject; if anyone is willing to come rescue this article, it would be greatly appreciated. — Politizer talk/ contribs 08:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Hindu terrorism has been unfairly deleted citing CSD G4 as the reason.
However, CSD G4 is invalid since it was very different from the version that was deleted earlier. It was not substantially identical to the deleted version (which is a necessary condition for deletion). The term "Hindu terrorism" has become very common after the arrests of Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and http://www.google.co.in/search?q=Lieutenant+Colonel+Srikant+Purohit. Here is the proof: http://news.google.co.in/archivesearch?q=%22hindu+terrorism%22&hl=en&ned=in&sa=N&sugg=d&as_user_ldate=2008&as_user_hdate=2008&lnav=d0&ldrange=1990,2007
Requesting all secular editors to keep a watch. 59.164.100.127 ( talk) 17:26, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I think the deletion is good. I read the article on Islamic terrorism, and it mentions that that Islamic terrorism is religious terrorism by those whose motivations are rooted in their interpretations of Islam. Do we have similar sources for a similar interpretation that merits a "Hindu terrorism" by seeking justification in religious books? Too premature to list such an article at this stage. Hindu extremism on the lines of Islamic Extremism might be a more apt title. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:09, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
According to Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#POV_forks,
A POV fork is an attempt to evade NPOV policy by creating a new article about a certain subject that is already treated in an article, often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts. This is generally considered unacceptable. The generally accepted policy is that all facts and major points of view on a certain subject are treated in one article.
So this extremist aspect can be described in Hindutva/ Hindu nationalism, that is, all facts and major points of view on a certain subject are treated in one article. -- KnowledgeHegemony Part2 12:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I thought 'Hindu Terrorism' was a POV fork. But then I see this in the New York Times this morning. I'm not sure it deserves a separate article, yet, but the term seems to exist independently now, and does need a paragraph somewhere - in Hindu nationalism for example. One has to be careful how though. By putting Hindu Terrorism into Hindu Nationalism you end up associating the two terms and nationalism and terrorism do mean different things. Perhaps a separate section that deals with the extreme elements of Hindu Nationalism (I'm not sure if the Violence subsection is appropriate because sporadic violence and terrorist cells are different things). -- Regents Park ( bail out your boat) 15:21, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Lemme see if I get this correct:
Correct? -- Deepak D'Souza 04:41, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
See here.-- GDibyendu ( talk) 09:32, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi - I'm working with User:Nichalp on restoring FA status for this article and I have started a peer review - I request all to review the article and help improve it. Thank you, Shiva (Visnu) 07:24, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I believe this list has now a potential to be an FL soon. Need comments/suggestions to understand what it may be lacking and what other improvements may be required. Please see here: peer review. Thanks. -- GDibyendu ( talk) 09:46, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I was wondering if any editors who have time on their hands can weigh in on the discussion here? The article is currently protected and I've been trying to start a discussion in the talk page to improve it. My changes (mainly surrounding cleaning up grammatical and spelling mistakes, and removing the more glaring NPOV/OR/PEACOCK violations) were being consistently reverted and I've tried to get a dialogue going on the talk page. However I'm being constantly accused by a few editors there of having a hidden agenda amongst some other things, and no one seems to be inclined to actually discuss improvement to the article. One of the main issues is that certain sentences (which seem POV, but are actually referenced) have been inserted into the article. They are definitely referenced but provide no information other than fluff. I think some of these could be rewritten, or just removed outright. Any input and help will be appreciated! Thanks! -- vi5in [talk] 19:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
I have updated the task force assessment stats table to show the task forces row-wise. You can see it here Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Assessment/Statistics. The table is now sortable; sort the FA column to see who is generating the most FAs. Thanks GDibyendu for the suggestion. Regards, Ganeshk ( talk) 12:54, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Somebody created an article by this title, which I think may be about the Cheraman Juma Masjid, which we already have an article about. Can anyone confirm that the Tamil-language article is indeed about this particular mosque? If so, we can transwiki the Tamil article to the Tamil Wikipedia and leave a redirect here. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:22, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Hope this helps. Probably it should have been posted to Tamil Wikipedia, if it does not exist there? VasuVR ( talk, contribs) 09:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
There are several issues with Template:Middle kingdoms of India - the biggest problem is that it does not properly represent kingdoms which lasted for long periods of time. I've flagged this issue up on the the talk page. I'd be grateful for input on how the issue can be addressed. -- Arvind ( talk) 15:40, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
I hope all our brethren in Mumbai are safe. Shiva (Visnu) 23:47, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi friends, I need the Telugu transliteration of Panaganti Ramarayaningaru in the article Raja of Panagal. Could anyone help???- Ravichandar My coffee shop 02:24, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Jimmy Wales and two other wikimedia foundation members will be in Thiruvananthapuram in connection with the 2nd International conference on Freedom in Computing, Development and Culture being held there. Re-Posting the invitation that was made in the mailing list by User:Jyothis:
All,
We would like to let you all know that Jimmy wales and two other wikimedia foundation members will be in Thiruvananthapuram this December as a part of fsfs conference. The fsfs and space-kerala organizers has provided an opportunity for malayalam wikipedians to participate, conduct a session/panel discussion and meet Jimmy soon after. We would like to welcome if anyone is interested in joining. We may even plan an indian wiki meet there, if there is enough participation from other wikipedias.
Thanks,
Jyothis.
-- thunderboltz (TALK) 18:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
I suspect that Sunil R Nair is an article on a non-notable personality - also, all its major contributors are a new user and an IP; couldn't see substantial Google hits for the notability either. Could someone please investigate this and PROD or SPEEDY or AFD this? Have been away for too long from WP :( and hence do not know the current guidelines for investigating deletion. -- Gurubrahma ( talk) 18:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
I started the article Gangadhar Appa Burande. There are two Marathi articles online, which I think have some useful material for the wikiarticle, but I can't read them, http://www.esakal.com/esakal/10012008/TajyabatmyaMaharashtraMumbaiPuneNationalInternationalAurangabad3B748B8FCF.htm?article and http://maharashtratimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3548246.cms . Any help would be appreciated, for example was October 1, 2008 the date of death? -- Soman ( talk) 11:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
List of states and union territories of India by population is nominated at Featured list candidate. You may leave your comments here -- GPPande talk! 14:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Why is the project not using the C class rating? By skipping this rating, articles will wind up being correctly classed as 'C' by other projects that have an interest while this project would be rating them as start. That is confusing. Vegaswikian ( talk) 18:41, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Any further thoughts on having the C-class rating? Further debate solicited. =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
<reindent> These are my reasons why we need to have a C-class:
To conclude, I strongly believe we must assess the requirements of a C-class article for the needs of WP India, rather than digressing from the topic by making irrelevant conclusions without the availability of factual data. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:54, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Here are my ratings:
Grade | Details | Example |
---|---|---|
FA | All our articles should be FA class eventually | India |
A | Criteria: Has undergone a formal peer review, and comments have been addressed. A-grade articles can also be self-assessed by experienced FA writers (>4 FAs) for articles currently on FAC. Ideally, the article should progress from a GA. Usually, the only thing separating a A-class from FA is the quality of prose. A class articles also have suitable media (such as charts, photographs, and maps) that help in the understanding of the subject. | Vithoba |
GA | Meets all B class criteria. Reviewed independently by GA assessors. | Fundamental Rights in India |
B | Meets the six basic criteria for encyclopaedicness. Contentious claims in the article are referenced, has no grammatical issues, has a definite flow, and touches on all topics expected for a reader to gain an understanding of the subject. In addition, it touches on all sections recommended by a task force such as Indian cities. All infoboxes and tables are present. | History of Mumbai |
C | The article is not comprehensive, suffers from poor prose, but has the relevant information to gain an overview of the subject. The article needs a general clean-up, and needs sources to progress to B-class. A rewrite is necessary to focus on encyclopedicity. | Indian Army, Agra, Nagaland |
Start | In proportion to the availability of sources and scoping, a start class article may vary in length. A start class article might for example only talk about the history and geography of a place. The article may need infoboxes, templates, tables and pictures. | Gateway of India |
Stub | Basic information on the topic. See WP:STUB | various |
Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 10:38, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
<reindent>
Section break inserted bu User:G.A.S to facilitate easier editing]] Well the fact that WP:AUS has 110 FAs and 176 GAs doesn't necessarily mean that it is because of any particular administrative structure in place, eg a C-class assessment. If India wins this week, that doesn't mean that that Cricket Australia should engage in the type of hte politics that the BCCI does. Anyway, if this reasoning is going to be used, then don't use C-class because the rate of growth in FA-Class Australia articles has slowed up since C-class was introduced. I think the real reason that the FA production slowed down is because 4-5 authors have been responsible for about 60% of the FAs this year and they have all slowed down on writing recently, for differing reasons. YellowMonkey ( click here to choose Australia's next top model!) 06:51, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Why not start a seperate A-class review department for such articles which are midway between GA and FA. Like the PR department, Assesement department etc...I had also given an article ( Mangalore) for A-class status before which was a GA and a failed FAC. But the procedure and the reasons for not promoting it to A-status was not very much appreciated by me. The next time I gave it for FAC, it got promoted to FA with almost no changes at all. But it was not promoted to A-class. Kensplanet Talk Contributions 13:27, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Where to come in? I have been arguing the toss over this at mil hist, as a visitor. To try to sum up what I think are their views, they are mostly concerned with articles they consider of high quality, and potential candidates for same. As I have seen it argued, they are not concerned that the current system means most articles end up as 'stub' or 'start', with a lot of quite usefull and informative articles ending as 'start'. My own view is that this does not help visitors to wiki, or even us. Wiki needs a good grading system for the benefit of readers: it is no good having any system which lumps most of the articles in the same category.
Mil hist, and others of like mind, have made matters worse by continuously pushing up required standards for a grade. They currently insist upon more severe criteria than the assessment team. I think this is daft. Firstly, the assessment team created standards for their own purposes in sorting articles. Having said what they wanted, they asked others to help. Deciding to use a different standard then theirs is just unhelpfull complication. Secondly, the reason for introducing a C grade seems to have a lot to do with this 'grade inflation', because more and more articles are being pushed out of B downwards. So, to satisfy those who want a stricter B, someone introduced C. But now having created the problem, some are opposing the proposed solution. The system currently is top-heavy with high grades. In a system Fa A GA B Start Stub, you might expect stub was the bottom 20%, start the next 20%, and so forth. A quick look at your statistics says you have stub 75%, start 24%, B 2% , top four grades 0.4% combined (approximately, yes I know it doesn't add up). This also says that you should be looking to find C class articles amongst ths 'start' block, not by demoting any currently in 'B'. A better solution would very probably be a radical downwards re-definition of the criteria for the top five grades. Your own statistics show that even B, the lowest current grade with any meaningfull differentiation, is very hard to reach. Wholesale change may not be practicable, but for the present a C grade is a helpfull addition. Riddle me this: If the top five grades are only 2.5% of wiki, how does this help a reader know if what he is reading is a good article? 97.5% of articles are being listed as bad. (And I know perfectly well some of those are pretty good. For example, mil hist is littered with good articles which have been failed for lack of references) At present, the greatest number of articles usefull to readers are in the 'start' or even 'stub' section. Does that seem sensible? Sandpiper ( talk) 20:07, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Re: adoption of C-class in WP Aus My view is that using C class has been an underwhelming yawn. At first I opposed the idea on it just complicating things for no good reason and I still feel this is true. At the same time I am slowly rating some articles with C class, especially when they don't have appropriate citations from reliable sources.
Using C class doesn't provide any quick fixes so it is difficult to discern any real benefits. At first there was a lot of confusion about criteria. There is still of lot of inconsistency between types and many articles rated start are probably C class. However other editors who do more assessing or work on specific sub projects that I am not familiar with, may find may find good reasons and have other opinions contrary to mine. So in summary, adopting C class might have some benefits and probably some confusion. You might want to look at WP:VG/A, who also adopted C class. - Shiftchange ( talk) 22:48, 2 November 2008 (UTC) Reproduced from my talk page. Ncmvocalist ( talk) 02:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Copied from WP AUS =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:42, 3 November 2008 (UTC) <begincopy>
</endcopy>
I held off jumping into this discussion, as I'm deep in work on the Version 0.7 release. So, please forgive me, I've only glanced over the above comments, but I wanted to give you something of the "big picture" impression from the 1.0 team perspective. Prior to the vote, I did not have strong opinions one way or the other - I could see the value of C-Class, but I also wondered if the change was worth the trouble. I'm now in favour of C-Class.
Overall, my own prediction is that within a few years all projects will be using C-Class anyway. I may be wrong, but I think having a uniform system benefits everyone. And as the number of offline releases begins to take off - I expect us to be producing dozens of different releases by 2011 - I think projects will want to make sure they reap the full benefit of that. Walkerma ( talk) 17:33, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm following up on a request of a user for the opinion of MilHist people to comment on this debate. The issue that others have brought up concerning the use of C-Class stems from the wide range of articles that the project encompasses. Many articles have a gap in the eyes of some people. Others view this gap as an area for improvement to an article. The use of the C-Class has also been viewed as another thing to muddle up the project as evidenced in the debate. There is an small majority against the use of it, as evidenced by the debate that lasted a matter of months. In the end, it seems that the C-Class proposal could eventually pass as more people are realizing that there are many benefits to having it. Personally, I'm all for the use of the class, as I was one who helped to start the most recent debate. Good luck in the debate and I will happily answer any questions that anyone might have. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 23:08, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
We'll we've got inputs from proponents of the C-class and against the usage of C-class. In addition, we have got inputs from WP:1.0. No further significant inputs have been added for a while, so I think we need to make a decision while the issue is still ongoing. Please indicate your choice based on your understanding of the comments above.
Result: Seems majority support C class addition for WP:IND project. Can somebody tell how to close this poll and take this forward to implement in WP:IND? -- GPPande talk! 09:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Clearly, we're not in a position of strong consensus to support the original proposal. So it's time to consider alternative proposals so that we have a strong consensus for something.
One of the concerns is that an undue amount of time will be spent on assessment through C-class, while one of the other concerns was that a lack of C-class is not in line with other projects. We should consider a broader measure then.
Rather than use the editorial team's vague criteria for C-class, let's try a different approach. Currently our start article criteria is as follows. The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element. For example an article on Africa might cover the geography well, but be weak on history and culture. Has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including the following: multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic, a subheading that fully treats an element of the topic, multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article, a particularly useful picture or graphic (optional).
Implementing a C-class that uses the following criteria would be useful: The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should be free from major grammatical errors, and have a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. It should also contain supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams, and a section dedicated to providing references to sources of information used.
Our B-class could stay similar to what it is currently without requiring a full checklist: Commonly the highest article grade that is assigned outside a more formal review process, but requires some further work to reach Good Article standards. Satisfies all C-class criteria, but also has a majority of the material needed for a comprehensive article. At minimum, it should also have some references to reliable sources. Nonetheless, it has some gaps or missing elements or references, needs editing for language usage or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright, Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) or No Original Research (NOR).
GA criteria would then add four extra criteria in addition to coverage: namely, MOS compliance, in-line citations, references to all sources, and NPOV. Thoughts? Ncmvocalist ( talk) 09:00, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I've opened this section early; if there's no further comments in the above section, I think we're ready to get the ball rolling on the alternate proposal. Ncmvocalist ( talk) 12:45, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
i just created Indo-Palestinian relations and Indo-Irish relations but I have no pic in ths regard. First of all it would be great to create a map. But then some sort of relation with the countries would be great. maybe eamon de valera or yasser arafat in india. Lihaas ( talk) 02:56, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Big thumbs up for Nichalp ( talk · contribs) to get this to FA status. This seems to be the shortest FA nomination to pass successfully. :-) -- GPPande talk! 14:30, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Kingdom of Mysore for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Cary Bass with Wikimedia Foundation had posted the following message to the Wikimediaindia-l list:
Hello everyone,
Sue Gardner is going to be in India next week for several things, Bangalore and Chennai, and would like to get in touch with some local Wikimedians in and near those areas for meeting and meetup. We are especially interested in those who are interested in the chapter but anyone with any involvement is welcome.
If you would respond to me off list ( Special:Emailuser/Cary_Bass ) I would be most grateful, whether yourself or other Wikimedians you may know.
Yours very truly
Cary Bass Volunteer Coordinator Wikimedia Foundation
Posting here for wider audience. Regards, Ganeshk ( talk) 02:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I need a picture of the Raja of Panagal for incorporation in the Raja of Panagal article. I have searched all over the net and was not able to find a single one. If at all someone here has a picture in his/her personal collection, we humbly request you to contribute to the project. Thanks- Ravichandar My coffee shop 15:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)